What you want to know about Christ.

No, I think insanity and psychosis exist. Those are labels describing symptoms, but the human being who is exibiting symptoms is not a label.

quote:

---

Hang on, you are jumping the gun. I meant the 'experience' is valid. That is, the 'experience' of seeing a unicorn is valid. It cannot not be a human experience.

---

Wait, what? How is a human claiming to have seen a unicorn not a human experience?

quote:

---

Given your scenerio, I would hope that if someone had the 'experience' of god telling them to kill, then the 'experience' would be treated as valid and the person helped before a killing occurs.

---

But that contradicts what you said, doesn't it?"Every human experience is a valid experience", right? So, why should we stop the person from carrying out God's will?

quote:

---

Hasn't 'god' ever given the order to kill? I wonder where the idea came from?

---

It was just a typical example. Replace "God" with "aliens" if you want to, it makes no difference.

"How is a human claiming to have seen a unicorn not a human experience?"It is an experience. Nothing more until judgement is made."But that contradicts what you said, doesn't it?"How?"Every human experience is a valid experience", right? So, why should we stop the person from carrying out God's will?"Silly question.The problem occurs when the person, having the 'experience' of voices ordering them to kill, is not heard. The one hearing voices/god/aliens and obeying is in serious trouble and can cause even more serious trouble. Surely the thoughts are a big clue?Surely, prevention is better than cure, or revenge?Edited by Heinrik, : No reason given.

Ignore the extreme cases of insanity, people from other religions have religious experiences and visions. The Iranian president has claimed such experiences and the content is very much in line with their religious ideology. Are these experiences valid? Are they from God or something else. How does one differentiate?

"Ignore the extreme cases of insanity, people from other religions have religious experiences and visions. The Iranian president has claimed such experiences and the content is very much in line with their religious ideology. Are these experiences valid? Are they from God or something else. How does one differentiate?"Personally, I think that everything comes from within and life has put it there. Not god. Not demons. Not devil. Not the man in the moon. People just don't/can't or don't wish to take responsibilty for their own minds.
I am not trying to validate the claims made about the content or information within the experience. There is a difference between the validity of the experience and the validity of the content.Aren't there many preachers who claim to hear the voice of god telling them to preach the gospel, e.g Joyce Meyer? The validity of her claims are accepted without question by many, but could be just as real\unreal as god telling them to kill.The experience is real to them whether it is acceptable to others or not.

Greetings, handyman. Not at all. An experience can have more than one source. More possibilities exist. A few that come to mind:- The experience is natural, not supernatural, but I am not its source.
- The experience comes from God (according to one definition of God) but not from God (according to another definition of God)
- I imagine it, but my imagination is a conduit rather than the ultimate source.
- The experience is both natural and supernatural.
- The experience is neither natural nor supernatural.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

quote:

---

The problem occurs when the person, having the 'experience' of voices ordering them to kill, is not heard. The one hearing voices/god/aliens and obeying is in serious trouble and can cause even more serious trouble. Surely the thoughts are a big clue?Surely, prevention is better than cure, or revenge?

---

But every hiuman experience is a valid human experience, isn't it?Who are we to tell the person who hears God's voice that they shouldn't believe it because we think it isn't really God?How do you know that a person hearing God's voice is in "serious trouble"? All human experience is valid; none should be discounted.

Many claim to 'hear' god and do very well out of it. I was referring only to those who were 'hearing orders to kill or harm another'. As you say, and I agree, all experiences are valid but it doesn't make the content valid. The content could well be an illusion, but having the experience of an illusion is valid.We are trying to judge the validity of an illusion when we don't even know if it is one. Maybe those who claim to hear god, and indeed have a conversation with god, may all be having illusions? Some could be love sponsored and some fear sponsored, and in truth this could be the only difference.

Perhaps you should define what you mean by "valid" in this context.It seems to not mean much of anything as you have used it in this last message.What I have ment by "valid" is something that is supported by fact or logic; cogent.

As IA pointed out, that’’s in Rom, starting around v 11: It’s hard to find a clear statement against this in the Bible.The response is that yes, the Christian God is what Rahvin says, but since he’s in charge, you better obey anyway. It’s simple might makes right. The Christian is to keep him or herself complicit, because non-Christians go to Hell, whether they have integrity or not.

Exactly. It's the single most abhorrent ethical system ever devised, and Christians like our friend Gen spend innumerable hours trying to twist it into something that sounds better.

---

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

I wonder what has happened to our friend Gen. S/he seems to have disappeared around the time s/he was asked to provide biblical support for a few things.Maybe s/he has realised that the Bible is a little more complex than first thought.

I think Gen expected to find a place to preach to a choir, like most Christian forums. This is a legitimate debate forum - we question beliefs, and some questions simply have unpleasant answers. I don't think Gen was ready or able to answer them, or even face them him/herself.

---

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

I was wondering about the same thing. He/she disappeared right after I pointed out that his/her answer to my question was a total dodge and did not really answer the question at all. If anything, he/she seemed to have implied that Jesus condones the cold blooded murder of innocent little infants and toddlers.But I guess it is too much to ask for a straight answer from a christian these days...

---

Sugar baby love, sugar baby love
I didn't mean to make you blue
Sugar baby love, sugar baby love
I didn't mean to hurt you.

​

All lovers make
Make the same mistakes
Yes they do
Yes, all lovers make
Make the same mistakes
As me and you

​

Sugar baby love, sugar baby love
I didn't mean to make you blue
Sugar baby love, sugar baby love
I didn't mean to hurt you.

​

People take my advice
If you love somebody
Don't think twice.

​

Love you baby love, sugar baby love
Love him anyway, love him everyday

Thanks. I don't think I fully explained the point I'm trying to make. I am meaning the 'validity of the belief' The persons' actual 'belief' in the 'experience.' They are having an experience that they are fully engaged in. The experience itself is real. It is a separate aspect to the 'meaning' or 'content' of the experience.Maybe a person 'believes' they are hearing god or 'believes' they are seeing a unicorn. It is 'actually happening' to them and is a human experience, therefore their 'belief' of the experience is valid and we cannot tell them they are not having that experience because they are.E.G Joyce Mayer (preacher) 'believes' to be hearing and speaking with god regularly. No one else can hear it. It comes directly through her. How can we prove the validity of her claims? We cannot. We either accept or reject her claims, but the experience will remain valid to her. She believes it is god and has convinced others it is god. There is still no proof that she communicates with god. Everything she preaches is from within her and within her experiences...........So why would we believe her and not others who claim to have bizarre experiences with the unseen?How would you feel if I claimed that: during a prayer for the truth, a blinding light appeared that penetrated my soul, bringing me peace that I had never felt before. At that moment, God spoke gently to me. God was answering my prayer. He said, "faith has no bearing on the truth. 100% faith in anything does not make it true."Where does your focus go? Does it go to the content or to the messenger? God also told me that, "we 'believe' what we 'want' to believe."It isn't true, of course.