Muffled
Jesus in me
Atheists supply a belief in nothing when it comes to God and of course their belief in nothing has no evidence.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Understanding the holy scriptures is impossible unless God gives you the interpretation
- Thread starter 74x12
- Start date
Sgt. Pepper
All you need is love.
The bolded part is, of course, your personal opinion. However, I'm sure the atheists on this forum might disagree with you.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe I have but the post is lost in history.
There was an atheist criticizing my analysis of the evidence but he was being unreasonable and absolutely refused to be reasonable and fell into ad hominem when he no longer had any good arguments. There was another atheist who wanted a miracle as proof but God refused to cooperate. Jesus had to have been exasperated when they asked Him that after all the miracles He had done.
So electricity does not exist because it is hidden in the wires?
I offered the witness of having God tell me of a future event that happened that very day.
I believe that is often how we get new scientific discoveries. They are imagined first and then proven afterwards.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe I can tell you that I saw NH man in the mountain. However the evidence now is only in pictures. The man's head fell off the mountain. However the fact is there is nothing there to see now so the atheist can say it never existed because my witness is not evidence and pictures can be doctored.
Sgt. Pepper
All you need is love.
It's clear to me that the difference between you and me is that I have no interest whatsoever in convincing atheists to believe in anything supernatural as I do. In fact, I don't care if they believe as I do, because their skepticism has absolutely no bearing on what I believe or negates my personal encounters with what I am 100% certain is supernatural. If they don't believe me, then that's fine with me, because their doubt and criticism won't ever change my mind.
Derived by applying reason and prior knowledge to the evidence of the senses, that is, experience properly interpreted. How do we know when we've done that? Correct ideas are those which correctly anticipate outcomes. The argument which conclude with correct conclusions are sound and cannot be falsified.
For the sake of clarity, what I mean by cannot be falsified is not the same as Popper's unfalsifiability, which refers to claims that cannot be tested and thus are "not even wrong" I'm referring to ideas that can be tested. Were they false, they could be falsified using rebuttal (evidenced counterargument). Thus, the theory of evolution is falsifiable in the sense that if it were wrong, that might be demonstrable, but if it is correct, then though falsifiable in the Popper sense, it will never be falsified.
I wrote, "Evidence is whatever is evident to the senses." Electricity and its effects are not hidden from the senses.
That's not supporting evidence of gods for others. Assuming that that's an honest account (and I do), that is only evidence that you believe a god was involved, not that you are correct.
OK. Did you write that for a reason? I wrote, "imagined things aren't evidence." I wasn't arguing that imagination has no value. It might direct the search for evidence, without which all we have is an imagined idea.
I don't know how many times I have to post this verse, but I believe that it gives the best definition of faith...
Hebrews 11:1, "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for, being convinced of what we do not see." Doubt, questioning, etc. are something entirely different. I don't understand why some people can't understand what it clearly says.
If I said "I am sure that I am breathing and am convinced that I am alive", would some people still what question it?
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I can agree with that. Telepathy is spiritual but it does not make the one who has the ability a spiritual person.
I agree.
I disagree. Although I believe that miracles are possible, belief in Miracles is not why I believe in God and have Faith.
I do not believe that I can work miracles since I believe only the Manifestations of God can work miracles.
Question.—It is recorded that miracles were performed by Christ. Are the reports of these miracles really to be accepted literally, or have they another meaning? It has been proved by exact science that the essence of things does not change, and that all beings are under one universal law and organization from which they cannot deviate; and, therefore, that which is contrary to universal law is impossible.
Answer.—The Holy Manifestations are the sources of miracles and the originators of wonderful signs. For Them, any difficult and impracticable thing is possible and easy. For through a supernatural power wonders appear from Them; and by this power, which is beyond nature, They influence the world of nature. From all the Manifestations marvelous things have appeared.
But in the Holy Books an especial terminology is employed, and for the Manifestations these miracles and wonderful signs have no importance. They do not even wish to mention them. For if we consider miracles a great proof, they are still only proofs and arguments for those who are present when they are performed, and not for those who are absent.....
Some Answered Questions, p. 100
I am sorry to hear that and I believe that God is the most great protection.
I live in an idyllic setting surrounded by trees and animals with nobody nearby.
In my view, to believe that anyone can 'become Jesus' is an illusion and it is the epitome of arrogance.
Nobody can be a Manifestation of God unless God designated to them that station. All anyone ever can do is strive to be more like Jesus.
In my view, Miracles are of no importance. The quote below explains why.
"The outward miracles have no importance for the people of Reality. If a blind man receives sight, for example, he will finally again become sightless, for he will die and be deprived of all his senses and powers. Therefore, causing the blind man to see is comparatively of little importance, for this faculty of sight will at last disappear. If the body of a dead person be resuscitated, of what use is it since the body will die again? But it is important to give perception and eternal life—that is, the spiritual and divine life. For this physical life is not immortal, and its existence is equivalent to nonexistence. So it is that Christ said to one of His disciples: “Let the dead bury their dead;” for “That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” 1
Observe: those who in appearance were physically alive, Christ considered dead; for life is the eternal life, and existence is the real existence. Wherever in the Holy Books they speak of raising the dead, the meaning is that the dead were blessed by eternal life; where it is said that the blind received sight, the signification is that he obtained the true perception; where it is said a deaf man received hearing, the meaning is that he acquired spiritual and heavenly hearing. This is ascertained from the text of the Gospel where Christ said: “These are like those of whom Isaiah said, They have eyes and see not, they have ears and hear not; and I healed them.” 2
The meaning is not that the Manifestations are unable to perform miracles, for They have all power. But for Them inner sight, spiritual healing and eternal life are the valuable and important things. Consequently, whenever it is recorded in the Holy Books that such a one was blind and recovered his sight, the meaning is that he was inwardly blind, and that he obtained spiritual vision, or that he was ignorant and became wise, or that he was negligent and became heedful, or that he was worldly and became heavenly.
As this inner sight, hearing, life and healing are eternal, they are of importance. What, comparatively, is the importance, the value and the worth of this animal life with its powers? In a few days it will cease like fleeting thoughts. For example, if one relights an extinguished lamp, it will again become extinguished; but the light of the sun is always luminous. This is of importance.”
Some Answered Questions, pp. 101-102
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Only God knows if I am close to Him or if I am Spiritual. You do not know. All you have is a belief, a belief I consider blatantly false as well as arrogant.
The Written Messages in the Bible are messages from men. Whether or not those men were inspired by God remains to be proven. It is certainly not a fact.
God is only Good. God is never Evil. Only humans can be evil, and they are evil because they break the Laws of God.
“God hath in that Book, and by His behest, decreed as lawful whatsoever He hath pleased to decree, and hath, through the power of His sovereign might, forbidden whatsoever He elected to forbid. To this testifieth the text of that Book. Will ye not bear witness? Men, however, have wittingly broken His law. Is such a behavior to be attributed to God, or to their proper selves? Be fair in your judgment. Every good thing is of God, and every evil thing is from yourselves. Will ye not comprehend? This same truth hath been revealed in all the Scriptures, if ye be of them that understand.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 149-150
Everything that happens in this world is not the Will of God. Some things happen because of human free will choices, which God allows.
That IS NOT a teaching of Jesus. It is a teaching of Christianity and it is false.
Show me where Jesus ever said we were all born Evil.
I do not lack belief in God, quite the contrary.
It is because I have a new religion that corrected the false teachings of Christianity that I do not believe Satan exists as an entity external to the self.
“The reality underlying this question is that the evil spirit, Satan or whatever is interpreted as evil, refers to the lower nature in man. This baser nature is symbolized in various ways. In man there are two expressions, one is the expression of nature, the other the expression of the spiritual realm…. God has never created an evil spirit; all such ideas and nomenclature are symbols expressing the mere human or earthly nature of man. It is an essential condition of the soil of earth that thorns, weeds and fruitless trees may grow from it. Relatively speaking, this is evil; it is simply the lower state and baser product of nature.”
Abdu’l-Baha, Promulgation of Universal Peace, pp. 294–295.
The Evil One, which is symbolized by Satan, is the lower nature of man, which is waiting to entrap us, if our thoughts are centered on our own selves, rather than on the Well-Beloved, which is God.
“Say: O people! The Lamp of God is burning; take heed, lest the fierce winds of your disobedience extinguish its light. Now is the time to arise and magnify the Lord, your God. Strive not after bodily comforts, and keep your heart pure and stainless. The Evil One is lying in wait, ready to entrap you. Gird yourselves against his wicked devices, and, led by the light of the name of the one true God, deliver yourselves from the darkness that surroundeth you. Center your thoughts in the Well-Beloved, rather than in your own selves.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 167-168
The belief that Asceticism is the Only Way to be Spiritual is almost as bad and the Christian belief that Jesus is the Only Way to God.
Neither one of those are facts, they are only beliefs some people hold.
The Bahá'í fast involves abstaining from food, drink, and tobacco from sunrise to sunset each day for 19 days..
firedragon
Veteran Member
That's not "empirical".
Are you speaking about scientific evidence? Physical evidence? You are not talking about empiricism in your post.
It was until you did a contextectomy and removed the reference to evidence. My answer was, "Derived by applying reason and prior knowledge to the evidence of the senses, that is, experience properly interpreted." You dropped the last two-thirds of my words, which changed their meaning from empiricism to pure reason.
Disagree. Empiricism is "the theory that all knowledge is derived from sense-experience. Stimulated by the rise of experimental science, it developed in the 17th and 18th centuries, expounded in particular by John Locke, George Berkeley, and David Hume."
Evidence is evidence whatever the application or circumstances. Evidence is whatever is evident to the senses, whether that is seen through a microscope or experienced as an aroma or an impending sneeze. The words are cognates, the former being the noun form and the latter the adjective.
Evidence begins as a bare apprehension - something is present or has changed. This is followed by comprehension - what we know about this apprehension, such as whether it's familiar, what commonly follows such apprehensions, and similar facts learned from prior experience - and affective judgment - how we feel about it ("Mmmm!" "Run!" "This is interesting / important").
The subject of what are the senses is an interesting one. There are more than five.
Some tell us about remote happenings, like sight, sound, and smell.
Some tell us about the body surface, such as taste, touch, and temperature. Some tell us about the outer body such as the position and movements of our bodies and limbs.
Some tell us about our deep organs, like indigestion or angina. Some tell us about or chemical status, such as thirst or shortness of breath.
The most fundamental sensory organ is the brain, which senses the self situated withing the theater of the mind (consciousness itself including dreams).
They all generate evidence for the subject of consciousness. They are all experienced just like visual evidence - bare apprehension followed by some degree of comprehension and often emotion (affect) and/or urge to act (volition).
firedragon
Veteran Member
Too much text and a lot of jargon hiding simple questions.
Are you an empiricist or a rationalist? Simple question.
Epistemologically, I'm an empiricist regarding knowledge about reality, which involves applying reason to evidence, but when doing math, philosophy, or writing conditional syllogisms, it's pure reason.
MayPeaceBeUpOnYou
Active Member
Understanding the holy scriptures is impossible unless God gives you the interpretation
There are different ways to interpret scripture, some examples I think sounds reasonable- I think the most important things in scriptures should be explicit. If a verse is ambiguous then it’s shouldn’t depend on your salvation since it could have different meanings.
- the ambiguous verses should be interpreted by the explicit verses. Meaning a ambiguous verse shouldn’t contradict the explicit verses.
- the person who is the intermediary between god and us could give some interpretation, but it doesn’t should contradict the scripture since that is the yard stick.
firedragon
Veteran Member
What do you consider is "evidence"? Not a wall of writing, just simple answer. Thank you.
Elihoenai
Well-Known Member
You ask me before what you should to improve life. I said to be Totally Devoted on the path you are on. Total Devotion in your life is Marquis de Sade, Jacob Frank and Aleister Crowley. My Path is in the Absolute Inverse Direction to yours.
Aleister Crowley - Bio
RabbiO
הרב יונה בן זכריה
@Elihoenai -
Now might be a good time to ask the mods if anyone is offering a refresher course on the forum rules.
Now might be a good time to ask the mods if anyone is offering a refresher course on the forum rules.
"Wall of writing?" Your question was already in answered in one of the posts you considered too long to read. I'm not motivated to repeat it and you seem unwilling to do your part, so I think we're done. What reason would I have to continue with you when you are dictatorial about how I must write to you and offensive in your judgment of what I have written without even reading it?
*Mod edit*
I don't recall asking you or anybody else for life advice. Whatever path you're on, no thanks.
I say let him speak. Let his light shine.
Last edited by a moderator:
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
The natural man is more connected to their five senses. He uses more of an extroverted approach to reality, that is based on environmental sensory data and instinctive feedback, working to reduce reality, to a natural cause and effect. The problem with this is one becomes a product of their environment, with even social sensory reality shaping your reactive decisions.
Back in ancient times, culture was violent, so the natural man reacted in the most logical way based on the preponderance of the real time data, to become, predator or prey, like in nature. This was not optimized for the future of humans, but it was based on the logical inference of real time needs.
Spiritual things are more of an introverted approach; inner man or spiritual man. This is more like a development person, looking at the existing data, but trying to figure out how to do it better and more just. But since this future way is not as useful, today, in real time, the natural man thinks this is foolish. If it is not broken, do not fix it.
Almost all religions promote using the introverted or inner man through restrictive laws, reflection, meditation and prayer. Thou shall not covert to a natural man makes no sense, if the object lures him and it is something he could easily take. The idea of spiritual thinking; better future, was to get people seeing a better place in the future, in that real time world, where the preponderance of data, has just solutions.
The early Christians saw a paradise world during a time of violence, and when the two worlds met, there was genocide; predator and prey.
1 Corinthians 1:22-25
22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom,
23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,
24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.
The signs and the wisdom is the evidence people ask for to believe. God will never present such evidence even if it means people will end up in hell. Something God will never do is to violate a human's autonomy. He created logical and FREE beings, not robots. That is what He created human in His own icon means. Human has AUTONOMY. The moment God presents solid proof like many people ask for the autonomy and freedom gets lost. Even if Jesus presents himself in front of someone of those who demand solid proof they might probably say their brain is playing tricks on them,they will not believe. Jesus said in the story with Lazarus and the rich man that even if someone is raised from the fead they will not believe.
That passage means you have to accept first Jesus and the teachings of the Church first and you will find the evidence later. Like the scientists who make an experiment to prove a theory. You want proof? Make the experiment, follow the teachings of the Church and you will find the evidence, the proof you are asking for. The moment you don't follow the teachings of the Church don't say there is not proof.