For those who are believers...Are you a theist or gnostic? Do you believe in God (Theist) or do you know there is a God (Gnostic)
For those who don't believe...Same question but with the "A"...
Just curious of responses...As many claim to know the "truth", I am curious how it can be "truth" unless you have knowledge...And having knowledge of God would by definition make one a Gnostic. Belief in God, but no knowledge would make one a Thiest, And lack of belief or knowledge would make one Atheist or Agnostic.
Thoughts, Opinions or Facts (as we know them)
What is "knowledge"?
We cannot "believe" or "know" god. We can only explain its presence(assuming god = creator). If there is no need for a 'creation', then there is no god, that is all. No belief, nor knowledge.
I am not attempting to define what is "knowledge" for the person...I am only curious as to what their true "title" would be based on belief, knowledge or lack thereof...
God doesn't HAVE to be a creator....Maybe There is a God and "creation" just kinda happened...
As far as I'm aware, Knowledge is the ability to predict future based on past experience and belief is the confidence we have that a past event occurred(or the confidence we place in the correctness of a statement), either of it has nothing to do with god.
We can only assume the past, so we have to assume a beginning, which is not possible. And god to need to exist and god cannot self create either, so there is no event called 'creation'. And you are taking out 'creator' from god. Then what is 'god'?
Hmm..Let me use personal examples for a response..
I have knowledge of how to play a guitar...I learned a long time ago...And I know that if I pick it up tomorrow I will still be able to play one...
Based on the simularity of the instruments...I believe I can also play a Ukelele, but I am not sure until I make the attempt...once that happens I will have knowledge as to if I can or cannot play the Ukelele.
As far as God and Creation...I am not taking out anything...I am only saying that you don't need one for the other...
And there have been many "Gods" throughout history who never "Created" anything...They just ruled over certain aspects of nature, emotions, life and other things along those lines...(Think Greek Gods)
What or who I think God is or isn't doesn't matter to anyone but me...
What is God to you (no need to answer publicly) is what matters to you...If you think God is real...Then to you God is real...If you think God is a myth...Then God is a myth to you...It doesn't matter to me either way, until you start infringing on others rights...
I'm understanding you somewhat, but I still got doubts?
Is knowing 'god' same as 'playing' an instrument? One is a noun and the other verb. You are sure you 'know' how to play guitar from past experience.
Regarding the gods, the greek gods are just like kings so can kings be called god. Now we know no other person can control ones emotions
"Knowing" God is the same and "knowing" how to play guitar, not "knowing" God is the same as "playing" Guitar. And seeing as I know that I started playing guitar at 8 years old and I am much, much older than that now...I would lean towards a past experience...
You are correct about the word God... It also means, Lord, King, Ruler, and many other things of a "Royal" nature...And I was refering to the stories of Gods and their deeds or what they controlled...not that it was true or false...
Sorry for troubling you again.
You said from your past experience you can predict you can play guitar. So when you try next time you knew you can play. About Ukelele you are not predicting but guessing. So how do you apply it to god?
The comparision is nothing more than an explanation of Gnostic and Theist...
Knowing I can play guitar is Gnostic (if playing guitar is "God")
And believing I can play a Ukelele is Theist (If playing Ukelele is "God")
But playing guitar is an action, while god is an object.
You know 'how to play', but do you play god? You can have information about god like his shape or location, so you may be able to know where he will be next, beyond that ?
Or let as change god to orange. So do you know apple? Are you gnostic about apple?
Jomine, it seems you are debating to debate...
I offered an analogy for the purpose of figurative examples and you have changed it into literal meanings.
Of course playing a guitar is action and God would be an object...
It truly doesn't matter if you believe or know of a God or not. This thread is just a discussion...For how one "believes", not if there actually is a God or proof of God.
If you don't know of a God or have no personal definition of one, then I highly doubt I could provide that for you. And I don't intend to even try to provide that type of information for you. That is something you will have to determine for yourself. And they are some who have determined that there can be no God based on the evidence they have or haven't found.
Your analogy is wrong. There is fundamental difference between knowing how to perform an action and how to identify an object.
When you say you know guitar, it means you know how to play the guitar the next time you are given one. You can predict that you can play because you knew from your past experience.
When you say you know an apple(just substituting god with apple, see, you won't even say you know apple, will you?) it means you are able to identify an apple when you are shown one because you have seen one before and you know you know.
What I'm saying this, No one can 'believe' or 'know' god. Either they can define god (if it is a concept) or can point to god(if it is an object). Knowing and believe with regard to god is idiotic.
I see...So one cannot know the definition of a concept...nor can they know the what is an object...
And as far as the apple goes...
Yes one can know what an apple is, if one has interacted with an apple using one of the five senses...
And one can believe there is an apple if they have only read about them, without any interaction with said apple...
As I have not said, nor insinuated that any of your or anyone else's thoughts or idea's are idiotic in anyway, it would be appreciated if you refrained from the same and hold to polite discussion when talking with me please. It doesn't matter to me how or what people believe...And neither is it my place to insult or ridicule those beliefs.
Did I insult you? Did I say you say idiotic things. I don't think so. What I said is, it is idiotic to say 'know and believe' with respect to god. You are one of the few Theists I 've some respect for and try to discuss instead of just pointing out fallacies or make fun of.
Imagine I've never seen an apple, how are you going to tell me what an apple is? Are you going to define it for me or will you show one for me or its picture?
If I ask you about love, will you show me one or define it for me?
"if one has interacted with an apple using one of the five senses..."
That is exactly how I define Knowledge, the ability to predict future based on past experience.
So one can assume there is apple even if they have only heard about them, or have confidence in the statement or believe somebody when they say 'there is apple'.
Also note you said 'believe there is an apple' not believe apple.
In common parlance you can say as we wish because most of it are commonly understood but if we want the audience to understand exactly what we said, we got to be precise and define.
So my "idiotic" is an expression regarding the statement, nothing to do with you, that is such a statement is Nonsense, carry no meaning.
What a brilliant question to forum topic!
By your guidelines I would be Gnostic, though in orthodox 'Christian speak' that word has negative connotations, so I would never normally attach it to myself, in my circles, for to do so would be to veer towards what orthodoxy terms heresy.
I KNOW God (and more importantly know He knows me) exists because there have been significant instances when He has spoken to me, in the spirit, and even held me trapped on the floor whilst He explained something of significance, on one occasion.
I have also witnessed His power in action, which makes it difficult to doubt Him.
But I would prefer to say that I would tag myself 'theist' because despite 20 years of experience with God, I will accept that until I die, I cannot KNOW for sure that my belief is grounded on fact.
Nevertheless, I stake my eternal existence on knowing God and that I am correct in my beliefs, as we all do.
We all start as atheists to a degree, and I agree that when we are born very few babies hold religious convictions. We are induced later into our societies beliefs, whatever they are.
But equally at some point those with enquiring minds will ask the questions that allow them to determine what they truly believe, or disbelieve.
My quest lead me to Christ, and by revelation to God.
I am convinced that anyone truly seeking God, will find God, just as someone truly seeking not to find God will find nothing.
Do you understand what you are writing? Seek is an attempt to find. One can only attempt to find or not attempt, that is, one can seek something or not seek, not 'seek not to find something'.
Of course you can, if you set out looking to find nothing, i.e. in your mind you are seeking to confirm what you want to believe, then you will not find anything to dissuade you.
I ran from God for two years, did all I could to evade the issue, and finally found Him when I started to read the bible with an intention of PROVING that it was not true.
I never set out to find God, I set out to find reasons to continue not believing in Him, but I was (and am) open and honest enough to accept that I was wrong.
You set out to confirm that the world is black and white with no hues in between, you found what you sought, and stopped looking. That was YOUR choice, and unless you open you mind to colour, you will stay colour blind.
I'm tired of showing you all logical fallacies which you cannot comprehend. I don't like idiots, honestly. So I'll reply one last time.
"if you set out looking to find nothing"
If you go seeking to find Loch Ness Monster, you should have an idea, what it is first. You cannot simply go and say the first thing you come across as Loch Ness monster. So what were you seeking, when you were seeking 'god'?
You cannot look to find nothing. "Nothing" is not a thing to find out. Either you seek or don't seek.
"I ran from God for two years, did all I could to evade the issue,'
Again, Before running away or towards "god" you have to first identify this thing. You already made up your mind that there is this thing called god.Then you made up your mind that "bible" is the word of god.
So you started out with this two premises
1. There is god
2. Bible is gods word.
Conclusion: god exist
So your conclusion is invalid because the your conclusion and premise are the same.. And without knowing what this god thing is, how can you whether it is there or not? So if yo do not know what it is, how can you say it wrote a book?
"with an intention of PROVING'
Proof is an opinion and as with all opinion changes with person. What you are saying is "in my opinion there is god, hence there is god" That is not logic.
"You set out to confirm that the world is black and white with no hues"
I have not set out to confirm anything. Because you cannot understand anything you think others are just like you.
"open and honest enough to accept that I was wrong"
That makes you a liar. An open minded person does not set out to enquire by forming conclusion first.
"Take the blinkers off, get to have an inner peace, and ask sincerely, that's all."
Just because you have mental troubles does not mean anybody else have.
I believe in God because I have experienced, and seen the evidence of His existence, and the evidence of His works in my life.
Nothing you can say will let me ignore what I have experienced and see daily.
I have no axe to grind with you that you cannot see and experienced what I have, that is your situation, and you may well live with that for the duration of your life.
It happens, we know that for not ALL are saved, some by their life choices miss that.
I really think that we have exhausted this discussion.
I care not one jot about your slurs and insults to my 'intelligence' and that you call me a liar, but it does not strengthen your claims, it simply shows that you cannot contemplate a world different from the one you have chosen to be in, and attack me because you cannot allow the thoughts that I may be correct.
I am 100% secure in my faith and belief in God and that I have made the right decision.
I am delighted that YOU have made a decision that you are 100% assured is the correct one.
Go in peace.
I too think we have exhausted the discussion. Experience is subjective, and the conclusion is subjective. One escaping from drowning is god's work for some and mere luck for others. Experience doesn't show much. And if you care to study a little deeper into the scientific article you provided, you find that our brain can really make up stories for missing episodes in life(it is not consciously done).
I see the world as it is and define my terms that I'm not confused. The world is same for us. You are using the terms belief, exist etc without clearly understanding the terms and mix your hopes and wishes to color the world you see and then interpret the colored image as the fact, though it is you who colored it. Correct or wrong is subjective, while logic and reason is not.
Jomine actually raised a very fundamental point. If you are going to "run away from god" then you must have already decided that he existed otherwise you wouldn't have anything to run away from would you?
"But I would prefer to say that I would tag myself 'theist' because despite 20 years of experience with God, I will accept that until I die, I cannot KNOW for sure that my belief is grounded on fact."
What do you mean by that? Are you saying you aren't 100% sure Jesus rose from the dead and saved us sin. If this is true, then you mustn't be a Christian. A Christian knows 100% as fact. Experience with God makes one 100% sure.
Claire, I am 100% sure that Christ is who He says He is, and that His sacrifice was sufficient to defeat death and all powers and authorities who seek to destroy us.
But the PROOF of that will be when I die, and when I face our Lord, and hopefully hear "well done my true and faithful servant"
My life is one of constant evidence of Christ and the Holy Spirit being presented to me in my life, daily, hourly, each minute, and I work these forums when time permits to ensure that the message goes out loud and clearly.
If you saw my words as lacking clarity, it is only because our detractors are pedants to a man, and look for words to use in attacks, so I was being factual from a world perspective, in order to deny them ammunition.
They were also because I steer clear from the label 'gnostic' as it has negative connotations in orthodox Christian circles.
Hope that explains things.
Then, you should be banned for doing so, based on the fact this is a public forum for discussion, not a mission field to evangelize your faith.
The more often you post that, the more childish and immature you appear and give good reason to be banned for spamming.
Yipes TM, I never realised you were getting so upset!
Go ahead, get me banned if it makes you life simpler, sorry that you cannot take the heat.
Guess you are actually NOT 100% sure you are right?
My current 'logo' is no different to Randy's little snake logo, wanna ban him also?
Or is it that 100% sign which is riling you up, making folk think about their decisions is obviously not conducive to your trite posts or objectives.
I appreciate your comment but why do you say the proof will come when you die? Haven't you got the proof now? Isn't the Holy Spirit the proof one needs? How can you be 100% sure of your beliefs without proof?
So you lie in order to fit in with the clan?
If you doubt your belief then you don't "know" it and therefore you don't truly believe it and if you don't truly believe it then you are not a theist.
Sounds like you are gambling based on your opinion and not knowledge.
Few babies??? were you one of them? Were you praying on the way out?
It doesn't sound to me like you really believe in a god. You sound more like you just think that a god probably exists.
I am knowledge, and knowledge is only known as itself and cannot be defined by words. Thus the term Gnostic is irrelevant as a definition, but these things are most important to those who do not have knowledge.
God is the entirety of Knowledge.
Proof belong to ignorance, for the only proof of knowledge is knowledge itself, and the one who request to be given proof of knowledge is also admitting that knowledge is not with him.
So as a man, I am knowledge, I am God and the only proof neccessary is that I am... And with such knowledge I am able discern Truth and to believe it.
So you as a man will take that and define me as you will, but if you limit me, you also limit yourself and you would then seek out a limited definition of who you are.
I don't know of any truth nor do I claim to. I have an understanding as to what I am percieving, but I can"t say I know anything.
As Wilderness so succinctly and correctly sums up your question, perhaps, the question needs to be reworded.
It is more relevant and understandable to not ask a non-believer if they believe in God but instead ask them what claims of theists they accept or reject, based on what Wilderness said, because that is the only thing theists have at their disposal to support their arguments.
I'm an agnostic atheist. You can also be a gnostic atheist. The two terms (gnosticism and theism) are not mutually exclusive.
There are no gods. My personal belief doesn't enter into it. No amount of wishful thinking on my part can make a difference.
I've never had a philosophical discussion with a scorpion before...
You both slay me!!!
Umm, I am neither a Scorpion or a Paradigm, I'm simply a woman who believes she fits into the category "Gnostic". Though I have no 'KNOWLEDGE' of God, or of His existence per se, I have my own 'knowledge' that He is. You know, 'is' as in 'exists'...
BTW, DS, I think your authorscore is far too low for a thinker such as yourself-the way you express yourself in these forums at least, reveal quite the smart guy. Hehe. No, I really mean it, unless your hubs suck!
And PS, nice to be in contact on Twitter, too! Like that, I do!
Many thanks, Not sure if my hubs suck or not..LOL...I just write as I have time..
And Personal Knowledge does count (at least as far as I am concerned) for the Gnostic types...
No one that is truly honest with themselves can be either a gnostic or atheist by your definitions. No one on earth has knowledge of the reality of God.
Hi wilderness, I think I am truly honest with myself when calling myself a Gnostic. Are you truly honest with yourself when you call yourself whatever you call yourself?
Sorry, I don't know what you call yourself, or maybe I don't remember...senior moment, perhaps.
I make no claims to KNOW ANYTHING about the existence of God, I only have some sort of faith. It's all so new, you see...
Perhaps I am misunderstanding the OP. As I read it Double Scorpion has defined gnostic as someone that KNOWS that God exists. They don't just believe it (as you say you do) they know it as a fact.
Now, that is not possible without either proof or very, very good evidence and neither is available to us at this time. Were it different everyone in the world would know the same fact, just as we know the earth is a sphere and not a flat plane.
By that definition, then, you would be a "theist" and not a "gnostic" and honest at the same time.
Personally, I'm on the other end as an atheist; I don't believe in God's existence although I have no absolute knowledge either way. I have always called that belief "agnostic" where the Scorpion seems to define it as "atheist".
Gnostic specifically means intuitive knowledge
To my way of thinking "intuitive knowledge" is an oxymoron. It actually carries the same meaning as "belief" as there can be no knowledge without evidence or proof and the sole use of intuition as a path to knowledge denies sufficient evidence to claim knowledge.
Thats fine. Im just saying doublescorpion has the wrong definition.
I guess that would depend on the dictionary used...<Shrug>
I doubt there is a dictionary that says gnostic means anything other than esoteric, mystic, intuitive knowlege.
You're thread hinges on the correct definition, or it makes absolutely no sense.
This is what I get...
gnos·tic /ˈnɒstɪk/ Show Spelled[nos-tik] Show IPA adjective Also, gnos·ti·cal. 1. pertaining to knowledge. 2. possessing knowledge, especially esoteric knowledge of spiritual matters.
Number one is pertaining to knowledge...
And what realm does God fall into if not "Spirtual, Esoteric,Mystic or Intuitive"?
"Intuitive Knowledge" IS an oxymoron-never thought of that!
In the case of religion..."evidence" is kinda like beauty...It is in the eye of the beholder...
I would tend to agree with the first part of this...I would lean more towards Theist with what was described....
With you, I lean towards atheist...While you have no knowledge either way, you have chosen, based from the lack of knowledge/evidence or whatever you chose to call it, to not believe in a God. If you said something like "I have no knowledge of a God and therefore neither believe or disbelieve" I would lean towards agnostic...
(Just my interpretations of the definitions of these words)
This becomes a matter of semantics. I may be an agnostic, then, as I do not believe "there is no God" and I do not believe "there is a God". That, to me, is the same as saying "I don't believe in God's existence" (from my post). A lack of belief either way as I could just as well say "I don't believe" and end it there.
wilderness, wow. I think I agree with what you've said here, but I must get a shower in before I attend my church services this a.m.! I will get back to you, though!
I'mmm Baaaack, wilderness,
Okay well, after re-reading your post, other sources, etc., I think you are right-I would call myself a 'theist' since it does not imply proof or absolute knowledge. tsmog's got it right there in b&w, as you do. He stated that in engineering when dealing with an unknown, there must be some 'givens' before concluding anything:
"From this I reason that all four answers imply belief.
A theist believes
A gnostic believes and knows
An agnostic believes they do not know
An atheist believes and knows
The question becomes not how but what?
All wooden chairs are painted.
the sky is blue
the ground is hard
Definition of the given comes into play or define God(s).
Here the question becomes 'who' defines God(s).
And, then, one may continue the struggle with;
God(s) is (are)
And you, my sweet, sound exactly like an agnostic/ambigu-antitheist/antitheist-are there such phrases? And if there aren't, well, I just made 'em up! -as you said, if I remember correctly.
I think I learned that in CHURCH this morning!! HAHAHA! Actually, wilderness, I'm going to a place called Calvary Chapel here in Bishop which is extremely 'laid back' but is scripturally based. I'm still not sure about all that-as I said, this is all so very new to me. I was a true agnostic myself for most of my life.
The only time I would have called myself a gnostic was when I was a little girl-and I believe most children see any religion in this manner. Jesus was my heart and very real, he brought 'the little children unto me...' and he loved animals-which I do to this day!
Bye for now!
Atheist is lack of belief, mostly due to lack of evidence...So someone true to themselves can in fact be atheist or theist..as well as agnostic...
gnostic, well, that depends on what one would consider to be knowledge...
Agnostic theist over here.
I definitely think there's a God, but I don't know for sure and am open to ideas
Agnostic Theist...Interesting take...
So you have no knowledge (per se) of God, But you believe there is one( for your own reasons)...
Yes I think that description suits me too. I believe because I have a gut sense that God does exist and try as I might I cannot deny that gut sense that He exists.
Also by a philosophical argument, the idea that the universe created such a wonderful thing as man who can observe and wonder at the universe, but that universe is ignorant of man's existence, makes no sense to me without God. Such an exceedingly cruel thing for an ignorant universe to create a self aware being that knows one day he will perish with no trace of his ever being; it requires a God.
But I have no proof.
Doesn't belief mean that you believe your belief is true? How can you be agnostic about something and also hold a belief about it?
There was a time in my life where I would have categorized myself as a gnostic. Slightly. But that was quite a while back and now I'm sure I'm simply agnostic.
Ah, lovely semantics-they are crazymaking, aren't they? Get you every time!
What caused you to change from gnostic to agnostic?
Years without further evidence. Second guessing myself, I suppose.
I appreciate where you are coming from.
Agnostic is good... there is always the chance that you will see the evidence you need; to come to faith and be 100% sure of your position.
I find it difficult to accept that an agnostic will be lost at the end of the day, because you don't deny God, you simply have not met Him yet.
I guess I should say 'thanks for the vote of confidence' but, I have to be brutally honest.
I don't care what the theist or atheist thinks at the end of the day. All that matters is what I know to be true for me. Spirituality is the personal search. It isn't a team sport; nor does it require agreement across the board.
A good harvest is gathered into the barn only as a result of the natural action of earth, water, air and light. Humanity likewise has four elements - faith, hope, love, and knowledge.
Faith is our earth, that in which we take root.
Hope is the water through which we are nourished.
Love is the air through which we grow.
Knowledge is the light through which we ripen.
OK, let's forget about God a second or two and look at what is asked, from the view I have.
"For those who are believers...Are you a theist or gnostic? Do you believe in God (Theist) or do you know there is a God (Gnostic)"
I believe I am conducting a discussion with the 'person' labeled DoubleScorpion. However, I do not know that to be true. Knowledge is not implied with belief.
Now, let's say DoubleScorpion is sitting typing a response from my pc while I watch. Then, I would know a result of my senses or empirical knowledge. And, my attitude is generally speaking I believe what I know. Therefore, belief does not imply knowledge, but knowledge implies belief. Again, that point of knowledge in the example is dependent on evidence or verification.
Digressing a moment, the question begins with 'those who are believers', which DoubleScorpion implies both a believer and a gnostic have belief.
I do not fall into either of those categories. I choose to accept and acknowledge. Here some may say faith enters into the picture. Then again, to believe a degree of faith also is entered upon. But, to know implies first a definition.
In engineering to solve a problem or in science to discover an unknown there must first be given(s).
From this I reason that all four answers imply belief.
A theist believes
A gnostic believes and knows
An agnostic believes they do not know
An atheist believes and knows
The question becomes not how but what?
All wooden chairs are painted.
the sky is blue
the ground is hard
Definition of the given comes into play or define God(s).
Here the question becomes 'who' defines God(s).
And, then, one may continue the struggle with;
God(s) is (are)
I honestly didn't think this would be a hard question...It seems a few are "nuking it".
I was only curious as to how the Hubfolks in these religious forums actually label their "Beliefs" or "Knowledge"...
There wasn't a right or wrong answer...
God convinced me of his presence. It wasn't easy...it took way longer than most people think it might.
A skeptical atheist. I'm fairly certain I'm right ( so not agnostic), but I acknowledge I don't know I'm right. Not the same as not knowing though, as I do know, I'm just not completely certain in my knowledge.
Wow, that barely makes sense even to me Hopefully, that's an answer to you question.
Well at least it's honest!
and you have until your dying day to get certain.
Why is that agua? I thought you now think there is a chance to change your mind after you are dead.
No Mark, I said I SUSPECT and hope, not believe, and I certainly would not stake my eternity on it, we may just be energy like our other friend says, and return to God as either negative or positive energy, with the negative energy being stored away for eternity where it can do no harm.
Not having died, I cannot say, and of course if I had died, I could not comment.
Anyhow, my decision is made and secure, it's you guys we are addressing.
Not really agua.
Interesting theory you have about the negative energy being stored away. Is this what you think happens to believers now?
No Mark, actually nobody can say what happens in eternity, we have some pointers:
God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and death shall be no more, neither shall there be anguish (sorrow and mourning) nor grief nor pain any more, for the old conditions and the former order of things have passed away.
Which sounds pretty good to me, and of course the ONLY way for that to work is apparent in the last line "for the old conditions and the former order of things have passed away" and I guess we will not remember those who are not present,or we would surely weep, or we will recognise their pure guilt for their absence, and accept it was a just decision made by God over a poor decision made by them.
But the negative/positive energy thingy is a good analogy, or parable to use.
I think it's the other guys though, my version just sees that we would return to God and spiritual conciousness, rather than an unknowing mass of energy ever unfolding and pouring over the universe.
I like to see where I am going!
The negative energy thing certainly is funny.
Odd you feel the need to shout warnings about something which you know absolutely nothing about.
I thought you had a personal relationship with this majikal being - why is it that you run around warning us that we must make a choice before it is too late! and then it turns out you were actually not being truthful and you have zero idea what happens after you die?
This is why your beliefs cause so much ill will agua.
Still - if you think causing lots of arguments and ill will is "winning," I guess you have won. Congrats.
I have a very clear idea about what scripture tells us happens after we die, however, applying your rules I have to say that I can only prove it when I die.
I have no doubts, you have no proof, I have a certainty, you cannot ever know until you die.
Yep, I guess we are finished, you are running out of repetitions and I am not playing fair by answer you.
Could be a long drinking session if we ever meet!
BTW it's not about winning or losing, those words are metaphors only, it's about making the right decision, if you are wrong, that give me no satisfaction.
Metaphors? Odd - you certainly give the impression that winning and losing are very, very important to you.
I am not running out of anything. You have not answered at all. You just went all mealy mouthed when it applies to one of our pals.
Might want to think about why that is?
As for proving anything - well - you cannot even prove your Invisible Super Being exists - can you?
Sure I can, to the satisfaction of about 2.1 billion folk who know Him, its you guys that have the proof problem, you deny He exists, yet can offer no proof, you demand proof that He does exist and refuse to carry out the observations and tests required to prove it, then you admit that you just don't know, and that you think it's probably 50/50 that He exists, and then revert to trying to twist the scenario.
As for our mutual pal, I have thought about it, he was a decent and honest guy, with a heart of gold, at least for his family, and I really hope that he was able to see faith again before it was too late, same for you, despite our wrangling I like you and suspect that you are a softy at heart, and I would hate to think that you were lost due to some proud defiance of God, causing rebellion from your anger.
No doubt we will continue at some time, but take a look at how you were when you first started here, click your posts score and go back 18,000 posts, you were different, softer and much less aggressive in all ways, your replies were even comprehensive and detailed... what happened?
I decided it was a waste of time. You continue to be condescending towards me and tell me I am lost unless I believe the garbage you spout.
Why would I bother speaking to you in any other way than the way you speak to me?
I spoke with Ernest not long before he died. He still rejected your ridiculous religion. As do I.
LOL at your proof. I mean seriously. Some people believe in majik and that is proof? Observations and tests? Dear me.
Look at what you just wrote to me - see how it completely ignores me and my opinions - and is simply self righteous condescending nonsense.
Then you will see why I no longer bother being gentle towards you.
This is why your beliefs cause so many fights.
You believe that our pal is being punished for not believing the garbage you spew. And you worship this thing anyway?
It is not 50/50 that he exists. Sorry you are too lazy to bother understanding.
It is 50/50 that a god exists. And infinity:1 that your Invisible Super Being is the one that exists if there is a god.
Is this the best you can do?
Dear, oh dear. Another bad day at the Knowles household.
Were you ever this way with your teenage kids?
Did you even have (teenage) kids?
The best? Probably not. Go ahead and disprove my reasoning though. Or at least offer some sort of rationale that disputes my probabilities.
Go on - without using majik.
Whatever back-peddling or excuses you wish to conjure about Earnest does not preclude your belief that he is now roasting for an eternity in hellfire because he rejects your god. If you call yourself a Christian, then this is what you believe with every fiber of your being.
And, we can only pity you for it.
Let me ask a question Aqua, if I may.
I person becomes a Christian through both confession and professing from my understanding, which could be wrong, of course. That said, the bible is presumed to be inerrant and 'God Breathed' when in the state of being a Christian. Then this must be true (Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness).
Since acceptance of the bible as inerrant is an on going debate still unsettled within and amongst churches, then lets use the most recent Chicago Statement of Inerrancy http://www.theopedia.com/Chicago_Statem … _Inerrancy
Neither here nor there, the introduction of Paul's words in Colossians 3:3 specifically says, "For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God." The logic says, the Christian, 'IS' dead! There is not a 'when.' There is only an 'IS.' Colossians is riddled with statements in this regard. It affirms it over and over.
Christ gave ONLY two commandments. Matt 22:36, focusing on the second - "And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets.”
So, my question is are you being a good neighbor by extending an invitation or are just rebuking to rebuke? I see no righteousness with your assertions negating their integrity of their personal belief systems.
Just a note on history. The Christians lost the crusades. A suggestion is to read Colossians then Hebrews, then John1, John 2, and John 3 written by the same guy who wrote Revelations. A suggestion is to remember one cannot witness until called upon.
I ask your forgiveness for speaking out of turn. When I first came to the religion & philosophy forum it was full of ridicule and and for a lack of a better word - hatred toward atheist and vice versa. Not exactly loving. I have seen more tolerance with atheist of late - odd, not really.
I used to tell the employees I was in charge of to worry about their own star and let the others take care of their own. After all a gnostic, the one who knows, begins with a personal experience and builds a personal relationship with the Christ - since it is personal, who am I to judge, ever, (Matt 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged).
Again, I ask your forgiveness for speaking out of turn.
by David Hinerman3 years ago
I have had many revelations in the past year...I'm not sure what to consider myself, as I am somewhat a paradox. Although I like many stories from the bible, I do not believe in it 100% -- at least certain aspects. I am...
by Cattleprod Media7 years ago
I find most people are clueless. They say they are atheist, but can't properly form an argument as to WHY, or they say they are agnostic, with zero clue as to WHAT that is.Ignorance, above all, is our weakness. Not...
by David Hinerman2 years ago
I have been trying to find a term for someone who is neither theist, atheist, or agnostic. For the longest time, I have considered myself an agnostic, but I'm not sure if that's the best definition. To me, a more...
by Thomas M D Hemsley5 years ago
This forum is for anyone here who wishes to debate on the subject of religion and religious beliefs. Outline your position, whether it be theist or atheist, explain why you hold that position, and then people can debate...
by A Troubled Man3 years ago
Beth is attracted to ATM. She asks ATM out on a date. ATM isn't interested, maybe he isn't attracted to her or he's married. For whatever reason, he declines. Was Beth rejected? Yes.When someone is rejected, they're...
by TruthDebater7 years ago
Atheist, Religious/Theist, Agnostic. Out of these beliefs or non beliefs in relation to a God, which belief or non belief system is the smartest and most honest? Agnostic gets my vote because I don't see enough evidence...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.