Hi TEC,
Thanks for the reply.
Darlin' I don't admit that. Never have. I have stated the opposite, but the means by which what I hear CAN be verified is not acceptable to you (and others). There is nothing I can do about that though.
If you want to rely on the different definitions that exist for words (eg "verifiable") in the English language as used by various theologians vs their commonly-accepted scientific definition, then be my guest, but don't expect anyone ELSE to be fooled (much less impressed) by such evasive tactics, relying on the ambiguity of 'weasel words' and feeling you have the right to redefine meanings of words when it suits YOUR needs.
If you KNOW the meaning I intended but are intentionally obsfuscating, then you're being more than a tad intellectually-dishonest (a common trait amongst believers, I've found) and there's little point in continuing the discussion, since you're not open-minded, but merely PREACHING a message/agenda with no honest intent to change your position if presented with persuasive or compelling evidence/argument.
Again, it seems you don't accept the principle that TRUE FAITH is NOT evidenced by arguing evasively and relying on a forked-tongue Pharisee-like use of 'weasel words', but is demonstrated to others by honestly stating that there's NOTHING that ANYONE could present as VISIBLE VERIFIABLE evidence that would make them alter their belief. THAT'S faith.
(funny side bit... mP tells me I'm selfish for not sharing more, you tell me I'm ego-centric for sharing at all, lol)
Actually, those are not mutually-exclusive, which also explains part of the problem: it's selfish AND egocentric to play the "I've got a secret friend in Jesus, and you don't" tease game with others, since you've apparently never considered how childish it makes YOU appear to be to others? Telling everyone, "But you're just not trying HARD ENOUGH!" is simply not helpful, since you're now blaming the ones who don't share your auditory-perception quirk, so although it may be fueled by a very real auditory hallucination experienced by you, it actually demonstrates a lack of empathy on YOUR part by failing to consider how EVERYONE ELSE will perceive your claims.
Again, that very fact tends to undermine your claim of Jesus being the source of the voices, since it would mean that not only YOU are arrogant and insensitive, but that JESUS is arrogant and more than a bit of a childish by using some people to play his "Hide and Seek" game, since THAT'S the message Tammy is conveying on behalf of Jesus. You'd almost expect that if Jesus chose to communicate to some, he'd threaten to ignore them if they ever DARED to publicly state they were "special". THAT'S what a moral Jesus would do, if only so as to NOT appear like a big arse who shows favortism to some.
Father, why have you foresaken me?" comes to mind as his "Whoops, what was I thinking, claiming to be a Jewish Messiah?!
No it doesn't. You don't ask someone why they have abandoned you, if you already know the answer: that you are false.
Huh? You lost me.
You've likely never been abandoned by another person then, as your answer betrays a fundamental lack of insight into the psychology of abandonment.
Contrary to your words above, the abandoned child often spends their ENTIRE LIVES trying to answer the question of why their parents abandoned them, often blaming themselves as being fundamentally unlovable, not worthy of being loved, etc even long AFTER they HAVE been told an answer, or even after the parents had died. They mull the question (and answer) over in their minds, haunted by the question "WHY".
The self-blame tendency is often fueled by an utter absense of information, where the "true" answer (which the parent cannot offer, since they often lack the self-awareness needed to recognize it, much less ADMIT it the ones they harmed!) IS that the parents were simply self-centered narcissistics who lacked the capability to offer love to another living being, and likely did the child a FAVOR by offering them up for adoption where they at least had a CHANCE at life with non-sociopaths.
That feeling of abandonment also is (not coincidently) EXACTLY the same dynamic involved in how humans feel abandoned by God, as if God is playing some cruel game of "Hide and Seek" or "I've got a secret" or "I only call my FAV children, and the rest of you just aren't worth personal contact since you're DOING IT WRONG!!"
Even setting aside the MOUNTAINS of VERIFIABLE evidence from the World of evolution/physics, you think that a God who plays such games WARRANTS worship?
But back to your statement above:
No it doesn't. You don't ask someone why they have abandoned you, if you already know the answer: that you are false.
Are you admitting that Jesus uttered those expressions of abandonment after struggling to figure out WHY his Father had foresaken him, and Jesus realized that he was just another false Jewish messiah claimaint (not the first, and not the last: there were literally HUNDREDS of others Jews who lived short incendiary lives as minor celebrities within Palestine by making that exact claim and performing magic tricks before large crowds)?
Or, are you denying that entire Bible passage, too (appealing to the "lying scribes" bit)?
How do you explain those words? Wait: I see you answered it with this:
It's also another example of Jesus violating Divine character, since it directly violates the concept of his having insight into Master Plan of serving as the "perfect sacrifice" to redeem mankind from the sin of Adam. Instead, he seems out of the loop?
It's also an example of pain speaking, even if only for a moment.
Yeah, I'm not buying it, since that would somehow mean that Jesus experienced a moment of weakness and loss of faith in his Heavenly Father under the pain of bodily torture (where Jesus constantly spoke about the need to gain control over the flesh so as to purify the soul, putting spiritual interests ahead of the weaknesses of the flesh). Doesn't seem like "perfect" to me if he cried, "Uncle!" under significant bodily pain, and lost self-control. Jesus WAS claimed to be the Son of God, and appealing to his human side to make excuses for displays of "weakness of the flesh" by doubting his Father isn't going to fly with me.
The moment recorded in Matthew directly contradicts the OTHER two Gospel accounts (Luke and John) which portray Jesus as calm, cool, and in control at the moment of death, where Jesus KNEW WHAT was happening and WHY it was happening, right up until the moment of death (eg uttering the last words, "it is finished" in John, and "Father into thy hands I commend my spirit" in Luke).
(Let's set aside how Catholics rationalize Jesus' utterance of betrayal with Himself, since their trinity doctrine is questioned by such expressions of betrayal by ANOTHER independent being, much less how God's betrayal of himself isn't exactly evidence of "perfection".)
Again, the point is that you experience an inner gut feeling, a hunch, a twitch
If that is what you think... you're not listening. I don't actually expect you to do otherwise, but I have not described hearing in such a way, at all.
Yeah, I was using terms that are often typically used by OTHERS to describe THEIR voices, not referring to YOUR perception.
However, you described your perception of voices above: should I cut and paste your (quite nebulous) description?
But I do believe that you said, things had been tampered with. So that does not support your 'change over time'... hypothesis; that is tampering.
You admit that the Bible has been tampered with over time by lying scribes, but you're NOW claiming that such PROVEN examples of scriptural redaction and alterations with time is NOT evidence of "change with time"?
Again, that's simply a ludicrious laughable abuse of logic, and you don't do Jesus any favors by engaging in such intentional obsfucation, as if you feel the name of Jesus gives you an excuse to insult everyone's basic sense of logic. Ask Jesus, or read the Bible's policy on faith, and you'd realize that you're SUPPOSED to incite such examples as opportunities to admit that YES, it is a contradiction which cannot be resolved by reliance on "mere human flawed logic", but instead requires suppression and ignoring, citing it as an OPPORUNITY to BUILD one's FAITH.
In comparison, you point to "lying scribes" as a DEFENSE to explain why you feel entitled to cherry-pick scriptures from a Divinely-inspired book at will, to explain away the discrepancies. (We're not arguing from the same position, hence we're going to use the same
evidence differently.)
Why do you feel the need to describe/define my actions? This is just your interpretation. I dont do what you have listed above either. The bible is not one book, for one. The bible is not the Truth, for two. Christ is the Truth. Why in the world would I believe anything over Him, if that thing contradicts Him... when I KNOW that there are errors in translation or understanding, etc, that have found their way into various books?
Likely because you REFUSE or are unable to DEFINE your actions, yourself, and seemingly feel entitled to make up contradictory definitions and beliefs on the spot. Fine. Sure, you have a RIGHT to be as hypocritical as you wanna be, and as slippery as an eel as you please, but just realize you're not likely to be perceived by non-believers (or other believers, alike) as serving to the glory of Jesus or God, but rather, only acting like someone who feels entitled to rely on "appeals to a personal friend of Jesus" to push YOUR agenda (as much as you protest it's all to the glory of Jesus, it's really NOT, since you are unable to even clearly DEFINE the message that Jesus tells you what he wants US to do, at least in concrete USEFUL terms).
Here's a VERY RELEVANT YouTube video which depicts how theists (whether voice hearers or not) are often perceived by others, which all theists SHOULD be aware of:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j8ZMMuu7MU
You're arguing AGAINST the value of faith now?
No, I am arguing against your definition of faith, and the value that you place on that.
Hebrews 11:1 defines faith. Do you agree with the Bible's (Paul's) definition in Hebrews 11:1 or is this more "lying scribes"?
(This is like pulling teeth!)
Read my post on the last page, where I explained my understanding that Christians and skeptics are sitting on OPPOSITE sides of the FAITH teeter-totter: per the Bible, the true Christian believes in Jesus DESPITE a COMPLETE lack of supportive evidence to bolster their
belief, relying exclusive on faith; the skeptic DEMANDS sufficient visible evidence in order to accept a belief in Jesus, so they don't REQUIRE FAITH, but require EVIDENCE.
I highlighted the addendums that you have attached to try and make your point stronger.
Thanks, if you seem to think it makes it clearer or significantly alters it. More importantly, does your modification mean you AGREE?
My faith is based on evidence. You may not accept that evidence, but that doesn't make faith blind. You want specific... visible... evidence; and faith is in what is unseen. But it is not based on nothing. I already said this, so i wont' continue to emphasize, as we will just repeat ourselves.
Again, you're arguing with the Apostle Paul now, who DEFINED Christian faith in Hebrews 11, and even offered examples of the "the men of faith" described in the OT who were in "the Faith Hall of Fame", where the Biblical accounts of THEIR faith SHOULD serve as all "the assurance" a true Christian needs to base THEIR faith upon. Hence, you seem NOT to understand that appealing to external evidence actually indicates your OWN WEAKNESS in their faith, i.e. being spiritually-weak, as if the OT accounts aren't good enough for you.
If all faith was blind, then we really wouldn't need the term, blind faith, now would we?
Except you're forgetting that the theological (Biblical) definition of faith differs from the common philosophical/scientific description of faith. eg I have 'faith' in radio waves, but it is not 'blind faith': their existence can be PROVEN by many means, such as using electronic equipment, signal-strength meters, receivers, etc. THAT'S verifiable evidence, so my faith in radio waves is NOT blind.
In Hebrews 11, the Bible clearly states that the OT contains the accounts of the men of faith, and that's the ONLY proof you SHOULD need, your faith built by reading THEIR accounts: the Bible assures readers that's ALL the assurance any Christian needs, and paradoxically by asking for MORE PROOF, you're actually demonstrating a LACK of faith, per Paul.
Now, If you DON'T agree, then you need to point out WHERE I'm wrong, and offer a BETTER INTERPRETATION which IS based on something outside of your own brain. MY CLAIMS are verifiable (i.e ANYONE can reference their copy of the Bible, and point out where and why my interpretation is wrong), and even though I obviously don't BELIEVE in the theological interpretation (as an atheist), at least I UNDERSTAND it, and can DEFEND my claim in a verifiable manner (which is something you SEEM quite unwilling to do).
Well, perhaps you should more closely examine Hebrews 11, which i referred to earlier, paying particular attention to the basis of their faith... being what they heard, and then DOING as they heard. (when warned; when called; when God spoke; when commended; when God said) There is no conflict with the passages you quoted. I just hoped to give you something further to add to your personal interpretation of what faith IS, by how you have interpreted scripture (cherry-picking, yourself). The issue is not the basis of THEIR faith (the men of faith of the OT), but that the reader is expected to base his faith on the accounts of the faith of men in the OT.
Don't take this the wrong way, but I suspect you really don't get the POINT of Christian faith, as defined by Paul in Hebrews 11:1, as many Christians don't seemingly understand that demanding VISIBLE evidence, or experiential evidence that's been personally-delivered by Jesus actually indicates a Christian's WEAK faith; refusing to examine VISIBLE counter-evidence indicates STRONGER faith, since Christian faith, BY DEFINITION, is NOT dependent on ANY evidence, other than the Bible accounts of faith (where "assured expectations" refers to the assurance offered by accounts appearing IN the Bible itself. That's an example of circular self-referential evidence, where the book that tells you that faith is a virtue, and faith is all that you need to be saved ALSO tells you that it's the SOURCE of ALL the evidence you need. Thus no external evidence is needed, or even desirable, as it shows a LACK of faith).
Hebrews 11:1 is telling Christians that faith IS transerrable, since the accounts of the OT "men of faith" SHOULD be ALL that a Christian needs to base their faith upon: nothing else. The Bible elsewhere says that modern-day signs and miracles are not offered to men: no more miracles, speaking in tongues, healing, etc. That's OK, per Paul, since he says that TRUE Christians ONLY need to examine their accounts of the men of faith "hall of fame" to based their faith upon (as well as the example of Jesus). Hence, the Bible accounts are ALL the assurance you or any other Christian needs.
Does not the Bible ENCOURAGE you TOO to protect and build your faith, NOT by seeking ANY evidence to justify your beliefs? If you actually believe it, why would you counteract the Bible's admonishment by claiming your personal experience as supportive EVIDENCE?
Seems to me you'd be DOWNPLAYING it, as it truly IS blind faith.
Ah no, it doesn't encourage any such thing... though even if it did, Christ does not, and HE is the one I follow. Make your calling sure. Test the inspired expressions. Be wary of false prophets and false christs. Watch out for wolves in sheep's clothing. It's all ABOUT testing.
This is pointless, since you aren't seemingly willing to nail down a definition of faith, and worse, you're introducing the unbibical concept of "blind faith" on top of it all (which YOU dragged into the discussion, even though you cannot Biblically support the claim of the concept of 'blind faith'; since Paul already admitted that there's a COMPLETE lack of verifiable external evidence, and he even spun that lack of proof as a POSITIVE! You're arguing against Paul now, since ALL faith in theological discussions IS actually blind faith, by definition).
I mean, is it ME, the atheist, who just doesn't get it, or am missing something about how faith is supposed to work for Christians?
I'm just telling you about my experience. And this whole... faith being blind, doesn't make sense to me (other than technically not being about sight... religion is a sight thing with its visible leaders and structures and doctrines and statues and paintings and icons and rules and specific clothes, etc; faith is about the Spirit... and the Spirit is heard, but not often seen; that is what walking by faith means, over walking by sight)
It doesn't make sense to you, but you're not willing to even admit that YOU might be missing something? How could THAT be, with Jesus whispering clues in your ear? THAT can't be right!
Do you see the slight problem there, or were Jesus' comments of disgust and frustration upon dealing with self-delusion and confirmation bias (when he said "they have eyes, but they cannot see") not serve as a warning to YOU, but a warning to EVERYONE ELSE BUT YOU?
Perhaps you can offer ONE SPECIFIC CONCRETE EXAMPLE of how Jesus has directly influenced you, or "where something came to pass". Give us your BEST example.
I've given examples on this forum. They will not meet your requirements. The "BEST" examples are personal, at least to this date, and involve others, and I am not putting them here.
Well thanks for admitting that they are of no relevance or significance to anyone else BUT you.
Now, do you see a SLIGHT problem with that admission that they ARE personal in nature, so instead Jesus would seemingly be playing favorites here, as if YOU deserve all the candy and sweets, but NOT all the rest of us? You cannot be so deluded to be oblivious to seeing the problems that might create for you, if only out of green-eyed envy and jealousy?
Of course, you'll likely interpret it as being persecuted for your true faith, playing right into the persecution complex, when again, it actually indicates you WEAK faith since you wouldn't TOUT your perception as a means to brag about being "special".
Of course, Jesus didn't perform miracles as personal favors, party-tricks, for financial gain, etc but supposedly to demonstrate the glory of God. How does his communication with you reflect the glory of God, in the least?
Again, I ask you to consider the dynamic of JWs anointed partakers, where one elderly member gets moved to partake, and the others snitter how she feels "special", and others inevitably feel "moved" to spiritually "Keep Up With the Joneses" and make the same claim, even sometimes managing to actually fool themselves via delusion.
I'm actually reminded of Jesus' admonishment to pray in private, and not do it for "show" as the Pharisees do, receiving all their rewards by their showy displays in the eyes of men. I'd think that SHOULD apply to the freak show of anointed partaking, or to your claims of hearing voices?
However, they likely would rationalize it away like this:
A person who partakes might simply be doing so because Christ ASKS it of them, and they hear Him. Even if they might not recognize it. No doubt that some do it for false motives also, but so what? That is between them and God. To jump to a conclusion that they are doing so in order to claim special status or whatever... well that is indicative of a few things in itself.
The PROBLEM is that it is self-delusion at the least, since it's not really real; at the worst, it's false representation, a lie, a religious con-game. People make poor decisions when they're made upon faulty evidence (eg JWs die when refusing blood transfusions; 9/11 hikackers flew into WTC, etc), or they decide to kill in the name of God(s). The problem is religion IGNORES the implications and the COSTS of their fakey beliefs on OTHERS, which isn't really surprising that they'd be unable to consider that it's not all about THEIR wishes and desires, but that they share the Planet with 7 BILLION OTHERS, too.
The COST is that of the targets of Bible-justified bigotry, eg gays, women, etc. The Bible perpetuates ancient stereotypes, and believers use the Bible to justify holding back minorities. That SHOULD be obvious to any but the most deluded believers.
JWs speak of using one's internal moral compass to make decisions on 'conscience' matters (i.e. matters which aren't determined by expression of God's Divine Will). The Bible-trained conscience is sharpened by Bible study; it is fueled by wisdom. Christians typically
claim how "horribly flawed" their decision-making skills are, even being unable to direct their own footsteps on their own without God's direction.
Okay, but what i was hoping for was a specific example. An anecdote of some sort, please. Because I am not sure how you are applying this to me.
If only I could remember the original point I was trying to make, LOL!
I discussed all of this in a prior article on Adam and Eve on my blog: maybe that'll help explain the difference between God's Divine Will and man's free will, and where humans are allowed to exercise their own independent moral judgment (and the fly in the ointment being determining which is which).
http://awgue.weebly.com/the-paradox-of-adam-and-eve-and-how-the-new-world-translation-fruitlessly-attempts-to-keep-it-hidden.html
The problem is most Christians don't BEGIN to ask the tough ethical and moral questions that need to be asked, since Christians are often self-centered (deep down), and often waste time discussing how unimportant they are (which belies their overblown egos, since
Jesus demanded that they put on the humble act, in order to be saved) and don't get around to actually discussing anything important like how to solve the World's immediate problems! Sigh....
You keep speaking about 'christians' and applying that to me, as if we are all one hive group, lol. And you are making assumptions at that.
Christ didn't tell anyone to put on an act... but we are to be humble before GOD; that does not mean be humble before men, when that involves watering down the truth or teachings of Christ. We are to speak boldly, but we are not to claim something as having come from ourselves, that came from Him.
I was referring to Jesus' constant jibes of "he who would be the first is the last", as if he were chastizing a group of self-centered and greedy children who insisted, "ME, FIRST!" Do you follow that advice from Jesus, or do you reject those claims as "lying scribes"?
I must say, it's getting very tiresome and fatiguing, having to clarify exactly what scriptures of the Bible you accept and which you don't, since you're asking for ALOT of "personal special pleading" and exceptions made just for YOU, the author of the Divinely inspired 'Book of Tammy'.
Some people seem to waste time talking about how important they should act, or take credit for something that is not theirs (something that Christ taught them even), rather than getting around to discussing anything important ; ) In fact, that makes your statement kind of funny... people make things about the person sharing, and it is not about them... thereby themselves wasting time rather than talking about the important things, lol.
Point being, since we're all apparently awaiting Christ's imminent return, there's no point in actually BOTHERING to DO anything USEFUL, right?
Adam
