(Q) said:Faith in God is only circular and self-referential if God does not act.
That is only an assertion that MUST be based on whether or not gods exist. It is of course meaningless to those who do not believe gods exist, hence not an argument.
how does action require faith?§outh§tar said:Not only that but it presumes God (assuming He exists) acts. Which requires faith as well.
Pointless statements of frustration.(Q) said:That is only an assertion that MUST be based on whether or not gods exist. It is of course meaningless to those who do not believe gods exist, hence not an argument.
water said:Faith in God is only circular and self-referential if God does not act.
ellion said:another pointless statement
If you believe a denomination teaches something against the Word Of God,
Then to join with it is to add support to the lie they teach. Why do people
think they must join any denomination???? I have not belonged to a
denomination for over 20 years.
Its only emotional blackmail if one is out to please other men. If one is
looking for the approval of people then of course one will compromise their
faith and put the approval of God below the approval of the world.
If one is not prepared to stand alone in ones faith then what's the value of ones faith?
Mark 10
28 Then Peter began to say to Him, "See, we have left all and followed You."
29 So Jesus answered and said, "Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who
has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or
children or lands, for My sake and the gospel's,
Can a deist love God?
I would call myself a deist, I seek god, I believe in what I seek but I will
not attempt to define what I seek (i.e. have knowledge). Therefore I do not
have the revelatory conviction that I understand I would need to be called a
theist.
Or am I just mis-defining myself.
Crunchy Cat said:And your opinion somehow isn't?
(Q) said:Faith in God is only circular and self-referential if God does not act.
That is only an assertion that MUST be based on whether or not gods exist.
§outh§tar said:Not only that but it presumes God (assuming He exists) acts. Which requires faith as well.
ellion said:Not only that but it presumes God (assuming He exists) acts. Which requires faith as well.
how does action require faith?
MarcAC said:That is only an assertion that MUST be based on whether or not gods exist. It is of course meaningless to those who do not believe gods exist, hence not an argument.
Pointless statements of frustration.
Crunchy Cat said:Faith is a form of unconditional trust in *something*. That something in
this case is 'God'. There is evidence that contradicts the existance of
'God' and no evidence to support it.
Therefore, faith is unconditional trust in life form that doesn't appear to exist.
This is not circular. If 'God' existed, the argument would not be circular either
as someone can choose to 'trust still' even if they repeatedly get burned.
no i think it is. as is this one.Crunchy Cat said:And your opinion somehow isn't?
water, i thought you new better.water said:Seeing a certain phenomenon as an act of God requires faith. Otherwise, it is superstition.
Belonging to a denomination is a matter of practicing your Christianity, edifying one another as *brothers* in Christ.
To hear the Word of God, people go to church, and going to church, in many cities where there are only a few different denominations, means belonging to that denomination.
At least for me, here, it is unthinkable to go to a church and not belong to that denomination.
(Believing in God in effect means 'believing in the Catholic interpretation of God' here. Something I have been making an effort to overcome, but I can only guess how thoroughly rooted these preconceptions are in me. It is not exactly easy to identify them.)
I am more and more convinced that faith in God has a lot to do with the competence one treats oneself with. It seems this competence is essential for everything one does, and the crucial test of it is in relaitonship to God.
Faith in God is something that is between God and a person, not between that person and other people. (I came to that conclusion even before I read Rom. 14:22.)
ellion said:water, i thought you new better.
this staement is moving back into the circular crap that christianity spouts.
seeing an act of god as an act of god only requires faith if you dont know god, if you are not aware of his actions.
if i am aware of how water functions how she moves and flows where she gets stuck how to enliven her and respond to her in a way that she finds engaging, then i dont need faith in order to take action. i can trust my knowledge and the subject of my knowledge to be true to its nature.
i wouldnt say lofty. a vague trust in something unknown, yes.water said:because you think of faith as something lofty, like taking something on some vague trust and knowing you are not having any proper knowledge.
water said:Like I said, one-way induction is a cul de sac.
water said:INSIGHT, PEOPLE, INSIGHT.
My premise Faith in God is only circular and self-referential if God does not act. is problematic ONLY if one insists that one's preconceptions about God are true.
Enlightenment, insight, justification of faith work by the same cognitive principle: suspension of preconceptions.
Once preconceptions are suspended, it is possible to come to an explanation that is supported by evidence, whereby this very explanation enables us to see that very evidence in the first place.
This is insight.
Indulging preconceptions prevents insight.
Most great scientific discoveries are products of insight: The scientist suspended his already existing knowledge about something, allowing that there be a completely different explanation, with new evidence for a phenomenon, which in turn re-defined the phenomenon.
Seeing a certain phenomenon as an act of God requires faith. Otherwise, it is superstition.
The reason why science cannot find proof of God is because it insists that their preconceptions about God are true. I do not know how science can claim such a thing, it has no way of verifying its preconceptions.
Belonging to a denomination is taking part in sectarianism. The Body of Christ was established by the Holy Spirit IS NOT DEVIDED. NEVER HAS BEEN DEVIDED. AND WILL REMAIN UNITED INTO ETERNITY. The unity is in Spirit.
/.../
Are you in a church now? Is sciforums a denomination?... No. The gathering of the Body Of Christ happens every day and there is no need for church buildings or intermediating “professionals” to control such fellowship.
Matthew 18
20 "For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them."
Simple solution. Never Go To Church.
Well root those preconceptions out of yourself.
I am more and more convinced that faith in God has a lot to do with the competence one treats oneself with. It seems this competence is essential for everything one does, and the crucial test of it is in relaitonship to God.
Not sure what you mean here when you say “competence”.
Good.. Then why are you still chained in your “preconceptions” about the need to belong to a denomination?
You seem to be in two minds??
Looks like The Holy Spirit is working within you.
you say this with such certainty! yet it has no validity. animals have to be the purest manifestaion of spirit that the earth has (well maybe not rats or maggots or the heron that keeps eating my fish). nature itself is divine. i imagine the closer a person is raised to that state of being the greater will be recognition of the evil in man. if the faculties of spiritual discernment are unfolded why would they be any less able to relate to god than a human raised in an urabn jungle by people with less sense of relatedness than the uncivilized animal?southstar said:If you were born in the jungle and raised by animals, you would show no signs of spirituality and would not recognize phenomenon as acts of God.