Well the Southern Baptists declared the bible a true factual word of God.

[Stuartbirdan2]

Stuartbirdan2
Do you still believe that biblical rubbish?

Halley's Comet appeared in the sky when Mark Twain was born in 1835. The comet moves in a seventy-five or seventy-six-year orbit, and, as it neared Earth once again, Twain said, I came in with Halley's Comet... It is coming again ... and I expect to go out with it...
University of Houston › epi1642
No. 1642: Halley's Comet

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

Stuartbirdan2
Do you still believe that biblical rubbish?

Mark Twain was born on November 30, 1835—two weeks after the perihelion of Halley’s Comet. “I came in with Halley’s Comet,” Mark Twain commented in 1909. “It is coming again next year. The Almighty has said, no doubt, ‘Now there are these two unaccountable freaks; they came in together, they must go out together.’” He died on April 21, 1910—one day after the comet had once again reached its perihelion

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

Stuartbirdan2
Do you still believe that biblical rubbish?

I find it ironic that the most well-known star formation in our night sky is the big dipper which points to the north star. For centuries I presume seafarers used the north star for navigation.
To me the big dipper says "drink this"

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

Stuartbirdan2
Do you still believe that biblical rubbish?

Ah but we also have the little dipper which says "drink cautiously "

 

[Colin norris]

Stuartbirdan2
How could you possibly know what the almighty supposed to have said?
Do you have unique access to every word he utters because I doubt that.

 

[Colin norris]

Stuartbirdan2
You "think. How long have been affording yourself that luxury without evidence?

 

[ding]

Your GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call a veterinarian and have it put down.

I am sorry.


My comment was not a "Gotcha" attempt, merely a thought to ponder. I agree we will not know until the hereafter.

My apologies. You're right. We will not know, either in our lifetimes, or on this plane of existence.

Through the light of human reason I know now.

The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available.

It kind of contradicts itself when it says...

"We shall see that as a mental activity Christian faith is no different from everyday faith."

and

"The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available."

Most people don't put complete trust in something or someone without good reason for doing so. So if they are asserting that Christian faith is no different than say putting faith in seat belts, what they are arguing for is completely different than everyday faith. I am arguing that no matter what people put their faith in they have good reasons for doing so. God can be known through the light of human reason through the study of what he created.

If St. Paul is correct that we are without excuse, then St. Paul must have believed that there is empirical and rational proof available. Setting aside that St. Paul was talking about studying what God created to see proof of God's work, what about Jesus? Are you suggesting that Jesus Christ is not empirical evidence or rational proof?

I suggest only the things I say outright.

Yes, I believe there is ample evidence for the existence of both God and His Son. But not everyone is going to look at the same examples and come to the same conclusion.

We were given free will for a reason.

Then you don't need to take it on faith. You have proof. You know.

“I think, therefore I am”: Descartes on the Foundations of Knowledge
26 NOVEMBER 2018~ 1000-WORD PHILOSOPHY: AN INTRODUCTORY ANTHOLOGY
Author: Charles Miceli
Category: Historical Philosophy, Epistemology
Word Count: 994

If you are reading this, then you are probably looking at a screen or a piece of paper. Think to yourself: “I have some paper in my hand,” “I am in front of a computer” or whatever fits.

Is your belief here certain? Is there any way that you could believe this, yet your belief be false? Is there any possibility that you are mistaken about this belief? René Descartes (1596-1650) argues you could: this belief, and almost all other beliefs, are not certain

Given that everything is made manifest by mind one must recognize that the physical world is entirely abstract and without ‘actuality’ apart from its linkage to consciousness. Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create. This is a life‑breeding universe because the constant presence of mind made it so and imbued His creation with His attributes.

What did you just say?

That God exists and is the source of the material world.

Thanks.

I have had many remarkable coincidences in my life that showed up in times of terrible trouble just in the nick of time.

I think I am blessed... or receptive or both. Its not something I fully understand. This must be God.

God works for good for those who love him.

Not according to the bible

Romans 8:28

 

[ding]

Your GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call a veterinarian and have it put down.

I am sorry.

My comment was not a "Gotcha" attempt, merely a thought to ponder. I agree we will not know until the hereafter.

My apologies. You're right. We will not know, either in our lifetimes, or on this plane of existence.

Through the light of human reason I know now.

The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available.

It kind of contradicts itself when it says...

"We shall see that as a mental activity Christian faith is no different from everyday faith."

and

"The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available."

Most people don't put complete trust in something or someone without good reason for doing so. So if they are asserting that Christian faith is no different than say putting faith in seat belts, what they are arguing for is completely different than everyday faith. I am arguing that no matter what people put their faith in they have good reasons for doing so. God can be known through the light of human reason through the study of what he created.

If St. Paul is correct that we are without excuse, then St. Paul must have believed that there is empirical and rational proof available. Setting aside that St. Paul was talking about studying what God created to see proof of God's work, what about Jesus? Are you suggesting that Jesus Christ is not empirical evidence or rational proof?

I suggest only the things I say outright.

Yes, I believe there is ample evidence for the existence of both God and His Son. But not everyone is going to look at the same examples and come to the same conclusion.

We were given free will for a reason.

Then you don't need to take it on faith. You have proof. You know.

“I think, therefore I am”: Descartes on the Foundations of Knowledge
26 NOVEMBER 2018~ 1000-WORD PHILOSOPHY: AN INTRODUCTORY ANTHOLOGY
Author: Charles Miceli
Category: Historical Philosophy, Epistemology
Word Count: 994

If you are reading this, then you are probably looking at a screen or a piece of paper. Think to yourself: “I have some paper in my hand,” “I am in front of a computer” or whatever fits.

Is your belief here certain? Is there any way that you could believe this, yet your belief be false? Is there any possibility that you are mistaken about this belief? René Descartes (1596-1650) argues you could: this belief, and almost all other beliefs, are not certain

Given that everything is made manifest by mind one must recognize that the physical world is entirely abstract and without ‘actuality’ apart from its linkage to consciousness. Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create. This is a life‑breeding universe because the constant presence of mind made it so and imbued His creation with His attributes.

What did you just say?

That God exists and is the source of the material world.

Thanks.

I have had many remarkable coincidences in my life that showed up in times of terrible trouble just in the nick of time.

I think I am blessed... or receptive or both. Its not something I fully understand. This must be God.

God works for good for those who love him.

Love Your Enemies
…44But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Do not even tax collectors do the same?…

You don't understand how and why God prunes everyone (or the meaning of that passage) if you are going to apply that passage to arguing that God DOESN"T work for good for those who love him.

Everyone is being pruned by God for their own good. Even those that don't love God. Even those that don't understand how good can come from bad. But those that see how God is pruning them receive the most benefit from that pruning. Hence, God works for good for those that love him. God also works for good for those that don't love him. They just don't see it or learn from it. They are destined to repeat the same mistakes until they do.

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

Stuartbirdan2
How could you possibly know what the almighty supposed to have said?
Do you have unique access to every word he utters because I doubt that.

Did I say that I know?

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

Stuartbirdan2
You "think. How long have been affording yourself that luxury without evidence?

“I think, therefore I am”: Descartes on the Foundations of Knowledge - 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology

Author: Charles Miceli Category: Historical Philosophy, Epistemology Word Count: 994 Listen here If you are reading this, then you are probably looking at a screen or a piece of paper. Think to yourself: “I have some paper in my hand,” “I am in front of a computer” or whatever fits. Is your...

1000wordphilosophy.com

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

Your GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call a veterinarian and have it put down.

I am sorry.

My comment was not a "Gotcha" attempt, merely a thought to ponder. I agree we will not know until the hereafter.

My apologies. You're right. We will not know, either in our lifetimes, or on this plane of existence.

Through the light of human reason I know now.

The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available.

It kind of contradicts itself when it says...

"We shall see that as a mental activity Christian faith is no different from everyday faith."

and

"The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available."

Most people don't put complete trust in something or someone without good reason for doing so. So if they are asserting that Christian faith is no different than say putting faith in seat belts, what they are arguing for is completely different than everyday faith. I am arguing that no matter what people put their faith in they have good reasons for doing so. God can be known through the light of human reason through the study of what he created.

If St. Paul is correct that we are without excuse, then St. Paul must have believed that there is empirical and rational proof available. Setting aside that St. Paul was talking about studying what God created to see proof of God's work, what about Jesus? Are you suggesting that Jesus Christ is not empirical evidence or rational proof?

I suggest only the things I say outright.

Yes, I believe there is ample evidence for the existence of both God and His Son. But not everyone is going to look at the same examples and come to the same conclusion.

We were given free will for a reason.

Then you don't need to take it on faith. You have proof. You know.

“I think, therefore I am”: Descartes on the Foundations of Knowledge
26 NOVEMBER 2018~ 1000-WORD PHILOSOPHY: AN INTRODUCTORY ANTHOLOGY
Author: Charles Miceli
Category: Historical Philosophy, Epistemology
Word Count: 994

If you are reading this, then you are probably looking at a screen or a piece of paper. Think to yourself: “I have some paper in my hand,” “I am in front of a computer” or whatever fits.

Is your belief here certain? Is there any way that you could believe this, yet your belief be false? Is there any possibility that you are mistaken about this belief? René Descartes (1596-1650) argues you could: this belief, and almost all other beliefs, are not certain

Given that everything is made manifest by mind one must recognize that the physical world is entirely abstract and without ‘actuality’ apart from its linkage to consciousness. Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create. This is a life‑breeding universe because the constant presence of mind made it so and imbued His creation with His attributes.

What did you just say?

That God exists and is the source of the material world.

Thanks.

I have had many remarkable coincidences in my life that showed up in times of terrible trouble just in the nick of time.

I think I am blessed... or receptive or both. Its not something I fully understand. This must be God.

God works for good for those who love him.

Love Your Enemies
…44But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Do not even tax collectors do the same?…

You don't understand how and why God prunes everyone (or the meaning of that passage) if you are going to apply that passage to arguing that God DOESN"T work for good for those who love him.

Everyone is being pruned by God for their own good. Even those that don't love God. Even those that don't understand how good can come from bad. But those that see how God is pruning them receive the most benefit from that pruning. Hence, God works for good for those that love him. God also works for good for those that don't love him. They just don't see it or learn from it. They are destined to repeat the same mistakes until they do.

God does good for those who hate her also

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

Your GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call a veterinarian and have it put down.

I am sorry.


My comment was not a "Gotcha" attempt, merely a thought to ponder. I agree we will not know until the hereafter.

My apologies. You're right. We will not know, either in our lifetimes, or on this plane of existence.

Through the light of human reason I know now.

The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available.

It kind of contradicts itself when it says...

"We shall see that as a mental activity Christian faith is no different from everyday faith."

and

"The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available."

Most people don't put complete trust in something or someone without good reason for doing so. So if they are asserting that Christian faith is no different than say putting faith in seat belts, what they are arguing for is completely different than everyday faith. I am arguing that no matter what people put their faith in they have good reasons for doing so. God can be known through the light of human reason through the study of what he created.

If St. Paul is correct that we are without excuse, then St. Paul must have believed that there is empirical and rational proof available. Setting aside that St. Paul was talking about studying what God created to see proof of God's work, what about Jesus? Are you suggesting that Jesus Christ is not empirical evidence or rational proof?

I suggest only the things I say outright.

Yes, I believe there is ample evidence for the existence of both God and His Son. But not everyone is going to look at the same examples and come to the same conclusion.

We were given free will for a reason.

Then you don't need to take it on faith. You have proof. You know.

“I think, therefore I am”: Descartes on the Foundations of Knowledge
26 NOVEMBER 2018~ 1000-WORD PHILOSOPHY: AN INTRODUCTORY ANTHOLOGY
Author: Charles Miceli
Category: Historical Philosophy, Epistemology
Word Count: 994

If you are reading this, then you are probably looking at a screen or a piece of paper. Think to yourself: “I have some paper in my hand,” “I am in front of a computer” or whatever fits.

Is your belief here certain? Is there any way that you could believe this, yet your belief be false? Is there any possibility that you are mistaken about this belief? René Descartes (1596-1650) argues you could: this belief, and almost all other beliefs, are not certain

Given that everything is made manifest by mind one must recognize that the physical world is entirely abstract and without ‘actuality’ apart from its linkage to consciousness. Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create. This is a life‑breeding universe because the constant presence of mind made it so and imbued His creation with His attributes.

What did you just say?

That God exists and is the source of the material world.

Thanks.

I have had many remarkable coincidences in my life that showed up in times of terrible trouble just in the nick of time.

I think I am blessed... or receptive or both. Its not something I fully understand. This must be God.

God works for good for those who love him.

Not according to the bible

Romans 8:28

New International Version
And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose
It's all good

 

[Stuartbirdan2]

Your GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call a veterinarian and have it put down.

I am sorry.

My comment was not a "Gotcha" attempt, merely a thought to ponder. I agree we will not know until the hereafter.

My apologies. You're right. We will not know, either in our lifetimes, or on this plane of existence.

Through the light of human reason I know now.

The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available.

It kind of contradicts itself when it says...

"We shall see that as a mental activity Christian faith is no different from everyday faith."

and

"The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available."

Most people don't put complete trust in something or someone without good reason for doing so. So if they are asserting that Christian faith is no different than say putting faith in seat belts, what they are arguing for is completely different than everyday faith. I am arguing that no matter what people put their faith in they have good reasons for doing so. God can be known through the light of human reason through the study of what he created.

If St. Paul is correct that we are without excuse, then St. Paul must have believed that there is empirical and rational proof available. Setting aside that St. Paul was talking about studying what God created to see proof of God's work, what about Jesus? Are you suggesting that Jesus Christ is not empirical evidence or rational proof?

I suggest only the things I say outright.

Yes, I believe there is ample evidence for the existence of both God and His Son. But not everyone is going to look at the same examples and come to the same conclusion.

We were given free will for a reason.

Then you don't need to take it on faith. You have proof. You know.

“I think, therefore I am”: Descartes on the Foundations of Knowledge
26 NOVEMBER 2018~ 1000-WORD PHILOSOPHY: AN INTRODUCTORY ANTHOLOGY
Author: Charles Miceli
Category: Historical Philosophy, Epistemology
Word Count: 994

If you are reading this, then you are probably looking at a screen or a piece of paper. Think to yourself: “I have some paper in my hand,” “I am in front of a computer” or whatever fits.

Is your belief here certain? Is there any way that you could believe this, yet your belief be false? Is there any possibility that you are mistaken about this belief? René Descartes (1596-1650) argues you could: this belief, and almost all other beliefs, are not certain

Given that everything is made manifest by mind one must recognize that the physical world is entirely abstract and without ‘actuality’ apart from its linkage to consciousness. Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create. This is a life‑breeding universe because the constant presence of mind made it so and imbued His creation with His attributes.

What did you just say?

That God exists and is the source of the material world.

Thanks.

I have had many remarkable coincidences in my life that showed up in times of terrible trouble just in the nick of time.

I think I am blessed... or receptive or both. Its not something I fully understand. This must be God.

God works for good for those who love him.

Love Your Enemies
…44But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Do not even tax collectors do the same?…

You don't understand how and why God prunes everyone (or the meaning of that passage) if you are going to apply that passage to arguing that God DOESN"T work for good for those who love him.

Everyone is being pruned by God for their own good. Even those that don't love God. Even those that don't understand how good can come from bad. But those that see how God is pruning them receive the most benefit from that pruning. Hence, God works for good for those that love him. God also works for good for those that don't love him. They just don't see it or learn from it. They are destined to repeat the same mistakes until they do.

Everyone is being pruned by God for their own good. Even those that don't love God
Agreed. That's what I meant

 

[ding]

Your GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call a veterinarian and have it put down.

I am sorry.

My comment was not a "Gotcha" attempt, merely a thought to ponder. I agree we will not know until the hereafter.

My apologies. You're right. We will not know, either in our lifetimes, or on this plane of existence.

Through the light of human reason I know now.

The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available.

It kind of contradicts itself when it says...

"We shall see that as a mental activity Christian faith is no different from everyday faith."

and

"The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available."

Most people don't put complete trust in something or someone without good reason for doing so. So if they are asserting that Christian faith is no different than say putting faith in seat belts, what they are arguing for is completely different than everyday faith. I am arguing that no matter what people put their faith in they have good reasons for doing so. God can be known through the light of human reason through the study of what he created.

If St. Paul is correct that we are without excuse, then St. Paul must have believed that there is empirical and rational proof available. Setting aside that St. Paul was talking about studying what God created to see proof of God's work, what about Jesus? Are you suggesting that Jesus Christ is not empirical evidence or rational proof?

I suggest only the things I say outright.

Yes, I believe there is ample evidence for the existence of both God and His Son. But not everyone is going to look at the same examples and come to the same conclusion.

We were given free will for a reason.

Then you don't need to take it on faith. You have proof. You know.

“I think, therefore I am”: Descartes on the Foundations of Knowledge
26 NOVEMBER 2018~ 1000-WORD PHILOSOPHY: AN INTRODUCTORY ANTHOLOGY
Author: Charles Miceli
Category: Historical Philosophy, Epistemology
Word Count: 994

If you are reading this, then you are probably looking at a screen or a piece of paper. Think to yourself: “I have some paper in my hand,” “I am in front of a computer” or whatever fits.

Is your belief here certain? Is there any way that you could believe this, yet your belief be false? Is there any possibility that you are mistaken about this belief? René Descartes (1596-1650) argues you could: this belief, and almost all other beliefs, are not certain

Given that everything is made manifest by mind one must recognize that the physical world is entirely abstract and without ‘actuality’ apart from its linkage to consciousness. Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create. This is a life‑breeding universe because the constant presence of mind made it so and imbued His creation with His attributes.

What did you just say?

That God exists and is the source of the material world.

Thanks.

I have had many remarkable coincidences in my life that showed up in times of terrible trouble just in the nick of time.

I think I am blessed... or receptive or both. Its not something I fully understand. This must be God.

God works for good for those who love him.

Love Your Enemies
…44But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Do not even tax collectors do the same?…

You don't understand how and why God prunes everyone (or the meaning of that passage) if you are going to apply that passage to arguing that God DOESN"T work for good for those who love him.

Everyone is being pruned by God for their own good. Even those that don't love God. Even those that don't understand how good can come from bad. But those that see how God is pruning them receive the most benefit from that pruning. Hence, God works for good for those that love him. God also works for good for those that don't love him. They just don't see it or learn from it. They are destined to repeat the same mistakes until they do.

God does good for those who hate her also

Really? What does God do?

Cause that seems like a polytheistic belief. I don't see God as orchestrating anything. God created a logical universe where every cause has an effect and every effect had a cause. As a rule successful behaviors naturally lead to success just as failed behaviors naturally lead to failure. This concept is hard for some to accept because violating moral laws are not like violating physical laws. When we violate a physical law the consequences are immediate. If you try to defy gravity by jumping off a roof you will fall. Whereas the consequences for violating a moral law are more probabilistic in nature; many times we get away with it. But it should be obvious to everyone that nature does have a preference for an outcome. Societies and people which behave with virtue experience order and harmony. Societies and people which behave without virtue experience disorder and chaos. So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work.

 

[ding]

Your GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call a veterinarian and have it put down.

I am sorry.


My comment was not a "Gotcha" attempt, merely a thought to ponder. I agree we will not know until the hereafter.

My apologies. You're right. We will not know, either in our lifetimes, or on this plane of existence.

Through the light of human reason I know now.

The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available.

It kind of contradicts itself when it says...

"We shall see that as a mental activity Christian faith is no different from everyday faith."

and

"The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available."

Most people don't put complete trust in something or someone without good reason for doing so. So if they are asserting that Christian faith is no different than say putting faith in seat belts, what they are arguing for is completely different than everyday faith. I am arguing that no matter what people put their faith in they have good reasons for doing so. God can be known through the light of human reason through the study of what he created.

If St. Paul is correct that we are without excuse, then St. Paul must have believed that there is empirical and rational proof available. Setting aside that St. Paul was talking about studying what God created to see proof of God's work, what about Jesus? Are you suggesting that Jesus Christ is not empirical evidence or rational proof?

I suggest only the things I say outright.

Yes, I believe there is ample evidence for the existence of both God and His Son. But not everyone is going to look at the same examples and come to the same conclusion.

We were given free will for a reason.

Then you don't need to take it on faith. You have proof. You know.

“I think, therefore I am”: Descartes on the Foundations of Knowledge
26 NOVEMBER 2018~ 1000-WORD PHILOSOPHY: AN INTRODUCTORY ANTHOLOGY
Author: Charles Miceli
Category: Historical Philosophy, Epistemology
Word Count: 994

If you are reading this, then you are probably looking at a screen or a piece of paper. Think to yourself: “I have some paper in my hand,” “I am in front of a computer” or whatever fits.

Is your belief here certain? Is there any way that you could believe this, yet your belief be false? Is there any possibility that you are mistaken about this belief? René Descartes (1596-1650) argues you could: this belief, and almost all other beliefs, are not certain

Given that everything is made manifest by mind one must recognize that the physical world is entirely abstract and without ‘actuality’ apart from its linkage to consciousness. Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff.

It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create. This is a life‑breeding universe because the constant presence of mind made it so and imbued His creation with His attributes.

What did you just say?

That God exists and is the source of the material world.

Thanks.

I have had many remarkable coincidences in my life that showed up in times of terrible trouble just in the nick of time.

I think I am blessed... or receptive or both. Its not something I fully understand. This must be God.

God works for good for those who love him.

Not according to the bible

Romans 8:28

New International Version
And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose
It's all good

God's involvement is in letting us experience the consequences of our actions so that we have an opportunity to learn from our mistakes.

 

[daveman]

progressive hunter
The proof is in DNA and fossils, and carbon dating. That is fact.
There's not a single item in that filthy bible which can be verified to include the above three benchmarks.

I admire your faith in your religion and its high priests.

You disagree with science and education

Not at all. I do, however, disagree with science and education being bastardized to promote the leftist agenda.

 

[daveman]

Your GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call a veterinarian and have it put down.

I am sorry.

My comment was not a "Gotcha" attempt, merely a thought to ponder. I agree we will not know until the hereafter.

My apologies. You're right. We will not know, either in our lifetimes, or on this plane of existence.

Through the light of human reason I know now.

The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available.

Idk, maybe you are right.

I suspect daveman reads Genesis literally. Which as near as I can tell - relatively speaking - is a new thing.

Dave is a fundie?

I don't use terms like that. I believe he reads Genesis literally. I could be wrong.

You are. And I have no idea how you could have come to that conclusion.

Because of your thought experiment OP.

I don't care either way. To each his own.

No way to conclude I read Genesis literally from that thread.

Do you believe the earth and the universe are 4000 years old?

No. I have no idea how old the universe is; neither do you.

And you know what? It doesn't matter.

 

[daveman]

Your GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call a veterinarian and have it put down.

I am sorry.

My comment was not a "Gotcha" attempt, merely a thought to ponder. I agree we will not know until the hereafter.

My apologies. You're right. We will not know, either in our lifetimes, or on this plane of existence.

Through the light of human reason I know now.

The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available.

Idk, maybe you are right.

I suspect daveman reads Genesis literally. Which as near as I can tell - relatively speaking - is a new thing.

Dave is a fundie?

I don't use terms like that. I believe he reads Genesis literally. I could be wrong.

You are. And I have no idea how you could have come to that conclusion.

Because of your thought experiment OP.

I don't care either way. To each his own.

No way to conclude I read Genesis literally from that thread.

Sure there was. Think about it.

Dude. I WROTE it. I already thought about it.

 

[daveman]

Your GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call a veterinarian and have it put down.

I am sorry.

My comment was not a "Gotcha" attempt, merely a thought to ponder. I agree we will not know until the hereafter.

My apologies. You're right. We will not know, either in our lifetimes, or on this plane of existence.

Through the light of human reason I know now.

The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available.

Idk, maybe you are right.

I suspect daveman reads Genesis literally. Which as near as I can tell - relatively speaking - is a new thing.

Read Post #62 in the Thought Experiment thread. My beliefs are made clear. Ask if you need further clarification.

A simple, I'm not a YEC would have sufficed.

I don't feel obligated to jump when I'm told.

Vainglory

Not at all.

 

[daveman]

Your GOTCHA attempt is so lame, we need to call a veterinarian and have it put down.

I am sorry.

My comment was not a "Gotcha" attempt, merely a thought to ponder. I agree we will not know until the hereafter.

My apologies. You're right. We will not know, either in our lifetimes, or on this plane of existence.

Through the light of human reason I know now.

The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available.

It kind of contradicts itself when it says...

"We shall see that as a mental activity Christian faith is no different from everyday faith."

and

"The Biblical concept of faith is that it amounts to complete confidence in something for which there is no empirical or rational proof available."

Most people don't put complete trust in something or someone without good reason for doing so. So if they are asserting that Christian faith is no different than say putting faith in seat belts, what they are arguing for is completely different than everyday faith. I am arguing that no matter what people put their faith in they have good reasons for doing so. God can be known through the light of human reason through the study of what he created.

If St. Paul is correct that we are without excuse, then St. Paul must have believed that there is empirical and rational proof available. Setting aside that St. Paul was talking about studying what God created to see proof of God's work, what about Jesus? Are you suggesting that Jesus Christ is not empirical evidence or rational proof?

I suggest only the things I say outright.

Yes, I believe there is ample evidence for the existence of both God and His Son. But not everyone is going to look at the same examples and come to the same conclusion.

We were given free will for a reason.

Then you don't need to take it on faith. You have proof. You know.

It's proof for me. It's proof for you. But show it to an atheist. It will not be proof to them.

I didn't realize you were speaking for others when you made that post.

I try not to do that. And if you have presented what you see as evidence to atheists, what was their reaction?