Tribute Thread For the Recently Raptured Faith

You've got that right. I could never be so confident about what I don't believe. You can, of course, because you believe in logic and evidence. Plus you feel no discomfort over the idea that there is no God. (Absence of Belief) I can't get that in my head. Totally odd and bizarre to me. It does sound arrogant. How could one be so comfortable with humans being the highest intelligence known?

I interpret it differently. God by definition could never be afraid of anything except in the sense of fearing for His "creations" safety and well-being. He likely foreknew that if humans attempted to exclude Him from their conscious plan and self-identified meaning, they would eventually perish.My preassumption is why I continually argue the necessity of acknowledging God rather than attempting to live life dismissing it all as myth and an ancient folklore.Perhaps, however, it is I who needs to at least understand if not accept the lens through how unbelievers view it all.

It is you who are describing a fictional God. I don't care what you literally interpret as written. The church, in general, disagrees with you. I'm going with them (and my own belief) on this one... No, but its closer to orthodox belief than your literal interpretation of the story.

This is an interesting discussion that you and GDR have going. It is becoming ever increasingly evident to me that those who are not inclined to believe the stories or the basic beliefs are, like you, at best Deists awaiting further evidence. The main difference between you and the believers is that you seemingly have never felt a need to believe or to seek God. (Or am I wrong? I seem to remember you stating your belief in a post about 2 weeks ago...let me see if i can find it) Indeed. Perhaps this is what upsets me about placing all of my trust in the future of humans without the beliefs. Our human nature is repeatedly unreliable as a secure future. Critics would point out that its all we have...thus (I need to)have positive outlooks on us all surviving. I find a joy and comfort when I pray, however. I really sense that I am getting closer to understanding myself through my belief. What scares me is that I may be treating my belief in God little differently than I was treating the possibility of winning the lottery...back when I was addicted. I like discussing these philosophies at EvC because it is one of the few places that such discussions take place---with people whom I have gotten to "know" online.Another fear that I have is that God may exist and be personal to all of us yet won't favor me the way that my expectations have been forged throughout my life. Suffering scares me...I doubt that I would be a good witness for Christ if I ended up with a poor hand in life...whether it was my fault or not.GDR is the best of the EvC Christians at representing reasons to trust Jesus. ICANT is the best at explaining scripture...despite objections from ringo and tangle...but he lacks the saavy of experiencing a secular world of logic, reason, and reality apart from faith in the KJV...in my tentative opinion. Faith knows her apologetics yet is a poor poster child for having a renewed mind and changed life through communion with the Holy Spirit. jar was too literal...and so is ringo. They read the plain text and attempt to convince mainstream Christianity that they are collectively reading and interpreting the text wrong. You are similar. The evidence is everything to you...but perhaps evidence for God is of a different variety than testing things that we can measure and observe.As for me, my jury is still out as to my effectiveness at doing anything well.I think I had stronger (though untested) faith when I first came to EvC from church and was more naive.To be honest, though---and don't ask me why because I can't explain it---I feel closer to God now than I did then, but I'm not always too happy or joyous about His tough love reshaping my expectations for my life.

the problem (for me, if I were you) is that you treat it as a literal reading of fiction. God is more than fiction to me. Granted you argue that we make up the story to suit us...I cant argue with that criticism...but I can't justify reading a message and internalizing it as literal if it is coming from 3 bears.It would be like worshiping superman and either pretending as if he talked to me or worse...trying to put on a cape and fly out the door, spare change in hand, to save the planet from selfishness. It gets back to what I said to Percy about what differentiates the need to believe(internalized) in some of us from the need for evidence and good works that you make for yourselves in the rest of y'all. Anyway...Merry Christmas, ringo! May the library be festive and good cheer abound in your small town.

That's what I mean. You don't miss God in your life. You don't miss whatever it is that I would miss were I to think as you do.I could never view the stories and interpretation of literary legends the way that you view them. Perhaps you could never view them as I view them either...or GDR.But its all another online ongoing debate. All presents aside...(pun intended ) Merry Christmas to you and yours, Percy. May the Spirit of the season live in us all!

I would never even consider that zombies or vampires could be real. I would, however, be biased towards miracles. As for me, you can tell Mr.Trump that I prefer bridges to walls, be they actual, virtual, or metaphorical. I guess so, if you put it like that. had I never had my "Born Again" experience, I would be inclined to doubt. As is, I question but have drawn a line at doubt. Its why I argue. I can't doubt. In that regard, I'm similar to Faith...except I at least entertain questions. She wont even go that far.(Merry Christmas to you too, Faith...if you are reading this. May your aches and pains go away...at least for Christmas and prayerfully forever. )

I am coming to the conclusion that no matter what evidence is available, belief comes down to a basic choice and decision. I can see that for some, confirming information would help...but then it would be an external source making their decision for them. There is no convincing.
Its like Yoda said: There is no try. Do or Do Not.Believe or Don't.

I can understand that logic, but I question your disdain for apologetics in general and about your egotistical view that you understand the Bible (through simple reading) better than the church. One could argue that "we have the mind of Christ" and yet argue that it's not preinstalled into all humans. Of course, that would place the egotistical view in the apologists, rather than us. Bible Studies are designed to be discussions where all participants are encouraged to provide feedback. I have had some Pastors who read the book and taught it well and found that at the studies, everyone arrived at similar though unique conclusions about the meaning of the scripture. I suspect that had you been there, or jar, and began spouting nonsense and challenging the status quo you would be shunned from the group. But God works in mysterious ways...perhaps you were divinely sent as a thorn in our flesh.

So lets get this straight. You claim not to be an atheist, yet you say God is fiction. True?
You claim that the message of Matthew 25 is the essence of your belief and that we all should strive to give according to our ability. No problem there. One of the few things you preach that makes sense...You claim there is nothing wrong with scrambling someone's faith. I know that an unchallenged faith is a weak faith...but why the need to do so? Are you the Robin Hood of Rationality? Why are you seeking to buck Christianity?And this idea that you are right is...at best...premature. I've read many people more learned than you. Your dad was right, though. You would have made a good lawyer. Im just curious as to what motivates you to argue these points.I do it because I simply like to debate and argue. It is a fun part of my day...to a point. Some of our arguments have been rather good. In my opinion, you win most of them in the minds of a peanut gallery, but I don't think you are right in some things. There would be no valid reason to challenge strangers faith.

I wish you could watch the videos. The apologists have a good argument

I thought Craig Parsons videos were well done. I shared them with ICANT in our GD thread. watch one and tell me what you think.

Im not convinced i am. Then again, I may not want to know. In any case, the counter arguments are at this time unconvincing. Show me a good one.

I watched Richard carrier. His argument is one of the best that your side has. Most Christians wouldn't do that. In any case, I suspect a spiritual war. Carrier is under the influence of some pretty strong demons. Ive had subjective experience regarding those. By the way, how can you not be an atheist if you believe that all gods are fiction?

OK, but you cant watch videos so digging one up will require some research. off the cuff, I would say that A Creator makes more sense to me at least than an eternally expanding/contracting universe. I will say that most believers have a need for God (once they become believers) that unbelievers don't. I dont see why the concept of God is so odd. Where i go wrong is when I expect favor from Him. Life isnt fair and I hate that.