What is the starting point?

[NMSquirrel]

too many post with same area of topic to quote..so let me see if i can answer a few with my own opinions..

i am a christian..i only call myself that cause there is no other label that comes closest to what i believe,personaly i do not like labels..it is closer to the truth to say that i believe in God..only because i believe god has taught me certain thing in the course of my life..he has taught me through other ppl and situations,the best example i can come up with some would call circumstantial..
IE overhear a conversation concerning an issue i am struggling with,then hearing the same issue being disscussed on the radio,then hearing someone directly telling me about an issue in there life that directly relates to my issue(without any clues from me that i am struggling with that issue)..ETC...

the claim of having 'special' knowledge from god is not really special it is just a conclusion based on the circumstances and events like i stated above that leads them to believe that it is from god,since it applies directly to their situation..the prob with communicating such a thing to someone else is they do not see those circumstances that leads to such a conclusion so any attemp to communicate such would be lost as they are not communicating from the same points of referance..
notice i did not claim any 'special' knowledge from god..i only said i believe that god taught me..and i hope i have explained why i think it was god who taught me..
you can argue with that if you want but i will still believe that god taught me..


any argument claiming christians are so bad cause they do this or that,it has to be understood that this is not a purely christian mistake..it is the human condition..just because one is christian does not mean they are perfect, show me a christian who thinks they are perfect and i will show you a person who would think they are perfect even if they were not christian..

if one is a christian,they are still human and as such are just as susceptible to their own humanity as a nonbeliever..

sometimes i wonder how much the christian reputation is due to the actual christian and how much is due to the perception of that christian..it seems to me the nonchristian views christains as a perfect ppl..so whenever a christian fails to meet that perfection he gets a bad rep..(also i have met lots of 'better than you' christians..but again they would be that way if they were not a christian.)

christians are just as human as the rest of us..

 

[Doreen]

IE overhear a conversation concerning an issue i am struggling with,then hearing the same issue being disscussed on the radio,then hearing someone directly telling me about an issue in there life that directly relates to my issue(without any clues from me that i am struggling with that issue)..ETC...

That's all fine. But note: here you are claiming something miraculous is happening to you and you are capable of noticing it. I am not saying this is wrong either. What I am saying is that Christians - and others where the shoe fits - need to take responsibility for the implicit claim they are making: they are claiming they can recognize God, God's word, God's acts.

the claim of having 'special' knowledge from god is not really special it is just a conclusion based on the circumstances and events like i stated above that leads them to believe that it is from god,since it applies directly to their situation..the prob with communicating such a thing to someone else is they do not see those circumstances that leads to such a conclusion so any attemp to communicate such would be lost as they are not communicating from the same points of referance.

it is not a problem for me. It does not constitute proof for others, but you are not presenting it as that.

notice i did not claim any 'special' knowledge from god..i only said i believe that god taught me..and i hope i have explained why i think it was god who taught me..

Actually you did make that claim.

you can argue with that if you want but i will still believe that god taught me..

And here you make that claim again. And not only did God teach you, but you had the skills or insight to notice this. Even if it was not a burning bush, it was a revelation.

sometimes i wonder how much the christian reputation is due to the actual christian and how much is due to the perception of that christian..it seems to me the nonchristian views christains as a perfect ppl..so whenever a christian fails to meet that perfection he gets a bad rep..(also i have met lots of 'better than you' christians..but again they would be that way if they were not a christian.)

I don't think Christians are the only ones who are holier than thou. It was a very specific complaint I made about Christians above.

They say we humans cannot interpret God's actions, but they do this. When their explanation is show to not make sense, they then say that mere humans cannot understand God's actions. But they and other Christians are often explaining God's actions. they have answers to the problem of evil or the crucifixion or why there is no female God or why humans should suffer for eternity etc. That is contradiction 1.

Contradiction 2, is that they claim that they are simply following the Bible. They are not especially insightful. They have not had revelations themselves. They are not like saints or prophets or the writer's of the Bible. Yet at the same time they are absolutely certain the Bible is correct and that the writers of Bible were infallible. The only way they could know this is if they have revealed insight themselves.

There is no escaping this if they are certain. That other poster who came and went. He or she was absolutely certain. Bang. This is the way it is. This is a claim to relevatory knowledge.

christians are just as human as the rest of us..

Sure, but just like other groups they have tendencies to make certain mistakes. I think the above two are 2 of their common ones.

 

[NMSquirrel]

That's all fine. But note: here you are claiming something miraculous is happening to you and you are capable of noticing it. I am not saying this is wrong either. What I am saying is that Christians - and others where the shoe fits - need to take responsibility for the implicit claim they are making: they are claiming they can recognize God, God's word, God's acts.
it is not a problem for me. It does not constitute proof for others, but you are not presenting it as that.

i didn't claim miraculous..

Actually you did make that claim.

And here you make that claim again. And not only did God teach you, but you had the skills or insight to notice this. Even if it was not a burning bush, it was a revelation.

no skills..no insight..just chose to believe that god was responsible..

I don't think Christians are the only ones who are holier than thou. It was a very specific complaint I made about Christians above.

They say we humans cannot interpret God's actions, but they do this. When their explanation is show to not make sense, they then say that mere humans cannot understand God's actions. But they and other Christians are often explaining God's actions. they have answers to the problem of evil or the crucifixion or why there is no female God or why humans should suffer for eternity etc. That is contradiction 1.

to me it doesnt matter whether god is male or female..and at your current job how many ppl claim they know best.....

Contradiction 2, is that they claim that they are simply following the Bible. They are not especially insightful. They have not had revelations themselves. They are not like saints or prophets or the writer's of the Bible. Yet at the same time they are absolutely certain the Bible is correct and that the writers of Bible were infallible. The only way they could know this is if they have revealed insight themselves.

or if they chose to believe that..no special insights..
personaly i believe the bible was written by man..yes god influenced those men,but they are still just men and are susceptible to their own humanity. to me it is a guide book..not a rule book..
do you really believe god taught us all we needed to know in one book?

There is no escaping this if they are certain. That other poster who came and went. He or she was absolutely certain. Bang. This is the way it is. This is a claim to relevatory knowledge.

another case of 'little miss can't be wrong' how many ppl do you know who cannot hear that they are wrong?

Sure, but just like other groups they have tendencies to make certain mistakes. I think the above two are 2 of their common ones.

sound more like my last point..nonchristians tend to hold christians up to a higher standard and when they don't meet that standard they are vilified..

 

[Doreen]

i didn't claim miraculous..

I know. But you should, I think. If it is not miraculous communication then when was it ever miraculous communication?

no skills..no insight..just chose to believe that god was responsible..

Yes, but I mean some of the characters in the Bible had burning bushes. You managed to 'get it' with much subtler input. I understand the urge to humility, but it is nevertheless skill and insight (or it is confusion, whatever). Other people are not noticing these things and making connections to God or themselves and certainly not both.

to me it doesnt matter whether god is male or female..and at your current job how many ppl claim they know best.....

Not sure about that second part, but as for the first, I think it is fair to generalize that Christians think God is male.

or if they chose to believe that..no special insights..
personaly i believe the bible was written by man..yes god influenced those men,but they are still just men and are susceptible to their own humanity. to me it is a guide book..not a rule book..
do you really believe god taught us all we needed to know in one book?

Not at all. And not really my point. If you have the skill and insight to recognize God in certain texts one cannot avoid, implicitly, taking responsibility for that ability. You had a sense that to a signficant degree truth about you and God and goodness and salvation adn the world were being communicated in that text. It sounds like you may even have opinions about when the humanity of the writers may have missed the mark a bit. This is a big claim. Good. I have no problem with that claim per se. I do think that people need to take responsibility for that claim.

Here's one reason why.

A Christian says that the Bible is (to some degree the word of God)
A non-christian questions certain ideas - eternal damnation, for example - and, often, the Christian is saying that the nonChristian is showing hubris. The Christian is judging the non-Christian for thinking he or she can make judgments about the truth of a relgious concept.

This criticism becomes much harder to make if the Christian takes responsibilty for their own claim to be able to recognize God.

Then the Christian cannot give all the responsbility to the book.

I base my knowledge on God's word.

You base your knowledge on your own mind.

But this is not the case. Each of them is basing their belief on their intution, feelings and ideas. They are on even ground.

another case of 'little miss can't be wrong' how many ppl do you know who cannot hear that they are wrong?

You're not really hearing me. The point is not that he or she is certain. The point is they are not taking responsibility for their certainty. They know it is true because God said it. But what they are skipping is that they know it is true because they know they can recognize what is God's word and what is not.

Please see if you can get this point. Look, I argue with the atheists here and the 'rationalists' here all the time. I am well aware that certainty is a human trait, period. I am talking about a specific double message I hear from Christians. I know this, but I am not responsible for this knowing. It has nothing to do with me. Sorry, that cannot be the case. If it can, it may be true for the non-Christian.

Notice...that person told me I could not know. I could not judge.

sound more like my last point..nonchristians tend to hold christians up to a higher standard and when they don't meet that standard they are vilified..

No, you are confusing me with other people.

 

[NMSquirrel]

Not sure about that second part,

just trying to show that just cause a christian professes he knows better does not make it just a christian thing..

Not at all. And not really my point. If you have the skill and insight to recognize God in certain texts one cannot avoid, implicitly, taking responsibility for that ability. You had a sense that to a signficant degree truth about you and God and goodness and salvation adn the world were being communicated in that text. It sounds like you may even have opinions about when the humanity of the writers may have missed the mark a bit. This is a big claim. Good. I have no problem with that claim per se. I do think that people need to take responsibility for that claim.

several times you have said that a christian need to take responsibility for a claim..
explain...

Here's one reason why.

A Christian says that the Bible is (to some degree the word of God)
A non-christian questions certain ideas - eternal damnation, for example - and, often, the Christian is saying that the nonChristian is showing hubris. The Christian is judging the non-Christian for thinking he or she can make judgments about the truth of a relgious concept.

this also works written like this..

A non-Christian says that the Bible is (to some degree the word of God)
A christian questions certain ideas - eternal damnation, for example - and, often, the nonChristian is saying that the Christian is showing hubris. The non-Christian is judging the Christian for thinking he or she can make judgments about the truth of a relgious concept.
(except for the italisized part)

Please see if you can get this point. Look, I argue with the atheists here and the 'rationalists' here all the time. I am well aware that certainty is a human trait, period. I am talking about a specific double message I hear from Christians. I know this, but I am not responsible for this knowing. It has nothing to do with me. Sorry, that cannot be the case. If it can, it may be true for the non-Christian.

IOW..i know this but i don't know why i know this..i just do..
is this what you are getting at?
or is it a don't give me the credit for knowing..give god the credit..

Notice...that person told me I could not know. I could not judge.
No, you are confusing me with other people.

maybe..

 

[Doreen]

[several times you have said that a christian need to take responsibility for a claim..
explain...

I really have several times.

this also works written like this..

A non-Christian says that the Bible is (to some degree the word of God)
A christian questions certain ideas - eternal damnation, for example - and, often, the nonChristian is saying that the Christian is showing hubris. The non-Christian is judging the Christian for thinking he or she can make judgments about the truth of a relgious concept.
(except for the italisized part)

Right, but here's the difference. The Christian is already saying that regular people like themselves can see the Bible is the word of God. This opens the door for regular non-believers to criticize the ideas. Do you understand? A Christian is, generally, making the claim that they have the ability to determine what is and what is not the word of God. They, just like you, usually do not say they have had revelations or have any special skills. AT THE SAME TIME they, like that other poster, want to say that other people do not have revealed knowledge. That is hypocrisy. The Christians either have to say they are special and have special insight or they must acknowledge that other people are just as likely to know what makes sense or what a God would say etc.

IOW..i know this but i don't know why i know this..i just do..
is this what you are getting at?

Which I think is a fine stance, actually. It may or may not be right, but that is a different issue. But to say I know because the Bible tells me, but I have no special powers, that makes no sense at all.

or is it a don't give me the credit for knowing..give god the credit..

yes, But even there there is no escape from the claim, because you are saying YOU know it is God. Which again, I think is fine. People need to step up.

 

[wynn]

Right, but here's the difference. The Christian is already saying that regular people like themselves can see the Bible is the word of God. This opens the door for regular non-believers to criticize the ideas. Do you understand? A Christian is, generally, making the claim that they have the ability to determine what is and what is not the word of God. They, just like you, usually do not say they have had revelations or have any special skills. AT THE SAME TIME they, like that other poster, want to say that other people do not have revealed knowledge. That is hypocrisy. The Christians either have to say they are special and have special insight or they must acknowledge that other people are just as likely to know what makes sense or what a God would say etc.

Actually, perhaps our problem lies simply in that we have given Christians (and others with similar implicit statements of omniscience/special ability) too much credit (possibly under the influence of the threat of eternal damnation).

If we literally look at their statements, we will soon find mutually exclusive or undermining ones: on the one hand, they speak with full confidence about divine intent, for example - and on the other hand, they make statements such as "But we could all be wrong", "I am a sinner", "I am a seeker just like you".

This means that their philosophy, especially the epistemological aspect, is not very well worked out. And what is more, that they are unable to verbalize this in terms of a philosophical discourse, but instead make/take it personal/ly.

It's rather foolish on our part then to take their claims seriously if we are working out of a frame where proper philosophical discourse is given value over claims of confidence.

 

[Doreen]

Actually, perhaps our problem lies simply in that we have given Christians (and others with similar implicit statements of omniscience/special ability) too much credit (possibly under the influence of the threat of eternal damnation).

If we literally look at their statements, we will soon find mutually exclusive or undermining ones: on the one hand, they speak with full confidence about divine intent, for example - and on the other hand, they make statements such as "But we could all be wrong", "I am a sinner", "I am a seeker just like you".

There is an escape from authority - the assuming of it oneself - that is offered by Chrisitianity. I know these truths to be so because of the Bible and the experts who interpret it. What is not acknowledged openly, though sometimes can be felt in smugness, is that knowing which book and which experts to follow reqiures an act of 'divine intution'. This is generally not taken responsibility for, except implicitly, since for making this choice they are less likely to suffer for eternity.

I find that escape from authority maddening. One can enounter it, of course, in science groupies, who do not fully understand certain scientific theories, but 'know' they are true. The difference is generally that with the latter group we are often faced with shame for being irrational, whereas the former group is reminding us that we may suffer torture for all time.

This means that their philosophy, especially the epistemological aspect, is not very well worked out. And what is more, that they are unable to verbalize this in terms of a philosophical discourse, but instead make/take it personal/ly.

yes, a good way to put it. And, as you perhaps also meant, aim personal evaluations back.

It's rather foolish on our part then to take their claims seriously if we are working out of a frame where proper philosophical discourse is given value over claims of confidence.

I can take someone's insights and certainty seriously if they take responsibility for it. This does not mean I assume it is true, but I can take it seriously. At some point, however, for this seriousness to mean anything to me in practical terms, my interaction with them or with whatever they are asserting must lead to experiences that I have that fit with their models. If such experiences come with regularity - especially if some are rather surprising, for example - I may come to have some degree of confidence about things they have said I have not yet experienced. But the whole process is to some degree exploratory.

 

[NMSquirrel]

Right, but here's the difference. The Christian is already saying that regular people like themselves can see the Bible is the word of God. This opens the door for regular non-believers to criticize the ideas. Do you understand? A Christian is, generally, making the claim that they have the ability to determine what is and what is not the word of God. They, just like you, usually do not say they have had revelations or have any special skills. AT THE SAME TIME they, like that other poster, want to say that other people do not have revealed knowledge. That is hypocrisy. The Christians either have to say they are special and have special insight or they must acknowledge that other people are just as likely to know what makes sense or what a God would say etc.

if i understand what you are saying..
i don't think special enters into it..think of it as more as experiance and training rather than special insight..i mean a person who studies the bible complete with even a little historical referance to certain meanings behind some of the practices of the time can get an idea of what is from god and what is not..the non-believer who studies the same material will go out of his way to say X is not from god because that would be admitting that he believes in god..so they can have the same insights but the non-believer will refuse to admit it is from god..

Which I think is a fine stance, actually. It may or may not be right, but that is a different issue. But to say I know because the Bible tells me, but I have no special powers, that makes no sense at all.
yes, But even there there is no escape from the claim, because you are saying YOU know it is God. Which again, I think is fine. People need to step up.

i think in my opinion the phrase 'because the bible tells me' is slightly inacurate i would use the phrase 'because the bible gives me a good clue'
but thats me..and i still have a problem with the special powers part..just cause your a christian does not nescesarily make one special..(at least in the eyes of man)

 

[Doreen]

]if i understand what you are saying..
i don't think special enters into it..think of it as more as experiance and training rather than special insight..i mean a person who studies the bible complete with even a little historical referance to certain meanings behind some of the practices of the time can get an idea of what is from god and what is not..the non-believer who studies the same material will go out of his way to say X is not from god because that would be admitting that he believes in god..so they can have the same insights but the non-believer will refuse to admit it is from god..

I think you do understand what I am saying, but we also still disagree. It is a huge thing. There are many texts out there, each with different gods, each with different rules, a difference voice - way of speaking, different surrounding beliefs - for example Jesus dying for our sins or Original Sin - different stories and so on. Some are very popular - now - some are not. Some, like Christianity were not popular at one time. To sift through all these texts - or to choose not to - and to know which one is the right one and then to come up with reasons why this or that in the text shows it is the right one takes tremendous insight. One must have a feel for what God must be or is like, how God would think and react and act. This decision - around which text adn how much of that text - is a huge one showing great skill, insight or revelation (if correct). So much of these texts could be wrong or confused by the human minds who wrote them down and translated them - and the committees that decided what texts would be included and which would not be: ie. the Bible. To trust one's abililty to see through all this potention for error, distortion and even complete misguidedness is, again, an indication of said Christian's amazing ability.

Note carefully: I am not saying this is impossible, at all. I am simply saying that it is a huge and not at all a mundane thing.

People study for years to gain the expertise related to attributing texts to Shakespeare, for example. To authenticate the products of humans - their handwriting style for example - takes training. A lot of training.

I am not saying a Christian who can do this must have had training, they could have been born with a gift. But however they came to this revelatory insight, it is no small thing.

i think in my opinion the phrase 'because the bible tells me' is slightly inacurate i would use the phrase 'because the bible gives me a good clue'
but thats me..and i still have a problem with the special powers part..just cause your a christian does not nescesarily make one special..(at least in the eyes of man)

I would need vastly more that a clue to make me think a deity died to eradicate the potential punishment for my sins, so I started to some degree with a clean slate. That concept is so strange, ornate and contradictory, I could not walk around saying it was true from some clues. Likewise, and even more so, I would never talk about people suffering eternation damnation if I was working from clues. For Christians to do this means, again, that they have incredible faith IN THEIR OWN SKILLS.

We hold our detectives and courts to a very high degree of skill and rigor when it comes to judging people guilty of crimes. They must have a wealth of clues to such a degree that it is overwhelming evidence, especially when it concerns capital crimes. The people who carry out investigations are very highly trained and with capital crimes very experienced. All of this should pale in comparison to working from clues to saying that unrepentant sinners will and should suffer damnation for all time. An idea that reaches children.

If Christians who state this matter of factly and with great confidence are working from clues, they MUST, it seems to me, morally and in terms of honesty have tremendous faith in their own ability to discern the truth

FROM CLUES!

Further the Christian, in this situation, must have confidence that they are not being misled by things like
wishful thinking
a discomfort related to NOT believing what their parents believe
a need to be a part of something
a sense of control
a desire to be connected to a tradition
a desire to fit in with a specific community
fear of death

and so on.

When a Christian - or anyone - says that one of these texts is true - to whatever degree - they are making a claim about their own ability to not be overly influenced by factors like the little list above. This carries with it a confidence about knowing themselves. They are implicitly claiming to know their own motives, emotions, fears, and desires in a fairly profound way.

I am not saying that Christians think they are making a huge claim. I am saying they are and I wish they would be up front about this.

And it may seem like I am picking on Christians, but it is relevent to the thread. I 'pick on' other groups elsewhere for their certainties adn what I perceive as blind spots.

 

[Doreen]

This just caught my eye...

.and i still have a problem with the special powers part..just cause your a christian does not nescesarily make one special..(at least in the eyes of man)

and honestly it felt a little sneaky. I assume that it makes one special in the eyes of God was the implication. (If I got that wrong let me know)

So the ability makes one special in the eyes of God.

And yet somehow it is not a huge claim?

 

[wynn]

I find that escape from authority maddening.

So do I. It is as if those people have no awareness of what it is that they are seeing with, or that epistemological problems do not exist (or that they exist only for un/non-believers).

In comparison, in so-called Eastern traditions, there is much emphasis on not speaking beyond one's competence or authority. There are living institutions one is supposed to get training and certification from if one is to become an authority on something. Conversely, the general populace has (or at least had) the understanding that if someone does not have such credentials, they are most likely not to be taken seriously.

I can take someone's insights and certainty seriously if they take responsibility for it. This does not mean I assume it is true, but I can take it seriously.

But the threat of eternal damnation turns everything upside down ...

But the whole process is to some degree exploratory.

Christianity generally has a only-one-lifetime-for-action conception, "you only get one chance" - this excludes any serious notion of exploration.

 

[wynn]

I am not saying that Christians think they are making a huge claim. I am saying they are and I wish they would be up front about this.

For this, they would probably have to take a course in philosophy, and even then there is no guarantee.

I think they just don't care enough about people to make an effort to make themselves understandable to everyone whom they wish would believe as they do or for whom they claim they love and care for.

The extreme are Christians who rattle down the Gospel in 30 seconds to a person they meet inthe street, and then tell them "You have heard the Gospel, so on Judgment Day, you can't say you haven't been warned".

 

[NMSquirrel]

For this, they would probably have to take a course in philosophy, and even then there is no guarantee.

I think they just don't care enough about people to make an effort to make themselves understandable to everyone whom they wish would believe as they do or for whom they claim they love and care for.

The extreme are Christians who rattle down the Gospel in 30 seconds to a person they meet inthe street, and then tell them "You have heard the Gospel, so on Judgment Day, you can't say you haven't been warned".

those kind of ppl haven't a clue,they just memorize all the banter and think they are doing good to recite it with absolutely no understanding of what they are talking about..

 

[NMSquirrel]

This just caught my eye...


and honestly it felt a little sneaky. I assume that it makes one special in the eyes of God was the implication. (If I got that wrong let me know)

So the ability makes one special in the eyes of God.

And yet somehow it is not a huge claim?

who are we to claim we are special? that is for god to decide..
yes it makes one feel good to think of oneself as special but to proclaim it to everyone else is kinda self centered or some such self-something..

and i don't think it is an ability that makes us special in the eyes of god..for that matter,find me the verses that claims we are special..

 

[Doreen]

So do I. It is as if those people have no awareness of what it is that they are seeing with, or that epistemological problems do not exist (or that they exist only for un/non-believers).

In comparison, in so-called Eastern traditions, there is much emphasis on not speaking beyond one's competence or authority. There are living institutions one is supposed to get training and certification from if one is to become an authority on something. Conversely, the general populace has (or at least had) the understanding that if someone does not have such credentials, they are most likely not to be taken seriously.

That is one way to deal with the issue. I actually think it is fine if someone states with certainty - or some degree of it - when it concerns issues like these, as long as they take responsibility for that. IOW they admit that they are claiming to have some special ability, training - even if it is unofficial - insight or have experienced some form of revelation. We don't have to accept this of course, but we are clear where we are. The cake and eat it too of the 'I am not doing something special when I know what God does and thinks and intends and why people should go to hell' and so on, sets up the other person for a trap. If the other person claims to know anything - including that something does not make sense - the Christian can say this is hubris. They are safe from this being pointed at them because they didn't really do anything themselves. It is, when it comes down to it, a lie.

But the threat of eternal damnation turns everything upside down ...

It is tough, I definitely admit that. And though I was partially raised Christian - very complicated to explain - my home as a whole gave off a mass of conflicting messages. I did not have to deal with one intimidating monolith. That said, I think one can extricate oneself from the torture of inner and outer voices like the one that says this. I think reason can help, but ultimately I think it is almost like the body vomits out the poison. Perhaps that is more than a fair metaphor. Perhaps the solution is no longer stopping ourselves from vomiting.

Rather than learning how to vomit. I hope the metaphor is clear.

I think the battered women may hear from friends for years about why the batterers are sick and why they should not allows themselves to be treated this way - and perhaps certain philosophical assaults on sexism or whatever the 'logic' of self-hatred these individual woman have - but at a certain point they simply find themselves packing when their husband is at work. Or when the man raises his hand to one of the children and the whole thing becomes clear, almost physically. (not that it is all miraculously over then either)

Christianity generally has a only-one-lifetime-for-action conception, "you only get one chance" - this excludes any serious notion of exploration.

You may know about the controversies in christianity around reincarnation, but if not they are worth a look. Note that some passages in the Bible are really quite odd if there is no reincarnation....

http://reluctant-messenger.com/origen1.html

this is the kind of thing I was referring to in relation to the Christian. He must trust that in these struggles between fallible men the correct decisions were made.

 

[Doreen]

who are we to claim we are special? that is for god to decide..

I don't think you are doing this consciously, but you are actively NOT dealing with the issue.

If I say I can remember all the names in 15 minutes of 300 people in an auditorium, I am claiming to have a special ability. I may be humble and say it is nothing special. I may say that God will decide if this is special. But the fact is it is a very skill requiring a great deal of natural talent or training.

This is what the Christian - or other religious person - is doing when they say this or that text is the word of God. They are saying they have a remarkable ability.

In post 230 I make it very clear why it is a claim to special abilities. Most people fool themselves all the time about matters that are important to them emotionally. Eternal life vs. eternal damnation, for example, are such emotionally charged issues, for someone to claim they know themselves well enough to know that all the emotions around fear of death and damnation and wanting to be good and loved are not affecting the way they determine what is true in these texts
is making a huge claim.

But post 230 lays this out more completely.

yes it makes one feel good to think of oneself as special but to proclaim it to everyone else is kinda self centered or some such self-something..

It is even worse to imply it and not take responsibility for it.

and i don't think it is an ability that makes us special in the eyes of god..for that matter,find me the verses that claims we are special..

What did you mean then by...

.and i still have a problem with the special powers part..just cause your a christian does not nescesarily make one special..(at least in the eyes of man)

Honestly, I am starting to get a bad feeling, here. You feel slippery in these last couple of posts, where before you did not.

 

[Doreen]

For this, they would probably have to take a course in philosophy, and even then there is no guarantee.

I think sometimes seeing a video of a conversation they had with or about non-believers might at the very least make them uneasy.

I think they just don't care enough about people to make an effort to make themselves understandable to everyone whom they wish would believe as they do or for whom they claim they love and care for.

Actually I think they are actively hiding something from themselves.

The extreme are Christians who rattle down the Gospel in 30 seconds to a person they meet inthe street, and then tell them "You have heard the Gospel, so on Judgment Day, you can't say you haven't been warned".

now that is evil. Pure evil. Given that now, according to some, they are subject to eternal damnation, whereas before - if it was their first exposure - they were not.

 

[NMSquirrel]

I don't think you are doing this consciously, but you are actively NOT dealing with the issue.

not trying to claim any speciality..if you think i am special with respect..then i can accept that..but i will not claim that i am special

If I say I can remember all the names in 15 minutes of 300 people in an auditorium, I am claiming to have a special ability. I may be humble and say it is nothing special. I may say that God will decide if this is special. But the fact is it is a very skill requiring a great deal of natural talent or training.

if you are humble and say that it is nothing special then you are not claiming to have the ability..even though you do have the ability you do not claim it.(btw i could never do something like that..remember all those names...)

This is what the Christian - or other religious person - is doing when they say this or that text is the word of God. They are saying they have a remarkable ability.

well..to me when they say this or that is the word of god (at least the majority of ppl) they are just indoctrinated,trained,pressured, whatever to say that..it is rare for me to believe a person has discernment for what is the word of god in the bible as most christians claim it all to be..

In post 230 I make it very clear why it is a claim to special abilities. Most people fool themselves all the time about matters that are important to them emotionally. Eternal life vs. eternal damnation, for example, are such emotionally charged issues, for someone to claim they know themselves well enough to know that all the emotions around fear of death and damnation and wanting to be good and loved are not affecting the way they determine what is true in these texts
is making a huge claim.

ah..emotions...unreliable at best..changing from moment to moment..way too much focus on them..i don't think ANYONE knows enough about themselves to satiate their emotional state of being..maybe that is the issue..ppl are focusing on their emotional state of being when they read those texts..

But post 230 lays this out more completely.

It is even worse to imply it and not take responsibility for it.

What did you mean then by...


Honestly, I am starting to get a bad feeling, here. You feel slippery in these last couple of posts, where before you did not.

i think we are getting our somantics crossed..

 

[Doreen]

not trying to claim any speciality..if you think i am special with respect..then i can accept that..but i will not claim that i am special

I know you won't say it, but the claim is made every time. If I say I can pick up a car, I am claiming I can do something special, regardless of what I am willing to say.

if you are humble and say that it is nothing special then you are not claiming to have the ability..even though you do have the ability you do not claim it.

that makes no sense. If I say I can memorize those name, I am claiming to have that ability, even if I am humble about it. If a Christian says the Bible is the word of God, they have made a special claim about their own abilities.

(btw i could never do something like that..remember all those names...)

Of course not. I mean, perhaps you could, but you must know that was not my point.

well..to me when they say this or that is the word of god (at least the majority of ppl) they are just indoctrinated,trained,pressured, whatever to say that..it is rare for me to believe a person has discernment for what is the word of god in the bible as most christians claim it all to be..

If you cannot make that claim, then the Bible is like any other book. If you claim that there is somethign special and from God in there, then you are making the claim.

ah..emotions...unreliable at best..changing from moment to moment..way too much focus on them..i don't think ANYONE knows enough about themselves to satiate their emotional state of being..maybe that is the issue..ppl are focusing on their emotional state of being when they read those texts..

That wasn't quite the point either and I think it was clear. They may not have been focusing on their emotions. That is beside the point. The point is one would need to know what one's emotions are and how they affect one to be confident this was not affecting what one decided was true about God and life, etc., in a text.

I am going to stop the dialogue here, because we are starting to go in circles. It helped me to lay out my position clearly in 230. I wish you could have responded to this, but it is OK that you did not. For what it is worth, I think there is something you do not want to look at here. Because at a certain point you stopped making sense and/or responding to what I wrote. I am aware this a rather big claim on my part - not so big as the one where one says one knows god sends people to hell, but nevertheless a big one - and I stand by that. I do have some skill and experience in such matters.