Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Nature and the fall of man
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 159 of 300 (274223)
12-30-2005 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by ReverendDG
12-30-2005 2:21 PM


Re: Original Sin or the original sin
Just for the record, I've understood both from Jewish friends and Jewish websites that they reject the idea of original sin completely. I'm not sure where Randman thinks he's encountered a different view.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by ReverendDG, posted 12-30-2005 2:21 PM ReverendDG has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 163 of 300 (274241)
12-30-2005 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by lfen
12-30-2005 2:33 PM


Re: If no Fall
Karma doesn't explain anything, it merely describes the cause-effect round of suffering on account of bad deeds or reward for good deeds. The Fall explains why it occurs.
I was as a matter of fact strongly attracted to the Catholic contemplative tradition. It was the doorway into Christianity for me. I thought I wanted to be a contemplative nun during that period. But I was attracted to the real tradition of the old saints, not to Bernadette Roberts or any of the other contemporaries who are mavericks outside that tradition. But then much of the whole tradition is now maverick, bordering on witchcraft at times. I found Roberts' writings alien and offputting as a matter of fact.
The experience that was called a Satori could maybe best be described as superintense compassion. At a cafe, my eyes fell on a man in a wheelchair and I was immediately gripped with empathy for his suffering, as if I were being squeezed from head to toe like a sponge, by a gigantic hand. No ordinary emotion that. It nearly squeezed the breath out of me. I couldn't stay at the cafe, had to get home. Thought those things only happened in formal meditation. I guess not. I'm not sure why that one would be called something special, however, as to me it was only an intensification of emotion, and I'd been going through intensifications of various emotions for about a week -- joy, fear, love, hatred, etc. They'd just hit me out of the blue for no clear reason related to anything I could use to explain them. As a matter of fact my dominant ordinary emotion at the time was elation at having discovered God. So these unusual heightenings of emotion didn't seem to be coming from me in other words, but to be imposed on me. Kind of like going through all the emotions of Samsara maybe, as it were. They didn't normally last long, maybe an hour. I was SO glad when they stopped altogether. I personally think they were caused by my intense involvement in questions about the spiritual and supernatural, without yet knowing Christ, and that there was nothing more special about the compassion experience than any of the others.
This message has been edited by Faith, 12-30-2005 03:44 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by lfen, posted 12-30-2005 2:33 PM lfen has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by ReverendDG, posted 12-31-2005 12:53 AM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 164 of 300 (274245)
12-30-2005 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by jar
12-30-2005 2:59 PM


Re: Original Sin or the original sin
They were created innocent of all sin but with the free will to fall into it. That is different from what happened as a result of their fall. No longer were they innocent and now they had a positive attraction to sin.
I'm sure you are wiser than all the Westminster Divines put together, jar, but, as I posted in my Message 6, here is what they had to say in
The Longer Westminster Catechism
Question 17
How did God create man?
Answer 17
After God had made all other creatures, he created man male and female; formed the body of the man of the dust of the ground, and the woman of the rib of the man, endued them with living, reasonable, and immortal souls; made them after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness,and holiness; having the law of God written in their hearts, and power to fulfil it, and dominion over the creatures; yet subject to fall.
Question 20
What was the providence of God toward man in the estate in which he was created?
Answer 20
The providence of God toward man in the estate in which he was created, was the placing him in paradise, appointing him to dress it, giving him liberty to eat of the fruit of the earth; putting the creatures under his dominion, and ordaining marriage for his help; affording him communion with himself; instituting the sabbath; entering into a covenant of life with him, upon condition of personal, perfect, and perpetual obedience, of which the tree of life was a pledge; and forbidding to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, upon the pain of death.
Question 21
Did man continue in that estate wherein God at first created him?
Answer 21
Our first parents being left to the freedom of their own will, through the temptation of Satan, transgressed the commandment of God in eating the forbidden fruit; and thereby fell from the estate of innocency wherein they were created.
Question 22
Did all mankind fall in that first transgression ?
Answer 22
The covenant being made with Adam as a public person, not for himself only, but for his posterity, all mankind descending from him by ordinary generation, sinned in him, and fell with him in that first transgression.
Question 23
Into what estate did the fall bring mankind?
Answer 23
The fall brought mankind into an estate of sin and misery.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by jar, posted 12-30-2005 2:59 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by jar, posted 12-30-2005 4:57 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 166 by Brian, posted 12-30-2005 5:13 PM Faith has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 168 of 300 (274277)
12-30-2005 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by lfen
12-30-2005 6:45 PM


What does it take to believe "the old beliefs?"
There are millions of people it appears who can live today and yet mentally prefer the old beliefs and take them to be literally true. Amazing but I've read enough here on the forum to believe it that it happens a lot more than I would have thought.
Yes, and we're even sane productive members of society! Ain't that a grabber!
When I first believed, it was far from anything I could ever have imagined believing for most of my life until then. I had had all the same prejudices the unbelievers here have. But I would never have settled for the intellectualized pseudofaith of the sort that some settle for and argue for at EvC. That's a far worse misuse of the human mind than even atheism is. The truth, the real truth, the real-real true truth, is far stranger and more wonderful than can enter the mind of the modern rationalist -- without causing some internal breakage at least. Caused a lot in my case. Rearranged the entire inner landscape. Some ridicule it as believing in fairytales. Well, that's how it hit me too when I did believe it, as a fairytale come true, but waaaaaay bigger than a fairytale. But come true.
Brian has no clue. He ridicules what he does not know.
This message has been edited by Faith, 12-30-2005 08:05 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by lfen, posted 12-30-2005 6:45 PM lfen has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by crashfrog, posted 12-30-2005 8:53 PM Faith has replied
 Message 180 by Brian, posted 12-31-2005 4:37 PM Faith has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 170 of 300 (274289)
12-30-2005 9:36 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by crashfrog
12-30-2005 8:53 PM


Re: What does it take to believe "the old beliefs?"
If I may ask, how did it come true for you? I've been through quite a bit of crap in my life, and I expect to go through a lot more, but I can't imagine going through anything so bad or so weird or even so lucky that it would cause me to see the "truth" in the Christian fables.
Prediction: you'll tell me to stuff it, but I am actually genuinely curious. I realize there's probably no act you would presume too low of me, but I do draw the line at the ridicule of a person's individual faith narrative.
Well, thank you. I appreciate that. When I saw your name on the thread I have to admit my first thought was Oh no, I'm not up to this, and I left the site for a while.
The phrase "come true FOR YOU" misses the point. I simply realized that it IS true. Had nothing whatever to do with anything in my own life, good stuff, bad stuff, weirdness, lucky or unlucky. Nothing whatever. Nothing in particular changed as far as all the ordinary ups and downs of life go. Maybe it got rather worse if anything.
It's just that the gospel itself, if you really believe it, is a fairy tale come true. It's an astonishing revelation to the rationalist mind that the supernatural realities of the Bible are really really true. That's all I meant. Likening it to a fairy tale can demean it, but I only mean to say that it involves a whole Reality that the normal rationalist mentality just can't begin to take seriously. Could also liken it to winning the lottery or something on that scale. But that too can demean it. "Fairy tale come true" gets at the incredible differentness of what it promises from what the world usually tries to get by living on. Future perfection. Future eternal happiness. {Oh and present joy too}
Sorry I can't give you any new approaches to believing it. I didn't expect to believe it. I just found myself believing it, and everything changed fro that point on.
This message has been edited by Faith, 12-30-2005 09:38 PM
This message has been edited by Faith, 12-30-2005 09:43 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by crashfrog, posted 12-30-2005 8:53 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by crashfrog, posted 12-31-2005 2:59 AM Faith has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 172 of 300 (274319)
12-31-2005 1:44 AM
Reply to: Message 171 by ReverendDG
12-31-2005 12:53 AM


Re: If no Fall
OK, yes, that sounds right, but the Bible says that wanting things we can't have is sin, brought about by the Fall. Saying suffering is caused by this covetousness, again, doesn't explain much, but the Fall does. It says how we got into this corrupted state where we are out of tune with everything, egocentric, desiring things we can't have, committing sin against our neighbor and against God.
This message has been edited by Faith, 12-31-2005 01:45 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by ReverendDG, posted 12-31-2005 12:53 AM ReverendDG has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by nwr, posted 12-31-2005 7:32 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 189 by robinrohan, posted 01-01-2006 9:56 PM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 178 of 300 (274395)
12-31-2005 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by jar
12-31-2005 11:01 AM


Far from a cop-out
Considering that we are "under the wrath of God" on account of the sin nature we inherit from Adam, and that this will be our lot for eternity plus our own personal sins added to it, the Fall can hardly be said to be a cop-out.
Funny, YOU may not see signs of either the Fall or Original Sin when YOU look at life, but when I finally got a grip on the idea myself, I considered it as great a revelation as the revelation of the reality of God Himself. To my mind it "explains everything," all the misery of human history, all the diseases, the wars, the cruelties of every kind, man-caused and nature-caused, and death itself.
That we now have a few answers, a few solutions, to some of the misery, is God's blessing, as salvation is always about mitigating the effects of and finally overturning the Fall itself, and the West in particular has been blessed with such solutions. Must be because of our illustrious Christian past. Our Christian present is nothing to brag about, and I expect eventually we'll lose the blessings as a result.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by jar, posted 12-31-2005 11:01 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by jar, posted 12-31-2005 12:33 PM Faith has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 190 of 300 (274838)
01-01-2006 10:51 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by robinrohan
01-01-2006 9:56 PM


Re: If no Fall
It says how we got into this corrupted state where we are out of tune with everything, egocentric, desiring things we can't have, committing sin against our neighbor and against God.
Apparently not completely out of tune. Otherwise we would not know we were out of tune.
Well, most of us don't. Some of us have more common sense than others, of course, and some of the great sages have made the connection, advocating living moderately {Abe: humbly, modestly} for instance if you want to live long, or like the Buddha, teaching meditative methods for ending the cause-effect cycle. But a lot (most?) of us just go on blindly sinning ourselves into oblivion and death and always have. The Bible chronicles many instances of this mentality.
But my point is that none of the sages ever explained WHY we are subject to this condition, even if they had wise methods for avoiding its worst consequences, and I claim that only the Fall explains it, that we are fundamentally flawed. That took the revelation by God Himself in His word.
This message has been edited by Faith, 01-01-2006 11:00 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by robinrohan, posted 01-01-2006 9:56 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 196 by robinrohan, posted 01-02-2006 6:14 AM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 197 of 300 (274935)
01-02-2006 6:37 AM
Reply to: Message 195 by Brian
01-02-2006 4:52 AM


Naive view of the Bible?
However, people such as yourself and Faith, really do have a very naive view of the Bible, and I do not mean that as an insult. You really appear to think that the Bible was written in a vacuum, uninfluenced by external social and political factors.
Which is really to say that although all other books may be fairly assumed to be influenced by such factors, we have the perspicacity to recognize that this one wasn't. It takes something other than naivete to recognize that, to make such an exception I would think, especially considering the amount of ridicule we have to take for it all the time. But if you don't see it, I don't want to get into a battle about it.
{ABE: The Bible is above such factors, is a commentary upon the world of such factors; its writers had the fear of God in them.
{ABE: Not happy with how I said the above. Trying to get said that you have the ordinary, normal way of regarding the Bible and its history. Really, the "mind of the flesh." Transcending that ordinary normal way takes something that's not naivete.
This message has been edited by Faith, 01-02-2006 07:31 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by Brian, posted 01-02-2006 4:52 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by Brian, posted 01-02-2006 8:33 AM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 198 of 300 (274936)
01-02-2006 6:40 AM
Reply to: Message 196 by robinrohan
01-02-2006 6:14 AM


Re: If no Fall
I just meant that I've been walking around with this ideal "me" in my head which, of course, is a far cry from my actual self. I was assuming that most everybody else felt the same way.
I suppose one might work that up into some sort of argument. If not for the Fall, I would BE this ideal "me," not merely have it in my head.
I didn't have a clue that you were thinking about it in such personal terms. I'm not sure it's really the same subject.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by robinrohan, posted 01-02-2006 6:14 AM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by robinrohan, posted 01-02-2006 9:29 AM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 203 of 300 (274982)
01-02-2006 10:19 AM
Reply to: Message 199 by Brian
01-02-2006 8:33 AM


Re: Naive view of the Bible?
Which is really to say that although all other books may be fairly assumed to be influenced by such factors, we have the perspicacity to recognize that this one wasn't.
No, you have the naiveté and ignorance to fail to recognise that the Bible is a collection of texts put together by councils who accepted, or rejected, texts based on their own beliefs.
Uh huh, well I said I didn't want to get into a battle about this. Maybe it's so off topic an admin will curtail it anyway. Couldn't be that your view of this is wrong of course. Couldn't be that I've read a fair amount about the councils myself, and the writings of the Church Fathers. Nothing to the degree you've read no doubt, but I do read in faith. And what I see is men of faith contending strongly for the truth against all manner of heresies and conspiracies intended to derail the gospel, and the truth winning out in the end.
There is no reason to believe that the biblical texts are any different from any other ancient texts, they were written for many different reasons. To promote the faith, to give some sort of legitimacy for an action, to explain rituals, to preserve Israelite hierarchies, to give ancient Israel a ”history’, far too many reasons to go into. Look at the texts regarding true and false prophets, these are essentially self preservation texts, do no listen to any other prophet, even if their prophecies come to pass, you really need to believe in Yahweh or our faith will collapse. It is pretty obvious that the priesthood and Israelite elders were protecting their positions with texts such as these.
Except there isn't a shred of evidence for that view, just your own squinty-eyed suspiciousness. The mind of the flesh.
And how odd. Does any other ancient people behave so? Work so hard to preserve their institutions? Why the Israelites in particular? Couldn't it be that what they say is in fact the truth and the truth is a vulnerable item on planet earth where the devil roams and the flesh rules? That is, a true prophet of God will say things consistent with God's law, a false prophet won't. That is, Yahweh really IS the God who made it all, made you too Brian. That is, they were "protecting" the truth, the truth of Yahweh, the One True God. That's what it SAYS you know. And the kind of duplicity you are charging them with is exactly the sort of thing they got punished for. They didn't follow the commands of Yahweh and the later (true)prophets come along to warn them of the consequences of it based on the Law. Eventually the consequences came about according to the Law. Should be a hint in there that this would only occur if Yahweh were indeed the One True God.
It takes something other than naivete to recognize that,
All it takes Faith is the Sunday School understanding that you have of the Bible. These arguments you put forward are simply childish. When adults study the Bible they go beyond Sunday School level investigation. Don’t get me wrong, Sunday School has its place, I still have a few Sunday School certificates from over 30 years ago, but its place in as far as understanding the construction of the Bible, is a starting point.
A fantasy of your own entirely, but I'm sure it's as rock solid as the ToE when it comes to trying to point out its flaws. I started my odyssey to Christ in my forties, reading Evelyn Underwood, Hans Jonas on the Gnostics, Elaine Pagels, Harvey Cox, Matthew Fox, and all those heretics, and something in me told me it was all wrong. It felt wrong, there was nothing satisfying in any of it. Then I got to reading people like Pascal, C.S. Lewis, Theresa of Avila, Francis Schaeffer, eventually Jonathan Edwards, Martyn Lloyd Jones, Spurgeon, dozens of biographies, commentaries, Bible encyclopedia etc. Something in me KNEW where the truth was, and led me to it. If this is Sunday School, well then so be it, I'm happy to be in Sunday School. And in that case it confirms what the Lord taught, that we must become as little children. I've worried that maybe I haven't met His standard, but now it makes me happy to think I may have after all.
I fear this is where both you and Randman, and a few others here, are stuck, you do not appear to want to burst out of the Sunday School comfort zone and actually appreciate the Bible in its true contexts. This stance is nave and childish, don’t you truly want to understand the Bible, are you not interested in the different worlds that it was written in?
Most Bible Studies teach the true contexts. My pastor always gives historical background. And Brian, I KNOW I understand the Bible, it speaks to me personally straight from the mouth of God. Knowing about the worlds it was written in helps to understand its forms and idioms, but understanding it is hearing from God through it.
to make such an exception I would think, especially considering the amount of ridicule we have to take for it all the time.
I only ridicule you to try and motivate you to study the Bible properly, and not to be content with this suffocating approach that you have. The Bible is wonderful, and I fear that you are missing out on so much with this blinkered approach.
The feeling is mutual, Brian.
But if you don't see it, I don't want to get into a battle about it.
But, I did see it, when I was earning these Sunday School certificates 30-odd years ago, I had the same understanding that you have now.
Obviously not. You may have had the contents of the knowledge that I have, from being taught it, but you didn't hold it in faith, in relationship with Christ Himself. That is how it comes to be lost, and many who grow up in the church do lose it. Very sad. I went to church as a child too, and I sort of believed, not with the commitment it sounds like you did, and as soon as I got to high school I encountered sophisticated critics like those at EvC, and lost it. It is only head knowledge and that is easily lost. It has to be a heart certainty.
However, when I could afford to, and when I had the time to, I wanted to really study the Bible, I wasn’t content with the childlike knowledge that I had, I knew there was far more to the Bible than what we see at face value, and it is only when studied in the context of the ancient worlds in which it was written can anyone fully appreciate the Book.
Well, maybe there's no way to talk you out of that. But again, good preaching does illuminate the ancient worlds in which it was written.
{ABE: The Bible is above such factors, is a commentary upon the world of such factors; its writers had the fear of God in them.
The writers maybe had fear of losing followers, or their esteemed positions, but why would they fear God?
This is SUCH a bizarre idea. The ones who played to the people, the ones who feared losing followers, were the ones denounced by the true prophets as false prophets and corrupt leaders who DIDN'T have the fear of God in them. If the OT teaches anything it is that the people were hardly ever true to the teachings of the true prophets. They forgot the Law right away and went off pursuing the neighboring idolatries. What nonsense this idea is that the incredibly unpopular true teachings could have been defended for such mean motives. The truth is always held against the popular tide. Elijah held onto it against the entire establishment of Israel and their whole retinue of hundreds of false prophets, while the true prophets had to hide out in a cave. Elijah sure did worry about losing his followers there.
Also, it is rather nave to assume that we know who the writers of the Bible were, in the Old Testament we do not know who wrote a single book!
Tch tch tch. You may not but I don't have any doubts. The names that were attached to the books from earliest times need not be doubted.
Oh and yeah, I've read some of the Higher Critics. They bore me, though, so not much I admit.
{ABE: Not happy with how I said the above. Trying to get said that you have the ordinary, normal way of regarding the Bible and its history. Really, the "mind of the flesh." Transcending that ordinary normal way takes something that's not naivete.
If it isn’t naiveté, what is it?
Transcending the ordinary normal way.
What is wrong with studying the Bible as an historical document, don’t you have any desire to reach the truth about the texts?
Oh well.
Happy New Year Brian.
{ABE: This doesn't read very clearly in places, probably the result of my not having slept much last night. Hope it isn't too hard to follow as I'm too tired to do anything about it.
This message has been edited by Faith, 01-02-2006 10:23 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by Brian, posted 01-02-2006 8:33 AM Brian has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 204 of 300 (274983)
01-02-2006 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 202 by robinrohan
01-02-2006 9:29 AM


Re: If no Fall
OK, I get the idea.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by robinrohan, posted 01-02-2006 9:29 AM robinrohan has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 208 of 300 (275171)
01-02-2006 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 206 by lfen
01-02-2006 9:31 PM


Re: If no Fall
I'd like to toss in a 6th possiblity that the fundamentalist God is a early model of reality that for a number of deep psychological reasons is more reassuring to a large number of people than later refinements of understanding.
The problem with this idea is that people don't believe anything simply because it is "reassuring." It has to be believed to be true. Even so, believing the gospel is not natural to us anyway, as witness the many exhortations in the Bible to stir up faith, protect faith, encourage one another.
Also the gospel is not an "early model of reality" -- it is the fulfillment of 2000 previous years of prophecy, and it took its contemporaries by surprise nevertheless, turning their theory of reality on its head.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 206 by lfen, posted 01-02-2006 9:31 PM lfen has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by crashfrog, posted 01-03-2006 12:42 AM Faith has replied
 Message 211 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-03-2006 12:45 AM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 215 of 300 (275225)
01-03-2006 1:27 AM
Reply to: Message 210 by crashfrog
01-03-2006 12:42 AM


Re: If no Fall
Of course people believe in things because they're reassuring. It's the oldest human story. Assurance comes first; truth is almost always second.
Can you give an example of this -- completely outside the usual topics here of course.
I would say that anyone who appears to believe for the sake of reassurance simply doesn't really believe, and as soon as some test of belief comes along, something that makes it not so reassuring but hard work or painful to believe, this will be exposed. No Muslim who converts to Christ, for instance, believes for the sake of reassurance, because the immediate consequence is to put his life in jeopardy, at least his membership in his family and every kind of security. He has to REALLY believe in order to face that inevitable reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by crashfrog, posted 01-03-2006 12:42 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by crashfrog, posted 01-03-2006 2:05 AM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 216 of 300 (275227)
01-03-2006 1:30 AM
Reply to: Message 211 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
01-03-2006 12:45 AM


Re: If no Fall
I'm not sure I'm getting YOUR point, Mr. Ex.
It seems to me that many do not have the empirical evidence they claim to have when it comes to many decisions in life.
Depending on what you mean by empirical evidence, when it comes to believing the gospel they have to believe they have enough evidence or their belief isn't going to last.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-03-2006 12:45 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-03-2006 1:36 AM Faith has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024