Is man a spiritual being?

Do you know why he told it?

Don't do it, ding. I'll leave you on your own here with these people. I hate when people start asking me a bunch of questions like that one after the other.

If I didn't think I was capable of having a discussion I wouldn't participate in one.
 
I guess you just swallowed and repeated that bullshit without really having the testicular fortitude to back it up and say proudly that this is what you believe.

Earlier you were talking like you were the expert and all these other Christians were just ignorant. Now you seem to be backpeddling. I don't think you want to try to defend that comment that you don't think Mary was really a virgin. That would be like saying you believe Jesus was just a really good dude. Do you know who believes that? Muslims and Jews.

In your defense, I don't think Mary was a virgin either.

Well, the discussion is very fragmented. When discussing chronological accounts like these there really does need to be a starting point.

In terms of Mary, did I not provide the correct Greek and Latin translations? Did you check me? I think you'll find that I'm correct.
I agree with you she was not a virgin.
 
Do you know much about the inquisition?

I can likely hold a conversation.
Ok, can you tell me what led to it and why it happened? In a nutshell?

ding, don't do that to me.
Why?

Gnosticism was a reaction to Christianity. They literally were the aggressors. The inquisition was a reaction to that threat.

Read the section on the heresies in Shafarevich’s book on socialism. It is a fair and impartial account by a humanist no less who is discussing socialism and not the inquisition. It’s about a 10 minute read for that section and well documented.

It’s available online. If you can’t find the link let me know.
 
Do you know why he told it?

Don't do it, ding. I'll leave you on your own here with these people. I hate when people start asking me a bunch of questions like that one after the other.

If I didn't think I was capable of having a discussion I wouldn't participate in one.
Don’t do what?

I am trying to show how context is needed to understand the teachings of Jesus. You can’t take a quote out of context and fully understand the meaning of the quote.

The book of Thomas tries to do that. Maybe that’s why it wasn’t included.

Do you know why it wasn’t included?
 
Do you know why he told it?

Don't do it, ding. I'll leave you on your own here with these people. I hate when people start asking me a bunch of questions like that one after the other.

If I didn't think I was capable of having a discussion I wouldn't participate in one.
I am literally trying to have a discussion with you. It seems you don’t want a discussion but want me to argue points instead. That isn’t a discussion.
 
Do you know why he told it?

Don't do it, ding. I'll leave you on your own here with these people. I hate when people start asking me a bunch of questions like that one after the other.

If I didn't think I was capable of having a discussion I wouldn't participate in one.
Jesus told that parable as a response to a question he was asked by a law expert who was testing him, “and who is my neighbor?”

A man (who is presumed to be Jewish) gets beaten and robbed. A priest and a Levite (fellow Jews) came along, saw the man lying there and crossed over to the other side of the road. Along comes the Good Samaritan who bandaged his wounds, put the man on his donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he came back a gave the innkeeper money to look after him and promised to reimburse him for any extra expenses.

Then Jesus asked the law expert who was this man’s neighbor?

Naturally the law expert said the one who took mercy upon him. What is not widely understood is that Jews and Samaritans are sworn enemies who hate each other. What is also widely not known is that the priest and Levite were going to the temple for prayer. Knowing these nuances gives a whole new meaning to the quote Love your neighbor as yourself.
 
The purpose of this thread is to discuss if man is predisposed to spirituality.

Since the beginning of man, man has had belief in a higher power. This belief has persisted throughout man’s existence.

Even today man overwhelming identifies himself as spiritual. So even though the grouping between belief in a specific religion may be declining, man has not abandoned his belief that he is more than just matter.

I think man is hardwired for object dualism. That there is an object that we see. And an object that we can't. The perception that there is a world behind the world we live in.

It seems to be an intregal part of both object permanence in a child's development and a facet of empathy and the mental creation of probability models when trying to glean the intent and future actions of another as we emotionally mature.

From this spiritualism would be a pretty obvious next step. As man is hardwired to believe in a world behind the world we see. And using mental probability models to imply intent is also what we're hardwired to do. Its one of the few advantages of sentience. Otherwise, its a lot of self reflection and navel gazing without a tremendous amount of survival benefit.

Its not coincidental that almost every conception of god resembles the culture that spawned it.
 
Last edited:
Do you know why he told it?

Don't do it, ding. I'll leave you on your own here with these people. I hate when people start asking me a bunch of questions like that one after the other.

If I didn't think I was capable of having a discussion I wouldn't participate in one.
I am literally trying to have a discussion with you. It seems you don’t want a discussion but want me to argue points instead. That isn’t a discussion.
.
I am literally trying to have a discussion with you. It seems you don’t want a discussion but want me to argue points instead. That isn’t a discussion.

I'll leave you on your own here


good choice, bing hasn't had a real discussion since before his first post on the forum ...
 
The flaw in thinking to the world instead of the spirit. How is a spiritual being conceived?

That's why I mentioned the Gospel of Thomas to ding earlier. Another one omitted. A rather important one, too.
There are many things one can read that are written from the old records. I started reading everything I could get my eyes on some years back but I was drawn by the Spirit to do so and for me it was as total of a search that I could do with limited resources and a lot of help from the Spirit to guide me. The emphasis on the Spirit has been largely ignore and it still is today as evidence in these conversations on this message board. Tell someone here you have seen demons manifest in people or the light of God shining through someone a lot of this society would toss in a moment and it is pretty obvious you'll get a lot of trolls coming out of the wood work here. If faith is the key and Jesus saw the demons and spiritual portions of those met along the way I cannot see what the big deal is with some? That word where he says and you will do greater things wasn't made in vain. Nor is the portion that tells us that the Lord will pour out his spirit. I think it all knits together nicely if one is serious about finding the truth and has been called to search it out but that is just me.

How big could one book actually be in the days of old fashion print without being totally cumbersome?
 

Forum List

Back
Top