The Tension of Faith

You are the one who tells us that witnesses must be trusted. Now you tell us that Christians can be easily deceived by demonic phenomena (and let us not forget those cases which did not check out)

Just to say it again: Because a miracle is a suspension of the laws of physics, and nothing in those examples involves such a suspension.How do I know they are the work of demons then? Because scripture makes clear that angels and demons do exist, and that Satan and his demons are always working to counterfeit the things of God to deceive human beings and lure us away from God and especially from salvation through Christ. Weird things like bleeding or crying statues are not God's work, or some kinds of injuries like stigmata or bleeding eyes, but they may also have no known human or natural source either. That leaves demonic manipulations. Apparitions also have to be manifested demonic illusions, things that have no human or earthly cause that anyone can detect but don't violate any physical laws since they are spiritual manifestations, though they do violate true Biblical doctrine.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I have never generalized to say that all witnesses must be trusted. But I also don't have any reason to distrust the witnesses to the events in question, I merely know that what they are calling miracles, though real, are not, and I've given my reasons for saying so in the post above.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

I have never generalized to say that all witnesses must be trusted.

---

That’s not the way it looks. And you have never offered any viable criteria for when witnesses must be completely trusted. (Is their not being really witnesses a positive feature or just irrelevant, for instance ?)And your reasons seem to be just opinions. Like your opinion that the supernatural can be easily identified (so ALL the cases should have checked out, right? - or are Christians making very bad mistakes ?)

Oh I've described the witnesses of the Bible as clearly trustworthy in their manner and also in the content of their writing.But convincing you of anything is not exactly high on my list of priorities.

That's it? Just one? You've had only one supernatural experience? And from that single experience comes this claim of how easy it is to recognize the supernatural. This is from your Message 1111, the one that started this subdiscussion: So basically what you're admitting now is that you have the tiniest amount of experience possible in recognizing the supernatural, a single supposed sighting of an apparition, and yet you claim recognizing the supernatural is easy. You are still speaking through your hat and making things up. I assume that if you sewed a button on once that you'd be regaling people with how easy sewing is, how anyone could do it.Your success so far in this thread has only been in making outrageous, unsupported, baseless and often contradictory claims. I didn't say he was an apparition. It's you that keeps bringing up apparitions, apparently believing you saw one once. What do apparitions have to do with Jesus, God and Bible anyway? The word "apparition" appears in neither testament of the King James.Jesus' resurrection was a miracle, yet the miracle wasn't recognized. Even Jesus himself wasn't recognized. The resurrected Jesus was bodily evidence of the supernatural (evidence that you claim can't exist, even though it obviously did). Apparently recognizing the supernatural isn't that easy. The measure of how much sense you're making isn't how much sense you make to yourself, but how much sense you make to others. You can barely find a square inch of common ground with fellow believers. Your certainty in your own beliefs is just another of the delusions you suffer from. You're redefining terms again. The supernatural does not abide by the laws of the natural and cannot be part of the natural world. I doubt many share your views. Christians believe that God and angels and demons and Satan are supernatural, not natural. There seems to be some disagreement about this. If only God can perform miracles, then why, for example, does Revelation 16:14 say, "For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles,..."Apparently Satan's spirits can work miracles. And just as apparently, you're making it up as you go along. Since I haven't yet been taken in by the many lines of malarkey you've been peddling, I think my brain is working just fine.--Percy

In other words, you have your beliefs, but you have no evidence that miracles no longer occur.You've been writing some parts of your last several messages in all caps, never a good sign for you. Try to hold it together there. And you know this how? Perhaps you can quote a few Bible passages indicating that at least you have a Biblical basis for your claims? And then once we've gotten that far you can present your evidence that what you say about demons is true. You don't know nothing. You're just spouting stuff.--Percy

I've been defining miracles as strictly the suspension of physical laws BECAUSZE THAT IS THE CASE WITH ALL THE MIRACLES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT AND JESUS' MIRACLES TOO. The Revelation passage is clearly using the term in the casual sense but it is an exception. I don't care which one we use but we need to be CLEAR. I've made my definition very clear and if you are going to use a different one we have to agree to use it in the same way. This is one of those maddeningly semantic messes. Instead of just accusing me of stuff how about doing something constructive like sorting out the semantic confusions?Oh now you want me to "admit" that if I can tell the difference between a dream and an appairition I should have been able to recognize Jesus when He was resurrected? But that is why I keep saying He was not an apparition, because I did NOT claim to recognize a resurrected Jesus.Obviously you are going to go on insisting on your own definitions against mine instead of trying to sort out the semantic problem. All you care about is finding some way to make me into the villain in the discussion. This gets pretty tedious.Excuse me if I NOW make my escape from this miserable excuse for a discussion.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Oh I've described the witnesses of the Bible as clearly trustworthy in their manner and also in the content of their writing.

---

Of course you said much the same about Chiniquy - and you were obviously wrong.And you can’t make people who aren’t witnesses into witnesses by declaring them so, nor erase their bias or their credulity nor any other human weaknesses.

quote:

---

But convincing you of anything is not exactly high on my list of priorities

---

Then what is the point of telling all these silly falsehoods?

Translation: They changed their beliefs. They proved it so well that few believe it anymore. What I am calling name-calling is exactly what it is. It's how you operate. If you can call something a derogatory name, that's what you do. It's who you are, a vehicle of hate. It defines you. That's all OT stuff. The message of Jesus is love. You just use religion as an excuse for spreading hate. You should have stopped after the third word: "God loves everyone."--Percy

The Bible says you're wrong. See my Message 1191 about Revelation 16:14. No science has ever uncovered a violation of the laws of physics. No miracles so far. Besides, you don't believe miracles occur anymore. Very true. I don't think it takes any giant intellect to understand what a violation of the laws of physics means.--Percy

Happens a lot, churches or Christians going from true beliefs to false. Cuz so many get seduced by Satan the liar. There is no difference between the God of the Old and New Testaments. God is a God of love, period. And Jesus came the first time to save, but He's coming aqain for vengeance on God's enemies. Same Jesus.I don't say anything hateful at all, but I try not to care what antiChristians think of me. God will judge you all in the end if you don't repent.

You love to bring up ancient discussions without quoting me, I guess because you love to leave lies in the minds of the lurkers perhaps? Chiniquy was an honest man, I couldn't have said anything else about him.

What science says is irrelevant. The miracles that define who God and Jesus are were events that suspended the physical laws. It's a matter of defining what they are, not proving that they exist. But you love to switch contexts without giving any notice. You've been trying to pretend I said I could recognize the resurrected Jesus when I said no such thing. I said only that I can tell the difference between a dream, something in my own mind, and an apparitision, which is something in the real world. I could certainly have recognized that much about the resurrected Jesus too, that He was a real man, just as Mary did. He was no dream or apparition either, He was a real man in the real world. I wouldn't have to be able to tell Him from a gardener to know that much. But you delight in twisting what I say. Either that or you aren't very bright.

And you know this how?In other words, how do you know apparitions are not miracles, especially given that apparitions aren't even mentioned in your Bible? What even makes you think there's any such thing as an apparition? Have you considered the possibility, given your hate-filled theology, that perhaps you're one of those deceived human beings lured away from God? Could you provide the Biblical citation that says "bleeding or crying statues are not God's work" but can only stem from "demonic manipulations"? You just get crazier and crazier. Again, no apparitions mentioned in the Bible. No statements about whether angels or demons can violate physical laws. And no evidence of angels or demons anyway.--Percy