- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Stu @ Mar. 28 2013,20:53) Quote (Colter @ Mar. 28 2013,00:06) Quote (Ed J @ Mar. 27 2013,19:50) Hi T8, The part I enlarged; sorry if it was confusing to you
as my post was to Colter, who would certainly of understood.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
One can maintain Faith while letting go of the false doctrine of Bible perfection.Philosophy of Religion
(1129.8) 103:1.1 The unity of religious experience among a social or racial group derives from the identical nature of the God fragment indwelling the individual. It is this divine in man that gives origin to his unselfish interest in the welfare of other men. But since personality is unique — no two mortals being alike — it inevitably follows that no two human beings can similarly interpret the leadings and urges of the spirit of divinity which lives within their minds. A group of mortals can experience spiritual unity, but they can never attain philosophic uniformity. And this diversity of the interpretation of religious thought and experience is shown by the fact that twentieth-century theologians and philosophers have formulated upward of five hundred different definitions of religion. In reality, every human being defines religion in the terms of his own experiential interpretation of the divine impulses emanating from the God spirit that indwells him, and therefore must such an interpretation be unique and wholly different from the religious philosophy of all other human beings.
(1130.1) 103:1.2 When one mortal is in full agreement with the religious philosophy of a fellow mortal, that phenomenon indicates that these two beings have had a similar religious experience touching the matters concerned in their similarity of philosophic religious interpretation.
(1130.2) 103:1.3 While your religion is a matter of personal experience, it is most important that you should be exposed to the knowledge of a vast number of other religious experiences (the diverse interpretations of other and diverse mortals) to the end that you may prevent your religious life from becoming egocentric — circumscribed, selfish, and unsocial.
(1130.3) 103:1.4 Rationalism is wrong when it assumes that religion is at first a primitive belief in something which is then followed by the pursuit of values. Religion is primarily a pursuit of values, and then there formulates a system of interpretative beliefs. It is much easier for men to agree on religious values — goals — than on beliefs — interpretations. And this explains how religion can agree on values and goals while exhibiting the confusing phenomenon of maintaining a belief in hundreds of conflicting beliefs — creeds. This also explains why a given person can maintain his religious experience in the face of giving up or changing many of his religious beliefs. Religion persists in spite of revolutionary changes in religious beliefs. Theology does not produce religion; it is religion that produces theologic philosophy.
(1130.4) 103:1.5 That religionists have believed so much that was false does not invalidate religion because religion is founded on the recognition of values and is validated by the faith of personal religious experience. Religion, then, is based on experience and religious thought; theology, the philosophy of religion, is an honest attempt to interpret that experience. Such interpretative beliefs may be right or wrong, or a mixture of truth and error.
(1130.5) 103:1.6 The realization of the recognition of spiritual values is an experience which is superideational. There is no word in any human language which can be employed to designate this “sense,” “feeling,” “intuition,” or “experience” which we have elected to call God-consciousness. The spirit of God that dwells in man is not personal — the Adjuster is prepersonal — but this Monitor presents a value, exudes a flavor of divinity, which is personal in the highest and infinite sense. If God were not at least personal, he could not be conscious, and if not conscious, then would he be infrahuman.
Colter
You also have these options:* Don't post screeds of irrelevant trash from your Book of Stolen Intellectual Property (if you must refer to that moronic tome at all, why not link to the screed elsewhere, then we will find it easier to ignore).
and
* Have a stab at staying on-topic in this thread.
thanks,
Stuart
(1434.3) 130:4.4 A one-eyed person can never hope to visualize depth of perspective. Neither can single-eyed material scientists nor single-eyed spiritual mystics and allegorists correctly visualize and adequately comprehend the true depths of universe reality. All true values of creature experience are concealed in depth of recognition.Your problem Stu is that you are a one eyed Kiwi who's life seems dedicated to convincing others of the virtues of partial blindness.
I was replying to Ed
Colter
Quote (Colter @ Mar. 29 2013,00:27) Your problem Stu is that you are a one eyed Kiwi who's life seems dedicated to convincing others of the virtues of partial blindness.
Ha ha, that is funny and true.Stu even thinks I believe that the iPhone was not created and that living things were according to my last post.
Wow, imagine not seeing the piss take in my post. Maybe I shouldn't be so hard on him after all, it is hard to see in the dark I suppose.
Quote (Colter @ Mar. 28 2013,21:27) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 28 2013,20:53) Quote (Colter @ Mar. 28 2013,00:06) Quote (Ed J @ Mar. 27 2013,19:50) Hi T8, The part I enlarged; sorry if it was confusing to you
as my post was to Colter, who would certainly of understood.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
One can maintain Faith while letting go of the false doctrine of Bible perfection.Philosophy of Religion
(1129.8) 103:1.1 The unity of religious experience among a social or racial group derives from the identical nature of the God fragment indwelling the individual. It is this divine in man that gives origin to his unselfish interest in the welfare of other men. But since personality is unique — no two mortals being alike — it inevitably follows that no two human beings can similarly interpret the leadings and urges of the spirit of divinity which lives within their minds. A group of mortals can experience spiritual unity, but they can never attain philosophic uniformity. And this diversity of the interpretation of religious thought and experience is shown by the fact that twentieth-century theologians and philosophers have formulated upward of five hundred different definitions of religion. In reality, every human being defines religion in the terms of his own experiential interpretation of the divine impulses emanating from the God spirit that indwells him, and therefore must such an interpretation be unique and wholly different from the religious philosophy of all other human beings.
(1130.1) 103:1.2 When one mortal is in full agreement with the religious philosophy of a fellow mortal, that phenomenon indicates that these two beings have had a similar religious experience touching the matters concerned in their similarity of philosophic religious interpretation.
(1130.2) 103:1.3 While your religion is a matter of personal experience, it is most important that you should be exposed to the knowledge of a vast number of other religious experiences (the diverse interpretations of other and diverse mortals) to the end that you may prevent your religious life from becoming egocentric — circumscribed, selfish, and unsocial.
(1130.3) 103:1.4 Rationalism is wrong when it assumes that religion is at first a primitive belief in something which is then followed by the pursuit of values. Religion is primarily a pursuit of values, and then there formulates a system of interpretative beliefs. It is much easier for men to agree on religious values — goals — than on beliefs — interpretations. And this explains how religion can agree on values and goals while exhibiting the confusing phenomenon of maintaining a belief in hundreds of conflicting beliefs — creeds. This also explains why a given person can maintain his religious experience in the face of giving up or changing many of his religious beliefs. Religion persists in spite of revolutionary changes in religious beliefs. Theology does not produce religion; it is religion that produces theologic philosophy.
(1130.4) 103:1.5 That religionists have believed so much that was false does not invalidate religion because religion is founded on the recognition of values and is validated by the faith of personal religious experience. Religion, then, is based on experience and religious thought; theology, the philosophy of religion, is an honest attempt to interpret that experience. Such interpretative beliefs may be right or wrong, or a mixture of truth and error.
(1130.5) 103:1.6 The realization of the recognition of spiritual values is an experience which is superideational. There is no word in any human language which can be employed to designate this “sense,” “feeling,” “intuition,” or “experience” which we have elected to call God-consciousness. The spirit of God that dwells in man is not personal — the Adjuster is prepersonal — but this Monitor presents a value, exudes a flavor of divinity, which is personal in the highest and infinite sense. If God were not at least personal, he could not be conscious, and if not conscious, then would he be infrahuman.
Colter
You also have these options:* Don't post screeds of irrelevant trash from your Book of Stolen Intellectual Property (if you must refer to that moronic tome at all, why not link to the screed elsewhere, then we will find it easier to ignore).
and
* Have a stab at staying on-topic in this thread.
thanks,
Stuart
(1434.3) 130:4.4 A one-eyed person can never hope to visualize depth of perspective. Neither can single-eyed material scientists nor single-eyed spiritual mystics and allegorists correctly visualize and adequately comprehend the true depths of universe reality. All true values of creature experience are concealed in depth of recognition.Your problem Stu is that you are a one eyed Kiwi who's life seems dedicated to convincing others of the virtues of partial blindness.
I was replying to Ed
Colter
Thanks for pointing out my problems to me Colter. I guess posting screeds of bad science fiction and stolen science in a thread where they don't belong isn't one of those problems I have to deal with myself.Were you thinking of dealing with them yourself?
Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 28 2013,21:46) Stu even thinks I believe that the iPhone was not created and that living things were according to my last post.
Do you?Stuart
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 27 2013,18:18) Have you guys noticed how iPhones have evolved lately? They are still looking highly competitive in the eco-system they exist in. Stu, what say you? Do you agree that the evolution of the iPhone has been outstanding?
T8…….Good post, interesting to see how Stu can't answer that , because he full well knows that the iPhone or his Android phone required a designer for it to evolve. But he lacks the ability it seems to see that from biological point. Hmmmmmmm seems or ape man brother has a problem.
Peace and love to you and yours………………………gene
Yes there is much he cannot answer. He tries his best to get off on technicalities as a way to save face. Doesn't save his face though.
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Mar. 30 2013,06:38) Quote (t8 @ Mar. 27 2013,18:18) Have you guys noticed how iPhones have evolved lately? They are still looking highly competitive in the eco-system they exist in. Stu, what say you? Do you agree that the evolution of the iPhone has been outstanding?
T8…….Good post, interesting to see how Stu can't answer that , because he full well knows that the iPhone or his Android phone required a designer for it to evolve.
I know that full well. But it appears you haven't read what t8 claimed a page or two back.Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Mar. 29 2013,14:53) Quote (t8 @ Mar. 28 2013,21:46) Stu even thinks I believe that the iPhone was not created and that living things were according to my last post.
Do you?Stuart
Yes I admit that the iPhone evolved.
What about you?
Did that phone arise without the need for a creator?Quote (Stu @ Mar. 30 2013,18:34) I know that full well. But it appears you haven't read what t8 claimed a page or two back.
Ha ha. That is very weak.Normally wouldn't engage in a weak conversation like that, but you are the most avid Atheist here. Would appreciate talking to an Atheist who is about 10 times more intelligent than you. But you don't know any. Never mind. Take my jest and turn it into me being serious. Why not, that will delay you having to answer real questions for a few posts and by then, you will have invented a new excuse.
I am waiting for a note from your mother at some point.
“Sorry Stu could answer your questions today. He was feeling a bit ill after eating a dozen bananas for breakfast.”
You have to admit you are scraping the barrel by saying that. But I look at it like this. I have the patience and you will eventually have to answer something and in the meantime it is funny looking at all the ways you can dodge real questions about your faith.
Quote (Stu @ Mar. 28 2013,23:49) Quote (t8 @ Mar. 28 2013,09:09) Quote (Stu @ Mar. 28 2013,00:44) Quote (t8 @ Mar. 27 2013,18:18) Have you guys noticed how iPhones have evolved lately? They are still looking highly competitive in the eco-system they exist in. Stu, what say you? Do you agree that the evolution of the iPhone has been outstanding?
I wouldn't know. Mine's Android.Stuart
Yes Android too has evolved significantly to the point that it could supplant the iPhone if its competitive features keep evolving at the rate that is has in the last year.Evolution is amazing. No need for a creator at all.
The evolution of the Web is even more impressive.
So you claim that designed objects don't need designers, and living things that were not designed do need designers.Of course you do.
Stuart
Here it is.Stu is the only one who can't see the joke was on him.
He is the one who thinks that there is no need for a creator. So I played along. And now he is all confused.
Will need to go back to basics with him.
Stu, regarding the Evolution of the iPhone, does that negate a creator?
Actually forget it. Please spend your time looking for an Atheist 10 times more intelligent than yourself. If such an Atheist exists, it would be better to converse with him.
Meanwhile that reminds me, I will see if you have answered the question over at the Hot Seat.
t8,Mar. wrote:[/quote]
Quote Evolution is amazing. No need for a creator at all. t8,
Is there an evolution without a creator for a believer?
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
A creator is always involved at some stage.
Even a computer virus that can self-evolve to dodge an antivirus program was still created.
Clouds are water, and a Popsicle is 98% water, so Popsicles evolved from clouds.That is how the theory of Evolution works.Just gotta use your imagination with things that are made up of the same stuff. It is that simple. Okay, maybe a bit more complicated than that. You have to come across as knowing what you are talking about too, even if it is a load of bollocks.
t8,April wrote:[/quote]
Quote A creator is always involved at some stage. t8,
What do you mean at some stage?
IN ALL THE ENTIRE STAGES RATHER!
IN ALL THE ENTIRE EXISTENCE FOR SURE !
THERE'S NOTHING WHICH EXISTS EXCEPT BY THE WORD!
THE WORD ITSELF IS ALL THE ENTIRE EXISTENCE!
Hebrews 11:3 By faith we understand that the world was framed by the word of God;( THE WORD MADE FLESH,JESUS) that from invisible things visible things might be made( ALL BY HIM, ALL IN HIM)
Romans 1:For the invisible things of him,(GOD) from the creation of the world, are clearly seen,( IN JESUS, SINCE ALL IN HIM,AND ALL BY HIM) being understood by the things that are made;( SO THE ENTIRE CREATION ,NO MATTER WHAT IS THE MOST VERSATILE SPIRIT OF JESUS IN MATTER STATE)
his eternal power also,
and divinity: (IN JESUS)so that they are inexcusable.
IT IS CLEAR OK!
NOW READ THIS:
21 Because that, when they knew God,
( WHILE HE WAS ON EARTH AS MAN,THE WORD MADE FLESH, JESUS CHRIST, GOD IN FLESH,)
they have not glorified him as GOD,
or given thanks;( AT LEAST)
but became vain in their thoughts,(STUPID) and their foolish heart was darkened(BECAME EVIL AND CRUCIFIED HIM)
THE ONLY WAY IN ORDER TO BE GLORIFIED
BY THEIR OWN EVIL WORK,
THINKING THAT THEY WOULD GLORIFY SATAN!
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
What I mean Charles is that there needs to be a creator. Minimum intervention could be that the creator creates a race or species that pro-creates. He only needs to get the ball rolling so to speak.
Of course that doesn't negate the idea that the creator intervenes when necessary or even all the time.
t8,April wrote:[/quote]
Quote Of course that doesn't negate the idea that the creator intervenes when necessary or even all the time. t8,
God right now is not only working through the Holy Spirit, but He is making JESUS' enemeies His footstool, and there's no way that He stops, NOT till He achieves it.
NOTHING FUNCTIONS WITHOUT GOD,AND HE ONLY FUNCTIONS TO PLEASE US, IN ORDER TO REMAIN IN OUR FREE WILL!
HE WANTS OURSELVES TO LOOK FOR HIM, CALL HIM, TALK TO HIM, AND HONESTLY BELEIVE THAT HE IS WITHIN US, NO MATTER WHAT!
LET'S FACE IT, IF HE WANTS HE COULD MAKE US PERFECT IN NO TIME. DON'T YOU AGREE?
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
