Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,928 Year: 4,185/9,624 Month: 1,056/974 Week: 15/368 Day: 15/11 Hour: 3/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   "Evidence and Faith"
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 170 of 303 (400919)
05-17-2007 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 169 by nator
05-17-2007 10:52 AM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
There are regions and nations which are predominantly Buddhist, so it is certainly possible to discover something about how Buddhists treat other people, how they feel about life, etc. We can do this for Muslim, Christian, and other regions and coutries, too.
Yea, but then we get into the "true Christian" discussion.
Buddhists are the most happy. They are also the most peaceful.
They bear the best fruit, if you think peace and happiness are good fruits.
I can't really say.
"I hit you because I love you" is something many a battered woman and child has heard.
Again, we get into the true Christian discussion.
If you want to measure Christianity by what people do, you will never think Christianity is good. But if there is a devil, he will attack what is most threatening to him.
So, to say "love others" isn't saying anything.
Nator, forget about the rest of the world, I said to you, because I know you know what love is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by nator, posted 05-17-2007 10:52 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by nator, posted 05-18-2007 12:43 AM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 172 of 303 (401022)
05-17-2007 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Equinox
05-17-2007 2:25 PM


Re: Subjective Invocations asking for Objective Results
The results clearly show that prayer is ineffective for healing,
For that particuylar study only, for those people praying, and those people recieving.
You see, my problem with that is that the bible, I think, only tells two different ways in which we can "test" the Lord, and prayer is not one of them.
They sorta do. Would people contribute money to your church if they thought that prayer didn’t have any effect beyond the person praying?
I think they would, as people in our church do not give money expecting prayer in return.
People give money, because we recognize that the money is from God, so we are giving it back to Him. That is what we are supposed to feel in our hearts.
Even when I became a member of the church, they told me, it was not a requirement to give 10% of my income.
My Pastor regulary gives a tithe challenge. This is one way to test the Lord, according to the bible. If you give 10% of your earnings, God will pour His blessings out on you. So my Pastor says give 10% for 3 months, and if you do not experience God's blessings, you can have your money back.
I personally have experienced nothing but blessings since tithing, I am never short of money.
As far as the Elijah list goes, there are some good things about it too, it isn't all bad. I have read some very uplifting things, and seen some prophecies come true. I just can't handle the advertising.
Some of the prophecies there, parellel prophecies exoerienced in our own church, another subjective experience that helps my faith.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Equinox, posted 05-17-2007 2:25 PM Equinox has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by Equinox, posted 05-23-2007 12:57 PM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 174 of 303 (401094)
05-18-2007 11:18 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by nator
05-18-2007 12:43 AM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
No, not really.
That is simply a meaningless, silly, useless reductionist argument and the only reason it is brought up is when the debater wants to avoid the debate.
Yes really. I will not judge a religion by the actions of it's people, especially when they clearly do not follow their own religious scripts.
Oh? Suddenly you have no opinion on if peace or happiness qualify as "good fruit"? Gimme a break, rat. Jesus is referred to as the "Prince of Peace", isn't he?
Something tells me you just don't want to admit that another belief system other than your own is better at delivering what it promises.
Tell me, rat, if peace and happiness are not "good fruits", then what are, according to you?
Of course peace and happiness are good fruits, that's not what I was refering too.
I just don't think that peace and happiness are the end-all to good fruit.
Some other things might include, true love, helping others, non-religious spirits, etc.
I am also not sure about what you say: "delivering what it promises".
Just what does Buddism promise? I am not an expert on it.
Just what does Christianity promise? In your words.
How else am I supposed to measure any religion other than by what people do?
By reading their religious texts.
People will always be people, even without religion, I am sure of that.
Er, huh? Irrelevant to our discussion.
We were talking about measuring beliefs by the quality of their "fruit".
It's not irrelevant. This is why I think you are not totally in tune to just what Christianity is, or more precisly, what Jesus was teaching us.
Listen, the devil, for the most part, does not present himself as a bad guy. And when I say devil, it is a figurative term. It can mean anything you want.
I have tons of peace and happiness....and LOVE, in my beliefs. My only disappointment is in the ways of the world.
I am convinced that the only proof there is of Christianity is God's Holy Spirit.I really hope you get to experience it one day, or maybe you have, but just deny it, I don't know.
But the Holy Spirit, is the Spirit of truth. Buddism, is not the truth, this I know. Anything beyond that, then I am judging people in way I do not want to be judged.
If the devil can keep you from the truth, and in a state of bliss, the so be it. This is a possibility.
I am not condemning people here, I am just stating what I think.
Perhaps we shouldn't even be getting into this, as this is way beyond what we can discuss here.
If you want to measure someone by their fruits, look at Mother Theresa.
And just for the record, I do not think that Buddist are bad people or anything like that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by nator, posted 05-18-2007 12:43 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by ringo, posted 05-18-2007 1:37 PM riVeRraT has replied
 Message 180 by Nighttrain, posted 05-19-2007 3:22 AM riVeRraT has not replied
 Message 181 by nator, posted 05-19-2007 6:59 AM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 176 of 303 (401152)
05-18-2007 3:08 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by ringo
05-18-2007 1:37 PM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
People can claim all the faith in the world, but if they don't act, their "faith" is a sham.
Right, so that is why I do not use people to measure religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by ringo, posted 05-18-2007 1:37 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by ringo, posted 05-18-2007 4:02 PM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 178 of 303 (401162)
05-18-2007 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by ringo
05-18-2007 4:02 PM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
Peoples's actions are the evidence of their faith.
Not completely.
Peoples actions are evidence of how they interpret things, and what they think is wrong or right, and evidence of their faith. But faith is a subjective thing, not an objective one.
It is not evidence of what Jesus said. Jesus's actions are evidence of how He wants us to live.
There is not many people in this world, worthy of leading by example.
MY own faith is a perfect example. I am far from being like Jesus, yet I desire too. My faith is subjective, and an evolving thing.
Of course my actions will have influence on what people think about Christianity, but it is not the measuring stick at all. I believe the only thing that is going to convert people to believe, is God Himself.
If I was to go on what I see in Christianity, I would not be Christian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by ringo, posted 05-18-2007 4:02 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by ringo, posted 05-18-2007 4:28 PM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 182 of 303 (401327)
05-19-2007 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 179 by ringo
05-18-2007 4:28 PM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
I couldn't care less about "converting" anybody to Christianity. (In fact, if anybody asked for my advice, I'd say don't convert to Christianity.)
You don't do the converting. God converts you. When this happens, if you accept it, there is a noticable change in your behaivor, but this doesn't make you Jesus Christ.
If we are to look for an example of what Christianity is, then we can only look at Jesus.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by ringo, posted 05-18-2007 4:28 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by ringo, posted 05-19-2007 11:41 AM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 183 of 303 (401329)
05-19-2007 7:53 AM
Reply to: Message 181 by nator
05-19-2007 6:59 AM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
If it is OK to judge Mother Theresa by her fruits, why is it not OK to judge Buddhists as a group for their fruits?
I never said it wasn't ok.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by nator, posted 05-19-2007 6:59 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by nator, posted 05-19-2007 7:31 PM riVeRraT has not replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 185 of 303 (401385)
05-19-2007 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by ringo
05-19-2007 11:41 AM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
Think of this way, religion is a red dress. Who's it going to look better on, Rosanna, or Angelina Jolie?
It is not religions fault if people don't get it right.
I am sure there are many more factors that go into what makes Buddist peaceful people.
Doesn't Mike Tyson practice buddism?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by ringo, posted 05-19-2007 11:41 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by ringo, posted 05-19-2007 3:25 PM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 188 of 303 (401482)
05-20-2007 7:32 AM
Reply to: Message 186 by ringo
05-19-2007 3:25 PM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
nator writes:
All you've done in this thread is tell me that we can't judge groups of religious people by their "fruits".
You've just contradicted yourself.
Mother Theresa, is not a group.
I would examine her, because she bears good fruits, and then see how she interprets what is written.
Just like looking up to Jesus.
I mean it is plainly obvious, to me anyway, when people are not following what is written.
What do we blame, the religous texts, or the people?
Ringo writes:
Why not?
If people follow wrong teachings, don't the teachings (and the teachers) bear some responsibility?
That's just it, the teachings aren't wrong, the people are.
If people murder, does that mean the law is no good, when it is clearly against the law?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by ringo, posted 05-19-2007 3:25 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by ringo, posted 05-20-2007 11:02 AM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 190 of 303 (401530)
05-20-2007 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by ringo
05-20-2007 11:02 AM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
Suppose somebody does X and claims that the Bible teaches X. If X is wrong, then the teaching of X is wrong too.
No, their "claims" have to be substanciated.
Just like in science, and the scientific method.
People can claim whatever they want, then they have to be proven right.
(Did I get that right Percy?)
You can't just claim that X is not what the Bible "really" teaches.
I can, and I do.
Look at the persecution of homosexuals. Some people claim that the Bible teaches homosexuality is wrong, and they use that "teaching" as an excuse for persecution, like denying the right to marry.
There is no denying that according to the bible, that God does not favor Homosexuality, but then again, He does not favor many things, that WE ALL DO.
So Jesus said, he who is without sin, can throw the first stone.
So all these people that take what the bible says, and clearly use them out of context, and ignore everything else it says, are wrong, not the bible itself.
Not only that, but the bible is not the end all to how Jesus wants us to be. It is only text to make you aware of what Jesus really did for us, and continues to do. Jesus sent His Holy Spirit to be guides in our lives.
Many people who read the bible, and claim to be Christian, can't even answer the question "what is the Holy Spirit?"
Why then should we listen to anything else they have to say on the bible?
I can't believe that I am even having to explain all this to you.
If science makes a mistake, and kills one of my relatives with bad information, is science then bad too? The people doing it?
Is all of science bad, because people like Dr.Emoto, and spirit chasers are full of it?
Or is science just 75% good 25% bad?
Is people's interpretation of the Bible wrong? Or is the Bible just wrong about homosexuals?
I know the first statement is true, the second statement is really up to each individual to decide. It is each individual that will have to stand before God, and explain themselves, and their actions.
People know what they do in their hearts to be wrong or right, I don't a crap what they say on the outside, it is totally irrelevant when it comes to God.
To me, it is very possible, and probable that many homosexuals feel what they are doing is right.
Jesus was slain on the cross, and what did He say as He was dying? Forgive them Father, because they know not what they do.
I want to be like Jesus.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by ringo, posted 05-20-2007 11:02 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by ringo, posted 05-20-2007 3:16 PM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 192 of 303 (401604)
05-20-2007 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by ringo
05-20-2007 3:16 PM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
But how do you know that the Bible isn't wrong?
With that question, you have just moved the goal posts.
That is a separate issue from whether people interpret things right.
If people who believe in the Bible do wrong, how do we know whether their interpretation is wrong or the Bible itself is wrong?
You can read it for yourself. You can study it for years, to try and learn.
Please try to remember, we are not talking about slicing cheese the right way here. It can take years to try and understand it, and then, I believe we still won't get it right.
The things that Jesus talks about, are extremely deep issues, that most of will take years to learn.
"Science" can't make mistakes. It can't be "bad". Science is a method.
Well the same can be said of loving God, and loving others.
If you decide right and wrong based on a book, you're letting the authors of that book make up your mind for you.
I don't think the bible tells what is right and wrong in the eyes of God, in order for us to enforce it on others. It is so we can get closer to God.
You can try these things, and if they are correct, then your own mind can come into alignment with the book, and with God. You are not parking your brain at the door, you still have to see for yourself what it tells you, and then go from there.
I think the real problem, is the people teaching it.
We can assess the usefulness of the book based on how believers in the book behave.
Absolutely not. The spectrum of behavior amoung believers is far too wide to make such a decision. And if you read the bible, it will even come into agreement with this thought, and warn you about it.
If they do what is clearly wrong, and they do it because the book tells them to (or the Holy Spook tells them to), then we can conclude that the book (or the Spook) is wrong.
The book doesn't tell you to do anything to anyone else, except love them.
As far as the "holy spook" goes:
Galatians 5:22
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.
The book warns of false prophets, and that you will know them by their deeds. Clearly this is not a black and white issue.
Judging the bible, or what Jesus was trying to teach us, by judging those that claim are from Him, is a huge mistake. I see it a lot in this forum.
And for a good reason. I feel more people are hurt by religion, or more precisly, the people doing religion, than anyone else. I know, I was one of them. It took me years, but I later found out, that I was wrong, and then wanted to find out for myself.
I used to think like you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by ringo, posted 05-20-2007 3:16 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by ringo, posted 05-21-2007 1:21 AM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 194 of 303 (401668)
05-21-2007 8:30 AM
Reply to: Message 193 by ringo
05-21-2007 1:21 AM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
Not at all. It's exactly the same issue. If people do wrong, it could be caused by them misinterpreting their source or by their source being wrong.
That is a moved goal post. You've added the word "or".
You never agreed with me that people could be mis-interpreting wrong. You blamed it totally on the text. Now it is either or.
Would you agree there are "good" Christians and "bad" Christians?
You could study it for eleven lifetimes and if it's wrong you still won't learn anything from it.
Absolutely. But that has nothing to do with my point.
I don't think it has anything to do with "getting closer to God". I think it's about getting along with our fellow humans.
It's both.
We can make an attempt at getting closer to humans. But the true closeness, and understanding of others, is once God shares His Holy Love with you, and enables you to see people partially the way He sees them. Then you can share that true love with them.
Some people are born with this gift already, but we all can benefit from God's love for us.
All this "getting closer to God" mumbo-jumbo isn't very productive.
That is a subjective statement.
In many cases getting closer to God can bring you away from people. That is where the misinterpretation begins.
Since there is a braod spectrum of behaviour among believers, it seems reasonable to conclude that the Bible doesn't determine anybody's behaviour
Isn't this in agreement with me then? Isn't this what I have been trying to say?
If the bible doesn't determine anyone's behavior, then the bible is not responsible.
i.e. it isn't useful for molding behaviour.
Only God can do that, with a concerted effort from the believer.
I used to think like you. I was about fourteen at the time.
I was 8.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by ringo, posted 05-21-2007 1:21 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 195 by ringo, posted 05-21-2007 11:01 AM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 199 of 303 (401816)
05-22-2007 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 195 by ringo
05-21-2007 11:01 AM


No. I've used the word "or" ever since I introduced the possibility of the Bible being wrong in Message 189.
Only when you refered to homosexuals.
In your first claim you said this:
"Suppose somebody does X and claims that the Bible teaches X. If X is wrong, then the teaching of X is wrong too."
I do not see the word "or" in there.
I never disagreed with that point either. I only brought up the additional possibility that the text itself is wrong.
That is reasonable, and if you are now saying that "or" is what you meant, then this conversation was a waste?
You blamed it totally on the text.
Not at all.
X is wrong, you said, not "or X is wrong."
That's just more mumbo-jumbo. The only way you can "know" what other people "see" and "understand" is by their actions. You have no way of knowing whose ear God is whispering in.
WEll Ringo, I strongly disagree with you, as I have experienced different. God has shown me how and why people behave the way they do, and I am able to forgive people as they do things to me based on this.
I have also been able to address the problem directly, instead of the effects of the problem, and people who I have gotten close to have poured their hearts out to me.
Who the hell am I to have this been done to? I am just a regular guy.
It is another one of those subjective evidences that bring up my faith. Before experienceing what I believe to be the Holy Spirit, this kind of stuff did not happen to me, and quite the opposite did.
You seemed to be crediting the Bible (and the Holy Spirit) with people's good behaviour but exempting it (and the Holy Spirit) from responsibility for their bad behaviour.
No, I credit the bible with text that when interpreted correctly, can help lead you to a closer relationship with God.
I credit the Holy Spirit with helping people grow in that relationship with God, and hopefully be able to improve your behavior.
Having said all that, people are still responsible for their actions, and no-one is like Jesus. We are all on a journey.
How do I explain all these bad Christians? I don't know.
I guess I was one of them for many years. I still am one, but heading in the right direction, and improving daily. Experiencing the Holy Spirit, was a huge leap in the right direction for me. I was able to shead a lot of bad stuff in the snap of a finger, and I can only thank God for that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by ringo, posted 05-21-2007 11:01 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by ringo, posted 05-22-2007 11:01 AM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 203 of 303 (402085)
05-24-2007 6:56 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by ringo
05-22-2007 11:01 AM


I said, "The only way you can know what other people see and understand is by their actions." You're talking about what you believe, not what you know.
How can you you know what other people see and understand by their actions?
Example, say a guy curses you out in traffic, you know by his actions what he sees, and understands? You can then understand how he got to that point?
We are also not talking about "problems". The bad behaviour that I'm talking about is not always seen as bad by the people doing it. Sometimes, they even think it's "good" - e.g. persecuting homosexuals.
Yes, I know, God has highlighted those things to me. That's why I was saying I can now see why people do things they do.
It is why I mentioned what Jesus said on the cross.
Since the Bible says "love thy neighbour", people who claim to believe the Bible ought to love their neighbours - and that love ought to be visible, not just "in their hearts". Jesus was pretty specific about how to love your neighbour - feed him, clothe him, visit him in prison.
Amen.
None of that is a secret between you and the Holy Spirit.
Well that depends. Your visible actions may not be, but the why and the how, might.
And people who love their neighbours don't claim that their neighbours caused 9-11 or Hurricane Katrina.
The evidence is in what you say and do, not in what you (claim to) believe.
Yes, I agree. You are only supporting my point here.
But that has little to do with if the actual texts of what you claim to believe in are wrong or right.
Wouldn't you agree it is 2 different issues, and just because Buddists may have abetter outwardly apearence (if they do) than Christians, that does not mean that buddism is the way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by ringo, posted 05-22-2007 11:01 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by ringo, posted 05-24-2007 12:01 PM riVeRraT has replied

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 447 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 204 of 303 (402087)
05-24-2007 7:21 AM
Reply to: Message 201 by Equinox
05-23-2007 12:57 PM


Re: Subjective Invocations asking for Objective Results
No, as I’ve said over and over, that’s the conclusion of multiple studies, including comprehensive reviews of all studies to date where the data is pooled. Even individual studies often have hundreds of subjects. If a drug was found to be effective based on hundreds of people in a study, it would sound pretty silly to say “that result was only for “that particuylar study only, for those people”.
With every drug study, there is a placebo effect. That means some people get cured without the actual need of the drug. What does that mean?
Then you go on to compare prayer to whether or not your dog has lungs, poor show.
Prayer is subjective, lungs in your dog are not.
The bible even says how God wants you to test Him, and prayer is not one of them.
Jesus sends people out to heal people.
The people in the study who got prayed for and were healed, how do we know that if they weren't prayed for, they would have not been healed?
The woman who reached out and touched Jesus's robe, and was healed. Jesus didn't look down at her and say, see, I told you prayer works. No He said it was your faith that healed you.
Maybe blind praying doesn't actually do anything.
Does this mean that all praying does nothing?
In countless areas of your life, rR, you accept the results of studies and logic (for instance, home cleaner toxicity, medical treatments, orbs, car safety devices, nutrition information, and on and on), yet in this one area (and probably a couple well-picked other areas), logic and data go out the window.
Not true. When I consistantly see prayer effectively work in my life, I do not need a study to tell me if it is working or not.
I mean if I walk outside and it is raining, and the news, and doppler show that it is not, what should I believe?
I have stated this many times before, especially to nator. I will not live my life completely by scientific study. No matter how good all these studys are, there are still choices to make.
Example, Doctor tells you, if we operate on you, you will have a 50% chance of making it. You are still faced with a decision.
I’m mentioning all this to point out the inconsistency, which makes you look either nave or deluded (and if you are arguing Christianity to a non-Christian, that begins to effect how Christianity looks too).
That's fine. Christians always looked deluded to me, before I felt what I believe to be the Holy Spirit also. And that all makes perfect sense to me now. That will not stop me from speaking what I believe to be truth.
The members are encouraged to give because they are persuaded to continue to believe that a “prayer answering” god is accessible though involvement in your church.
I would love to share our vision, mission, and relational values with you.
Our church is only for gathering, and corporately worshipping together. To hear a speaker, who may have heard from the Lord, and have words. Even if those words do not directly apply to you, sometimes the Lord will speak through that person, even if that person is not even Godly. Shit I believe God uses Atheists.
We go to church to get recharged, and be with friends. To organize all of our outreach programs, and to corporately help others.
The same is true of me since I ran over a raccoon in 1992. I don’t attribute my having money to running over the raccoon, confirmation bias notwithstanding. Nor do I profit by getting 10% of the squashed raccoon’s money. Someone is making money over this tithing business, and I bet it isn’t you.
Well I don't know. The church regularly hires me, and has probably spent as much money with me, as I have given. I also get a good protion of business from the congregation in the church. I give them a big discount, as I refer to Acts.
Our books are open, and no-one is getting rich at our church. On Pastor actually works for free. I think only one Pastor gets paid (some of the times) and the secretary gets paid.
The head Pastor has is own successful consulting firm, and does not need a full salary from the church.
Probably 80% of the tithe goes into just running the church.
You would be surprised just how much it takes to run a church, or a charity for that matter. IT is not as easy as you think.
So if a prophecy comes true, it’s from the holy spirit, if not, it isn’t.
I don't know, the bible says you will know a prophet is one, by his accuracy.
I ahven't had much prophecy come to me, but when it has, it has been 100% accurate.
I think being able to distinguish God, from your own personal thoughts helps in your accuracy.
But I know it is all subjective, and I uderstand about confirmation bias. I watch out for it as much as possible, and it is the reason why I say "I believe God exists" and not "God exists"
Edited by riVeRraT, : No time to spell check, sorry

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by Equinox, posted 05-23-2007 12:57 PM Equinox has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by jar, posted 05-24-2007 8:33 AM riVeRraT has not replied
 Message 207 by Equinox, posted 05-24-2007 1:45 PM riVeRraT has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024