Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
.The definition already answer your question.
Did you turn into Breezwood? What's with all the cryptic speak?
I write: Contradiction?! What are you talking about?
You write: The definition already answer [sic] your question.
The definition of faith is contradictory?!
What the beep!
I learned to write simply for people like you who have an amazing difficulty understanding simple statements.
Here is the FULL quote:
"They why do so many religionists say they have FAITH in God, if his existence is already overwhelming?
Faith is defined as belief with strong conviction; firm belief in something for which there may be no tangible proof; complete trust, confidence, reliance, or devotion. Faith is the opposite of doubt.
That is contradictory."
which as a reply to YOUR one line statement:
"Of course, the evidence for God's existence is overwhelming. "
=======
The Definition specifically states what FAITH is: Faith is defined as belief with strong conviction; firm belief in something for which there may be no tangible proof;
the total opposite of YOUR statement:
"Of course, the evidence for God's existence is overwhelming."
You finally understand where the contradiction is?
.Faith is defined as belief with strong conviction; firm belief in something for which there may be no tangible proof; complete trust, confidence, reliance, or devotion. Faith is the opposite of doubt.
You actually identified the reason Christianity has splintered into so many sects / sub sects as is common with most religions. The moment you break from the literal descriptions within any of the various holy texts, you fall into the circular loop of interpretation and what, if any, is the real interpretation. Which means, we’ve looped back to the issue of interpretation and translation but then we’d get in the problems with shoddy translation and why the gods would allow that. Why not simply be clear and prevent such such confusion? Why is it that the theistic perspective offers gods who confound us, but the materialist perspective offers one that makes sense-- a star is a million light years away because it's taken light a million years to get here. Simple. Explainable. Understandable. No need to assert mysterious beings using mysterious ways we can never know, precluding us from ever finding out.People have been studying the Bible for ages. There is a lot of information available, and many viable theories that are worth considering. Some really good scholars start with the premise that what is not true now (i.e. talking donkeys and snakes) are not true now. If mankind cannot live for 900 years now, then it was not possible then. All would agree this reasoning is based on knowledge and reasoning gathered through the years. Two theories that make the most sense: Zeros added to emphasize the importance of that person and what he accomplished. The theory I favor is this was a family (or tribal) name and the family/tribe lasted 900 years. The important thing is not to claim any theory as fact, to be comfortable with the knowledge that some knowledge or the way things were done thousands of years ago, has dissipated over the years.I think that reality including Arks sailing the seas, men living for 900 years, animal sacrifice, etc., warp the concept of reality. The gods might have taken the time to edit the books written about them. They chose not to. Why did they not require the reader to understand allegory vs. literal rendering of the tales? Why did they not acknowledge that "hey, we're sort of right but those Egyptian gods, yeah, they were really right".
The Bible is interesting. Your life is even more interesting. Your insights are just as worthy of consideration. Why shouldn't the original audience been expected to fully understand metaphor, symbolism, and allegory? In our own day don't we fully expect our audience to understand the expression (and many like it), "It's raining cats and dogs...and I stepped into a poodle."
“There is one god”?There is one God. You are speaking of four perspectives, not four Gods. I'm willing to bet that all four of us have different perspectives of you as well. Doesn't mean that there are four of you....God takes on an unlimited number of forms. Just in this thread alone we are discussing four gods with the same name.
So which is it, Faith or reason? you can't have both.
It was the Protestant Reformation that brought about the literal translations...which then began splintering within themselves. The Catholic Church taught Bible Study, yes with a priest teaching, whereas Protestants taught Bible Reading, with everyone deciding his/her own meaning. It was the Protestants who decided based on Genealogy, the earth had to be about six thousand years old, and if that wasn't strange enough, that people would literally be lifted up into the sky (Rapture). Protestants decided upon reading that a flood covered the earth (ground) that it meant the flood covered the Earth (planet).You actually identified the reason Christianity has splintered into so many sects / sub sects as is common with most religions. The moment you break from the literal descriptions within any of the various holy texts, you fall into the circular loop of interpretation and what, if any, is the real interpretation. Which means, we’ve looped back to the issue of interpretation and translation but then we’d get in the problems with shoddy translation and why the gods would allow that. Why not simply be clear and prevent such such confusion? Why is it that the theistic perspective offers gods who confound us, but the materialist perspective offers one that makes sense-- a star is a million light years away because it's taken light a million years to get here. Simple. Explainable. Understandable. No need to assert mysterious beings using mysterious ways we can never know, precluding us from ever finding out.
Do you? The Bible teaches that God is far beyond our understanding. Perspectives are all we have and I find them all valid. You find none valid and you find the none valid position less arrogant than all valid. That, too, is an interesting perspective.I get the tangy taste of religious inspired arrogance with such a statement.
That's precisely the problem. Rejecting a literal interpretation means any and all interpretations are valid.It was the Protestant Reformation that brought about the literal translations...which then began splintering within themselves. The Catholic Church taught Bible Study, yes with a priest teaching, whereas Protestants taught Bible Reading, with everyone deciding his/her own meaning. It was the Protestants who decided based on Genealogy, the earth had to be about six thousand years old, and if that wasn't strange enough, that people would literally be lifted up into the sky (Rapture). Protestants decided upon reading that a flood covered the earth (ground) that it meant the flood covered the Earth (planet).You actually identified the reason Christianity has splintered into so many sects / sub sects as is common with most religions. The moment you break from the literal descriptions within any of the various holy texts, you fall into the circular loop of interpretation and what, if any, is the real interpretation. Which means, we’ve looped back to the issue of interpretation and translation but then we’d get in the problems with shoddy translation and why the gods would allow that. Why not simply be clear and prevent such such confusion? Why is it that the theistic perspective offers gods who confound us, but the materialist perspective offers one that makes sense-- a star is a million light years away because it's taken light a million years to get here. Simple. Explainable. Understandable. No need to assert mysterious beings using mysterious ways we can never know, precluding us from ever finding out.
I simply acknowledge that anyone saying they have a valid interpretation of the will of the gods is making a false statement. That’s a valid position to take when believers acknowledge that the gods are far beyond their understanding.Do you? The Bible teaches that God is far beyond our understanding. Perspectives are all we have and I find them all valid. You find none valid and you find the none valid position less arrogant than all valid. That, too, is an interesting perspective.I get the tangy taste of religious inspired arrogance with such a statement.
I suppose you know with certainty that your position is that of the gods.I didn't read the whole thread, but from what I did read, it's a shame that a lot of people here are assuming that TULIP is Christianity. This thread is about Calvinism, which is wrong and evil.
I simply acknowledge that anyone saying they have a valid interpretation of the will of the gods is making a false statement. That’s a valid position when believers acknowledge that the gods are far beyond their understanding.Do you? The Bible teaches that God is far beyond our understanding. Perspectives are all we have and I find them all valid. You find none valid and you find the none valid position less arrogant than all valid. That, too, is an interesting perspective.I get the tangy taste of religious inspired arrogance with such a statement.
But there IS a truth. Not a number of conflicting "truths." Which is why people have told you a trillion times that there is only ONE God. Yet you insist in every post to phrase it as "the gods."
Didn't anyone pay attention in their middle school English classes? Metaphors, allegories, symbolism are all explained, and most English classes have students practice writing each. Can you, personally, or can you not, identify metaphors, allegories, and symbolism? You spoke of arrogance earlier. Do you believe that modern Western culture is the only culture who understands metaphor, allegories, and symbolism? That the very people who wrote the Bible using these tools didn't know what they were doing? You sell your ancestors way short. If we, today, can understand and use allegories, metaphors, and symbolism, we got it from somewhere. With the Bible, we can trace this use back to ancient man who also used a picture language (not a subjective language).That's precisely the problem. Rejecting a literal interpretation means any and all interpretations are valid.
I suppose you know with certainty that your position is that of the gods.I didn't read the whole thread, but from what I did read, it's a shame that a lot of people here are assuming that TULIP is Christianity. This thread is about Calvinism, which is wrong and evil.
How many times do people of faith have to say that full knowledge of God is beyond human understanding? How many times do we have to write it before this becomes equally obvious to atheists? I don't know who taught you religion, but that we cannot fully know God was one of the first things I was taught about God. God is love was the first. Then we were taught to know, love, and serve God, with the caveat that we could not fully know God, but do what we can within our capacity.I simply acknowledge that anyone saying they have a valid interpretation of the will of the gods is making a false statement. That’s a valid position to take when believers acknowledge that the gods are far beyond their understanding.
To be more precise, to stop harping about her misunderstanding of what she thinks others might be claiming. It makes sense that some cannot believe in God. It makes little sense to make up what one thinks others believe when the attributed belief just isn't so.You should care about seeking the truth yourself, instead of harping about what other people claim.
To be more precise, to stop harping about her misunderstanding of what she thinks others might be claiming. It makes sense that some cannot believe in God. It makes little sense to make up what one thinks others believe when the attributed belief just isn't so.You should care about seeking the truth yourself, instead of harping about what other people claim.
Read what is actually written. Everyone does what they can within his/her own capacity. This is constantly explained to you. As I wrote earlier, the person who has the best understanding of God is a short millimeter closer to God than the most sincere atheist., The rest of us fall in between these two.I suppose you know with certainty that your position is that of the gods.
How do you know there is only god? You do realize that religions other than yours insist there are multiple gods? How is it they are correct and you are not?I simply acknowledge that anyone saying they have a valid interpretation of the will of the gods is making a false statement. That’s a valid position when believers acknowledge that the gods are far beyond their understanding.Do you? The Bible teaches that God is far beyond our understanding. Perspectives are all we have and I find them all valid. You find none valid and you find the none valid position less arrogant than all valid. That, too, is an interesting perspective.I get the tangy taste of religious inspired arrogance with such a statement.
Why do you care so much about what other people say? You're missing the more important point. Whether one's claim is right or wrong, there IS an actual truth. Conflicting "truths" cannot all be true at the same time and in the same sense. That's the Law of noncontradiction, one of the most basic laws of logic.
If you want to argue against logic, go ahead.
What is actually written? I am certain that I have the best understanding of the gods or at least the men who wrote the Bible.Read what is actually written. Everyone does what they can within his/her own capacity. This is constantly explained to you. As I wrote earlier, the person who has the best understanding of God is a short millimeter closer to God than the most sincere atheist., The rest of us fall in between these two.I suppose you know with certainty that your position is that of the gods.
Religion is a philosophy, faith based on reason. Abraham's philosophy of One God strikes a cord with me, and his reasoning was logical. Jewish experiences and logic solidified Abraham's philosophy. Of course, I have also done a lot of research on how the Greek (and then Roman) Gods were chosen, and the philosophies and perspectives behind them. Once more, for me, the Abrahamic philosophies made better sense, so that is the path I have pursued. It works for me. If multiple Gods work better for you, embrace that. If no belief is your choice, rejoice.How do you know there is only god? You do realize that religions other than yours insist there are multiple gods? How is it they are correct and you are not?
