Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9175 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,646 Year: 4,903/9,624 Month: 251/427 Week: 61/103 Day: 5/14 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Honour Amongst Christians
Stile
Member (Idle past 129 days)
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 241 of 308 (454359)
02-06-2008 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by iano
02-06-2008 3:40 PM


Re: So many choices
iano writes:
What if one way swims against a tide of 90,000+?
That would certainly make it stand out.
However, this isn't our case. In fact, each of the 90,000 distinctly scream out they are the one that swims against the tide of the rest that are all the same.
Mostly for different reasons, of course. But the fact remains that none of these has any better reasoning than any other. They all have the same power and strength behind their identity of being the 'one that swims against the tide of all the rest'.
I've looked into Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Catholicism and Christianity, and many others, they're all in this boat. Buddhism seems the quietest of the crew, though. But it still has the same strength and power as all the rest in the fundamentals.
Equally valid. And therefore, equally useless in identifying which is "the one". Given, of course, that "a one" even exists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by iano, posted 02-06-2008 3:40 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 248 by iano, posted 02-07-2008 9:33 AM Stile has replied

truthlover
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 242 of 308 (454361)
02-06-2008 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 237 by Stile
02-06-2008 2:43 PM


Re: If I may...
and there's not really any difference in what we believe
It'd be hard to imagine, after one post, that there's not any difference in what we believe. We have agreed that being honest is important. However, seeking is for finding, and agreeing to seek and agreeing on how to seek is very different than agreeing on what's been found, or on whether anything has been found.
I mean, if you are "sold out", and I am not, and there's not really any difference in what we believe... why should anyone become a Christian?
See above.
Basically, what are you gaining from being a Christian that I am missing?
That'd be hard to answer without knowing a lot more about you than I do.
If these problems exist, that don't exist elsewhere, what's holding you into Christianity?
I'm answering in the order of your post, otherwise I wouldn't put this answer in the middle of my post.
What's holding me to Christianity is two things:
1.) I believe that Jesus is the Son of God. Why I believe that is a long and somewhat personal story. The things that were awe-inspiring to me and led to my faith might not be awe-inspiring to someone else. On the other hand, the timing of those events and the significance of those events to me leave me convinced they were directed purposely to lead me to faith.
2.) I believe Christian teachings, including the following issues that are significant to our discussion:
A. I believe that people need divine help to be delivered from their selfishness. (Selfishness is your word, and at Rose Creek Village we often use that word as a substitute for the Biblical word "sin.") If people can set aside their selfishness and follow God's design for their life some other way, it appears to me to happen rarely at best.
B. Um, from the previous point, it's obvious I believe God, the Creator, has a design for our lives.
C. I believe the society created by Christ living in his disciples is phenomenal. I believe it answers questions answered nowhere else and addresses internal issues that many people don't even know they have, thus allowing the Spirit of God to bind them in a unity and love that we were made for, whether we realize it or not. (Maslow's hierarchy is an acknowledgment of that need.)
I'd say I treat Truth as a power simply because it's very difficult to argue with reality. I don't see a requirement for a being to represet the ideals of Truth and Wisdom when the ideals themselves exist on their own.
And I treat Truth as a person who possesses power. I do think of truth as a power, but nothing like the simple acknowledgment of reality. I'm talking about the confidence Gandhi had that if he followed the principles of Truth, then Truth would back him up and guarantee his success in such things as the overthrow of Britain from India. Normally, this would be seen as requiring force, but Gandhi didn't look for physical or martial force, nor for the simple persuading power of truth. He looked for a real power to back him up, so that if he and those with him practiced non-violence in line with truth, they would not only be seen to be correct, but they would succeed in overthrowing error and oppression.
I don't see a requirement for a being to represet the ideals of Truth and Wisdom when the ideals themselves exist on their own....What sort of knowledge do you attain from the Word of God that is unattainable otherwise?
Not ideals or knowledge, but power, and a rational power at that. I am not speaking a being who represents the ideals of truth and wisdom, but a being whose own will and choices determine what truth and wisdom are. I am speaking of a being who's real, and thus who intervenes based on his own choices and on behalf of those whose hearts are wholly his (2 Chr. 16:9).
I'm curious as to your motive.
Hopefully, all the above answers the motives of my invitation to look at the web sites I mentioned. I would add that your comments about seeking and the discussions your were having made me think you would be interested in Christianity being presented from a different perspective.
For the most part, I don't believe Christianity works for most Americans who come to it. What's asked from them is small, and what they get from it is small, if they get anything at all.
I used the word society above, and I don't think there is any real Christianity apart from the society of disciples. The individual style Christianity in America--where Christians get together as though they were part of a club like the Moose Lodge and hold weekly meetings, then go their separate ways--is no Christianity and no church that the early churches knew about. The church, Biblically, is a society, founded and taught by a common, transforming Spirit and made into a family. Their meetings were a very small part of their life together, because they were not a club but a true family.
The claims I make in the post above I believe to be true only for the society of disciples, not for members of Christian clubs.
I am not going to threaten you with hell. I hope it doesn't exist in the manner most Christians believe it to exist. I hope--and expect because I believe God is real and that he's a just judge--that it's just a metaphor for divine judgment and that nothing like eternity in flames would ever happen to anyone anywhere.
Perhaps the best sum of what my motives are is to say that I believe not just is seeking, but in finding, and that what I've found is worth running into, even amazing, and a little hard to describe in words. More than one visitor has called it Utopia or heaven on earth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by Stile, posted 02-06-2008 2:43 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by Stile, posted 02-07-2008 10:19 AM truthlover has replied

Stile
Member (Idle past 129 days)
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 243 of 308 (454362)
02-06-2008 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 239 by iano
02-06-2008 4:10 PM


Re: Honestly searching
iano writes:
Other than hold up your possibly wonkey compass, what makes you think you are able to accurately perceive and judge truth?
But... I've said over and over again. I agree that my compass is possibly wonkey. Therefore I don't think I'm able to accurately perceive and judge truth. I'm just not currently presented with any better alternative.
And how do you suppose yourself objectively honest if you have no way of knowing whether you are being objectively honest or not?
I don't. I have a wonky compass. Everyone else has a wonky compass. Instead of using someone elses wonky compass, I've just decided to stick with my own, for now. What difference does it make which wonky compass I use? It's all I can do for now.
Would it be safe to say that you do place some trust in your own ability to steer yourself along?
No, not safe at all. Because I don't place trust in my own ability to steer myself along. I just also don't place trust in your ability or anyone elses ability to steer myself along because we're all in the same wonky-compass boat. That leaves me with nothing buy my wonky compass. I don't "choose" my wonky compass because I think it's good in any way. I'm "stuck" with my wonky compass because there's no better alternative.
Or would it be safer to conclude that you accept that you are reliant on something other than yourself to guide you to the truth - if ever you are to get there. That someone else must fly your plane home for you.
Perhaps something else. But definitely not someone else. Since 'someone' would also be human, and would therefore also have a wonky compass, and they too would have no way to identify if it's wonky or not. Which means... I'm still using my wonky compass until something better comes along. All I can do is honestly search, listen, and hope that I'll be able to recognize that something when (if) I get my chance.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 239 by iano, posted 02-06-2008 4:10 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 246 by iano, posted 02-06-2008 4:59 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

iano
Member (Idle past 2026 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 244 of 308 (454363)
02-06-2008 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 240 by Creationista
02-06-2008 4:28 PM


Re: Honestly searching
What makes you think you are?
Irrelevant. I'm not honestly searching.
Doesn't selecting the correct person to "fly your plane home for you" require being able to accurately perceive and judge truth?
If the set-up is such that your correct selection forms part of things then yes. If not then no. And failing a way to be sure we are accurately perceiving and judging truth, our conclusion must be that our correctly selecting doesn't form a part of the set-up
If that is the case, how do you know that you have accurately selected the correct pilot and he has not?
I've already landed. And found out that he selected me.
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by Creationista, posted 02-06-2008 4:28 PM Creationista has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 245 by Creationista, posted 02-06-2008 4:56 PM iano has replied

Creationista
Inactive Junior Member


Message 245 of 308 (454365)
02-06-2008 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 244 by iano
02-06-2008 4:42 PM


Re: Honestly searching
"Irrelevant."
No, it isn't irrelevant. You're trying to tell him that his selection process is flawed. That means that you have to know that yours isn't.
"If the set-up is such that your correct selection forms part of things then yes. If not then no. And failing a way to be sure we are accurately perceiving and judging truth, our conclusion must be that our correctly selecting doesn't form a part of the set-up"
You'll have to repeat that while using clearer language.
"I've already landed. And found out that he selected me. "
According to your potentially wonky compass, you have landed. How can you be sure? If you can't, then how can you tell him that his selection process is flawed?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by iano, posted 02-06-2008 4:42 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 247 by iano, posted 02-06-2008 5:10 PM Creationista has not replied

iano
Member (Idle past 2026 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 246 of 308 (454366)
02-06-2008 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 243 by Stile
02-06-2008 4:42 PM


Re: Honestly searching
Stile writes:
But... I've said over and over again. I agree that my compass is possibly wonkey. Therefore I don't think I'm able to accurately perceive and judge truth. I'm just not currently presented with any better alternative.
Perhaps you are being presented with better alternatives but your perception and judgement (whose ability is suspect) don't permit you see that.
Perhaps something else. But definitely not someone else. Since 'someone' would also be human
I was thinking more the person God and infinitely less the person human.
Which means... I'm still using my wonky compass until something better comes along. All I can do is honestly search, listen, and hope that I'll be able to recognize that something when (if) I get my chance.
Would you be prepared to hang up your wonky compass and take your hands off the controls altogether and let God (if he exists) steer the plane home for you? If ever you become convinced that there is truly nothing left for it but to do that then recall that you only have to get on your knees and ask.
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by Stile, posted 02-06-2008 4:42 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

iano
Member (Idle past 2026 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 247 of 308 (454369)
02-06-2008 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 245 by Creationista
02-06-2008 4:56 PM


Re: Honestly searching
No, it isn't irrelevant. You're trying to tell him that his selection process is flawed. That means that you have to know that yours isn't.
I'm not trying to tell him his ability to select is flawed. I'm telling him (and he is accepting) that he can't necessarily rely on his ability to select. We are talking about his search. Not me.
You'll have to repeat that while using clearer language.
Okay. You asked:
Doesn't selecting the correct person to "fly your plane home for you" require being able to accurately perceive and judge truth?
The answer to your question is clearly yes. But what if the correct person is God and God decides to select you - and not you him?
According to your potentially wonky compass, you have landed. How can you be sure? If you can't, then how can you tell him that his selection process is flawed?
How can I be sure God exists. Because God is able to make me sure that God exists. If he couldn't he wouldn't be much of a God, would he?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by Creationista, posted 02-06-2008 4:56 PM Creationista has not replied

iano
Member (Idle past 2026 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 248 of 308 (454473)
02-07-2008 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 241 by Stile
02-06-2008 4:34 PM


Re: So many choices
iano writes:
What if one way swims against a tide of 90,000+?
Stile writes:
That would certainly make it stand out.
Good.
However, this isn't our case. In fact, each of the 90,000 distinctly scream out they are the one that swims against the tide of the rest that are all the same.
I'm sure they do. But what happens when you filter out the noise? For instance, can they point to a specific root* attribute common in all the other 'false' systems, which operates in a polar-opposite sense to the same root attribute in their own 'true' system. You might agree that a claim to be swimming upstream, when all the rest swim downstream, would involve such a specific and polar-opposite attribute. If there is no such attribute then you cannot make the claim.
* the example root attribute I have posed can be stated thus: "Contributing to a desirable afterlife outcome - yes/no?" That different contribution-based systems involve you contributing in different ways is not relevant to the root issue of whether you must or not.
Edited by iano, : No reason given.
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by Stile, posted 02-06-2008 4:34 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 250 by Stile, posted 02-07-2008 10:59 AM iano has replied

Stile
Member (Idle past 129 days)
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 249 of 308 (454483)
02-07-2008 10:19 AM
Reply to: Message 242 by truthlover
02-06-2008 4:37 PM


Thanks for the in-depth analysis
truthlover writes:
And I treat Truth as a person who possesses power. I do think of truth as a power, but nothing like the simple acknowledgment of reality. I'm talking about the confidence Gandhi had that if he followed the principles of Truth, then Truth would back him up and guarantee his success in such things as the overthrow of Britain from India.
To me, Gandhi's power and confidence came exactly from "the simple acknowledgment of reality". When you have reality on your side, it's kind of hard for other people to argue. It's the highest source of confidence and power because, well, it's unassailable. You can show it to anyone, and most people can see it without even needing it to be shown because it is so obvious.
But we're simply arguing semantics here now. You believe there's a being behind this power, I think the power exists simply because we understand the reality of the ideas. I don't really think either stance is better.
truthlover writes:
Stile writes:
I don't see a requirement for a being to represent the ideals of Truth and Wisdom when the ideals themselves exist on their own....What sort of knowledge do you attain from the Word of God that is unattainable otherwise?
Not ideals or knowledge, but power, and a rational power at that. I am not speaking a being who represents the ideals of truth and wisdom, but a being whose own will and choices determine what truth and wisdom are. I am speaking of a being who's real, and thus who intervenes based on his own choices and on behalf of those whose hearts are wholly his (2 Chr. 16:9).
Okay. But can you answer the question, then? The question was "What sort of knowledge do you attain from the Word of God that is unattainable otherwise?" and you said "not ideals or knowledge, but power". So now the question is "What sort of power (rational, even) do you attain from the Word of God that is unattainable otherwise?"
It's okay, I currently think the only answer to this question is "there isn't any", so I'm perfectly fine with you not answering, but you should have your chance to change my mind. I certainly wouldn't want to continue thinking 'there isn't any' if there is in fact something I'm missing.
Hopefully, all the above answers the motives of my invitation to look at the web sites I mentioned. I would add that your comments about seeking and the discussions your were having made me think you would be interested in Christianity being presented from a different perspective.
Yes, answered my questions very well, thanks. And, actually, Christianity was presented from a different perspective from members such as jar, Ringo and Brennakimi all earlier (much earlier) in the thread. Huh... weird that they're all gone curently... watch your back, truthlover But thank-you all the same for your own unique perspective. That's exactly what I'm searching for, anyone's perspective that I may be able to learn from, or gain anything from. ...I'm selfish like that From the answers you provided, I've gained more confidence that my own methods are "just as good" and therefore still "the best available to me". This adds to my personal reality-based confidence and power. Of course, I could add even more if you're capable of answering the above question and telling me something I'm missing.
I am not going to threaten you with hell. I hope it doesn't exist in the manner most Christians believe it to exist. I hope--and expect because I believe God is real and that he's a just judge--that it's just a metaphor for divine judgment and that nothing like eternity in flames would ever happen to anyone anywhere.
Your use of the words "I hope" and "I believe" flag to me that you are aware that there are some things you cannot "know for sure". This is what sets you apart, and what makes me give much respect your way. The way of Truth is marked by our acknolwedgments of the things we are not fully aware of. It is those who understand their limits who will forward our gathering of Truth, simply because those limits are a part of our Truth. Not acknowledge those limits is the beggining of a slippery slope away from the Truth. Well, those limits are currently a part of the Truth, anyway (as far as I can tell).
Perhaps the best sum of what my motives are is to say that I believe not just is seeking, but in finding, and that what I've found is worth running into, even amazing, and a little hard to describe in words. More than one visitor has called it Utopia or heaven on earth.
If this is what you mean by the 'rational power' behind your beliefs, then I admit to you that I already have this as well. My "seeking" isn't seeking for Utopia. But how can we know we have "the best" of anything, if we don't search around to see what else is out there? That's what my seeking is, a continued search for anything even slightly better. I'm not beneath searching for more, you know, in case I happen to be wrong
If this search ever ends, it will be because I gain the ability to "know everything". Without that ability, it's possible that something I don't know is better than what I already know. I know I don't know everything right now, so my search for possibly-better-Utopias continues.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by truthlover, posted 02-06-2008 4:37 PM truthlover has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 251 by truthlover, posted 02-07-2008 11:06 AM Stile has replied

Stile
Member (Idle past 129 days)
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 250 of 308 (454493)
02-07-2008 10:59 AM
Reply to: Message 248 by iano
02-07-2008 9:33 AM


All the same, exactly the same
iano in Message 246 writes:
Perhaps you are being presented with better alternatives but your perception and judgement (whose ability is suspect) don't permit you see that.
Of course. This is a huge possibility I'm glaringly aware of, and yet have no idea how to get around.
I was thinking more the person God and infinitely less the person human.
I thought so, but a miss-step here could prove disastrous later, I just wanted to make sure.
Would you be prepared to hang up your wonky compass and take your hands off the controls altogether and let God (if he exists) steer the plane home for you? If ever you become convinced that there is truly nothing left for it but to do that then recall that you only have to get on your knees and ask.
Of course, I'd love to. And I'm listening and waiting and hoping and pleading on my knees for such an event to happen. Of course, I'm doing all this with my wonky-compass. But, well, I don't really have any other choice. My wonky-compass cannot get set until this happens.
And I cannot take direction from you, or your friends, or my friends, or any preacher, or the Pope, or Mother Theresa, or the President, or 'the greatest scientific minds of our time', or my family, or any other person. Because we're all in the same wonky-compass boat. Well, I can take direction from any or all of these sources, but there's no reason to, and certainly no good reason to. So I'm stuck with my own wonky compass. I think I should wait for a good reason before I go changing something as drastic as my compass, you know, what all morals and standards are based on. Yes, I need a good reason. God is a good reason. You (or anyone else) is not, because you have a wonky compass too.
iano from Message 248 writes:
I'm sure they do. But what happens when you filter out the noise? For instance, can they point to a specific root* attribute common in all the other 'false' systems, which operates in a polar-opposite sense to the same root attribute in their own 'true' system. You might agree that a claim to be swimming upstream, when all the rest swim downstream, would involve such a specific and polar-opposite attribute. If there is no such attribute then you cannot make the claim.
* the example root attribute I have posed can be stated thus: "Contributing to a desirable afterlife outcome - yes/no?" That different contribution-based systems involve you contributing in different ways is not relevant to the root issue of whether you must or not.
Yes, that's a great example root, and I understand this is the attribute Christianity defends. But this isn't the only possible root, and every single other choice from the 90,000 available have their own root. Each root is equally powerful, equally believed, equally 'obviously upstream against the other 90,000', equally 'the choice where all the others are simply noise', equally 'the specific root attribute common in all other false systems, which operates in polar-opposite sense to the same root attribute in their own true system', equally proven, equally 'unique', equally valid.
Which again, makes them all equally useless for identifying the correct one. If a correct one even exists at all.
I don't think you understand the difference. When something is truly the polar-opposite of all the others, and it's obvious it's different, then everyone in the entire world understands the same thing. Like identifying pure water. It's defined by 1 combination of elements. Water is H2O. And the entire world agrees. That's an obviously true statement. And it's obviously true because it's part of reality. We can do it again and again and again and it's always the same. Anyone can do it and it's always the same. It can be done anywhere and it's always the same. I've done it, and I agree, water is H2O. I've tried with religions, I've tried Christianity, I've tried Islam, I've tried many others. Each one is equally valid. Each one has exactly the same identical strength in it's claim to reality.
Not a single religion has any better claim to reality then any other. Not Christianity, not Islam, not any of the 90,000 choices. This is because all these choices have an equal ability to show their inclusion in reality. Every single one, in every single way. There's no way to tell them apart. If there was, there wouldn't be 90,000 of them. There'd be 1. Like water, only H2O. Only 1 way. There's over 90,000 choices for a religion.
Of course, it's possible we just haven't discovered how to tell the religions apart yet. But when that day comes, there will only be 1 religion. If that happens, I'll certainly be with that religion. But while there's still 90,000 absolutely equally valid choices, I'm not betting on any one of them. It seems rather foolish to cast the 90,000-sided die on the fate of my soul. I'd rather listen for God to tell me what path is right. And as long as I do everything in my power to listen, I'll hear Him when He talks to me. If He talks to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by iano, posted 02-07-2008 9:33 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 253 by iano, posted 02-07-2008 1:11 PM Stile has replied

truthlover
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 251 of 308 (454496)
02-07-2008 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 249 by Stile
02-07-2008 10:19 AM


Re: Thanks for the in-depth analysis
Okay. But can you answer the question, then? The question was "What sort of knowledge do you attain from the Word of God that is unattainable otherwise?" and you said "not ideals or knowledge, but power". So now the question is "What sort of power (rational, even) do you attain from the Word of God that is unattainable otherwise?"
It's okay, I currently think the only answer to this question is "there isn't any"
I can't say I understand why you think that's the only answer to this question.
Lots of things can be true and not happen unless some power causes them to happen. In fact, lots of things are true, best, or good and not happening.
I don't think truth made Britain leave India, nor caused him (abe: i.e., Gandhi) to succeed for freedom (to some extent) is South Africa. I think Truth did. America's separation from Britain happened by military force. India's happened by divine force (in my opinion).
I believe submission and denying your own will carries power, but not the simple power of submission. I think we can cause things to happen by submitting to divine will, because God chooses and causes them to happen, where he would not have had we not walked in obedience to his guidance.
So I definitely wouldn't answer "there isn't any."
Without that ability, it's possible that something I don't know is better than what I already know. I know I don't know everything right now, so my search for possibly-better-Utopias continues.
This statement makes me question why you would worry about my motives in suggesting there was something more for you to check out. My motives were a knowledge of where I was at as a seeker. I was looking, so places to look were welcome and sought after.
Edited by truthlover, : added explanation of "him"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by Stile, posted 02-07-2008 10:19 AM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 252 by Stile, posted 02-07-2008 11:34 AM truthlover has replied

Stile
Member (Idle past 129 days)
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 252 of 308 (454504)
02-07-2008 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 251 by truthlover
02-07-2008 11:06 AM


Attempt to clarify
This was my question and my current answer:
quote:
What sort of power do you attain from the Word of God that is unattainable otherwise?
I currently think "there isn't any".
Your response:
truthlover writes:
Lots of things can be true and not happen unless some power causes them to happen. In fact, lots of things are true, best, or good and not happening.
America's separation from Britain happened by military force. India's happened by divine force (in my opinion).
I don't have a problem with any of your beliefs or opinions. In my opinion India's separation did not happen by divine force. I don't really see how this point has anything to do with what we're talking about. Are you trying to say there is some power you have the ability to tap into that I do not? Are you saying that I cannot tap into the divine force that you believed allowed India's separation? But, it's trivial for me to just say I think I certainly can (and do) tap into the power that I think allowed India's separation. So, how is this useful? If there's no difference between what you can do and what I can do, how is this evidence that there's something you can do that I can't?
If what you want to say is that you have the ability to tap into some unlimited resevoir of power and I do not... but then you have no ability to show that you can actually tap into this power while I cannot... I admit I have no rebuttal. But I'd then argue that your point is useless because you cannot show your power anyway, and that anything you do have the ability to show, I can match.
I believe submission and denying your own will carries power, but not the simple power of submission. I think we can cause things to happen by submitting to divine will, because God chooses and causes them to happen, where he would not have had we not walked in obedience to his guidance.
Or maybe you're saying... we both have this power but I'm just attributing it to the wrong thing? I'd agree that's certainly possible, but since we cannot verify the source one way or the other, the identification is meaningless. So then, until you can verify that your source is the correct source for both of our powers, I'd ask you to respectfully allow me to have my own equally-unprovable source.
So I definitely wouldn't answer "there isn't any."
I know you wouldn't. I'm not trying to convince you otherwise. I'm asking if you can convince me otherwise (and I'm suggesting that the answer is 'no'). I'm wondering if you can give me any rational reason why I should change my mind from "there isn't any." So far, you haven't offered anything reasonable. Simply some musings of your own thoughts. Well, I have my own musings that are equally valid, and they say "there isn't any."
This statement makes me question why you would worry about my motives in suggesting there was something more for you to check out. My motives were a knowledge of where I was at as a seeker. I was looking, so places to look were welcome and sought after.
I wasn't worried, I'm sorry I came off that way, I attempted to clarify that I was simply curious. I guess I failed. And I agree, places to look are always welcome and sought after.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by truthlover, posted 02-07-2008 11:06 AM truthlover has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 257 by truthlover, posted 02-08-2008 6:28 AM Stile has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 2026 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 253 of 308 (454518)
02-07-2008 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 250 by Stile
02-07-2008 10:59 AM


Re: All the same, exactly the same
Stile writes:
Of course. This is a huge possibility I'm glaringly aware of, and yet have no idea how to get around.
You do in fact. You choose to use your wonky compass over anothers. You say so here.
And I cannot take direction from you, or your friends, or my friends, or any preacher, or the Pope, or Mother Theresa, or the President, or 'the greatest scientific minds of our time', or my family, or any other person. Because we're all in the same wonky-compass boat. Well, I can take direction from any or all of these sources, but there's no reason to, and certainly no good reason to. So I'm stuck with my own wonky compass.
The question asked was whether you would be prepared to let go you of your compass and the controls too. To quit in your attempt to fly your plane blind. Your answer...
Of course, I'd love to. And I'm listening and waiting and hoping and pleading on my knees for such an event to happen. Of course, I'm doing all this with my wonky-compass. But, well, I don't really have any other choice. My wonky-compass cannot get set until this happens.
Love to hang up your wonky compass and let go of the controls altogether. And at one and the same time continue flying according to your wonky compass? You can appreciate if I am a little confused.
Yes, that's a great example root, and I understand this is the attribute Christianity defends. But this isn't the only possible root, and every single other choice from the 90,000 available have their own root.
So you say. But could you provide an actual example from another system? Bearing in mind it must have crystal clear qualities outlined below and the sense of upstream/downstream.
When something is truly the polar-opposite of all the others, and it's obvious it's different, then everyone in the entire world understands the same thing.
You contributing vs. you not contributing is a crystal clear delineation. It is easy to see whether you have to contribute or not. You simply have to examine the statements of a religion whilst looking for words that indicate your contribution. Words such as
"Work", "chose", "accept", "pray", "pay", "be", good", "meditate", "seek" etc. Verbs really...
Note that we've already see that verbs such as "ask" in Christianity are actions that are pressed out of you by another. That is the mechanism posed so there can be no talk of your contribution. Having something pressed out of you is not you contributing. The credit goes to the squeezer - not the sqeezee
And as long as I do everything in my power to listen
Stile's own religion. One which relies upon his own contribution. Just like all the other ones - bar one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by Stile, posted 02-07-2008 10:59 AM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 254 by Stile, posted 02-07-2008 1:50 PM iano has replied

Stile
Member (Idle past 129 days)
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 254 of 308 (454521)
02-07-2008 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by iano
02-07-2008 1:11 PM


Still the same
iano writes:
The question asked was whether you would be prepared to let go you of your compass and the controls too. To quit in your attempt to fly your plane blind.
...
Love to hang up your wonky compass and let go of the controls altogether. And at one and the same time continue flying according to your wonky compass? You can appreciate if I am a little confused.
So, your advice to me is discard my wonky compass and accept a different equally-wonky compass? Why would that help? Why do you think it would be a good idea to place my soul on a different wonky compass? I would think that holding onto my equally-wonky compass would be the prudent thing until my compass is corrected.
You have identified a way in which my compass can be corrected, and I agree with you. My wonky compass can be corrected by God. Why do you have a problem with me having my wonky compass corrected by God? Why would you rather correct my compass yourself?
So you say. But could you provide an actual example from another system? Bearing in mind it must have crystal clear qualities outlined below and the sense of upstream/downstream.
Of course, there are religions (wicca?) that don't believe in salvation at all. You say Christianity is set apart because they believe you cannot contribute to your salvation. But there are religions that believe there is no such thing as salvation in the first place. And besides, of the 30,000 or so Christian sects, there is more than 1 that believes you need to do nothing in order to gain salvation. They just differ on other ideas. So you're not even "one" against 90,000. You're in a pool of likely 15,000 or so.
Both reasons are "crystal clear", both go "against the grain" of the 90,000 other religions saying otherwise, both are "polar opposite". Both have exactly the same power in their claim on reality. Every religion has exactly the same power in it's claim on reality.
Stile's own religion. One which relies upon his own contribution. Just like all the other ones - bar one.
I'm asking these questions in this thread because I don't have a religion and I'm wondering if I should be joining one. You've offered yours, saying it's "different", but it's "different" from the others in exactly the same way they're all "different" from each other. Equally different, equally useless in determining which is a part of our reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by iano, posted 02-07-2008 1:11 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by iano, posted 02-07-2008 3:41 PM Stile has replied
 Message 258 by iano, posted 02-08-2008 8:00 AM Stile has replied

iano
Member (Idle past 2026 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 255 of 308 (454544)
02-07-2008 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 254 by Stile
02-07-2008 1:50 PM


Re: Still the same
Stile writes:
So, your advice to me is discard my wonky compass and accept a different equally-wonky compass?
No. My suggestion is that if rejecting all wonkey compasses you should include tossing your own on the scrap heap too. Your reasons for holding onto your own are illogical in the face of such a conclusion - although you are entitled to do as you like.
Rejecting your own compass too and taking your hands from the controls which steer according to your own compass, places your fate in the hands of "God" (if he/it exists) to steer you where he/it will. You'd be trusting him/it to do that even though you have no reason to believe he/it exists - other than the force of desire in your sails.
In Christianity, such a move is called a leap of faith.
I'll get back to the rest of your post later. Dinner time here.
Ian
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by Stile, posted 02-07-2008 1:50 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 256 by Stile, posted 02-07-2008 4:01 PM iano 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