Epistemology. I Wonder 2... (page 5)

I think I speak for many of us tec in saying that while I can see your sincerity — at the same time, I am concerned about you.
You do know that hearing voices is not normal, right?

Not voices. One voice. The voice of Christ.

As HE said that HE does speak. AS we have examples of Him speaking as the Spirit after He died and was resurrected. What did you think those passages meant when you were a believer? Did you (and others) just overlook them? I did, for some time, until someone else gave their witness that he does speak... and there was truth in they shared from Him. I don't think I even really 'saw' those passages.

As for the question of process, I think that you have answered honestly: there was none — as you always believed in God.

I think you overlooked everything else that I wrote. I only started there. But when I started questioning WHAT to believe, it was the Truth in Christ that I followed... and then the evidence of his promises and Him being alive... that gave me conviction. I even confronted questions and possibilities that I was wrong, at the beginning of that journey/process.

I fear that your answer is not satisfying to most of us (even theists), because to the question "How do you know what you know?" your answer is "I just know", which of course, is not an answer.

But that was not my answer. I know because CHRIST tells me. I don't know on my own.

This is why process is important. When for like my dad and your belief is a default — the least that must be expected of you is to question and test your default bias. Otherwise you risk seeing everything else as false by default, hence becoming condescending to others, which is a perverted form of disrespect.

Do you see what I mean?

I see what you mean according to what you have concluded... but i think you have overlooked much of what I have said.

Peace to you,

tammy

braincleaned

Amazing video jgnat! Thanks for sharing... very informative.

braincleaned

I understand why you think I have overlooked what you said.
But I was careful to compartmentalize the issues. But the fact is that all my questions got the same answer, "Jesus told me so".

But listen my friend, I will stop here the prodding for answers. I think I get it. I cannot relate to your faith, so I am ill fit to argue for or against it.

You have pretty much answered my curiosity. I will leave it at that, with much respect.
Just know that I feel pretty much the opposite about God and Christ. These are our different journeys.
As long as we are happy and have a positive input in society, all is good!

Peace.

tec

tec and I read Hebrews 11:1 differently. I say faith cannot be fact based, otherwise it is not faith. tec says the opposite. She is satisifed that her internal evidence is sufficient, and continues to broadcast that "evidence" to others. From a scientific point of view, of course, it is not evidence at all.

I don't think I have ever said 'fact based'. Evidence based, yes. Based on Christ... and the truth He teaches, yes. (you will say that is semantics, perhaps, but sometimes clarity is important)

No one has faith in things for no reason at all, based on nothing at all. How does that makes sense? You just choose to believe something, and then just do it... for no reason other than you want to? (I know that is how many atheists define faith... but that is not what faith IS)

What I give is my witness to the Truth. As Christ said... you will be witnesses of ME. Including sharing what He gives me TO share. Regardless of who hears and accepts... or not.

I also tend not to get as hung up on one verse in the bible as some others seem to... including Hebrews 11:1. Corroborate Hebrews 11:1 with the examples of men of faith -- who heard and believed, and DID... and one might get a better grasp of what Hebrews 11:1 means... and that it does not mean that faith itself is the reason to believe.

Compare Hebrews to Romans:

So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ. Romans 10:17

I would ask you, jgnat the same question that I asked braincleaned (and others before). What did you think those verses meant, the ones where Christ is actually speaking and communicating?

Peace,

tammy

tec

May I ask you a question Braincleaned, with all respect, if you do not want to ask me any more?

How do you know what you know?

Do you not also listen to what others teach... others who (you believe) know what they are talking about... and then see the evidence for yourself for your own conviction?

I'm just curious why you think that my answer... I know from Christ... equals... I just know?

Because I truly do not understand what your thinking is on this.

Thank you!

Peace to you,

tammy

braincleaned

Thank you with all my heart for asking me how I know what I know, tec. I was wondering why you didn't ask before, as it was fair game!

I must first admit that what I claim to know is horribly limited.
The process goes like this: I ask a question, I do the research, and if I'm lucky, I get a satisfying answer for time being (as I realize that new information can unthrone that answer for a better understanding).
Problem is, answers give way to a wave of new questions… so the more I know, the more revealing is my ignorance.

So my answer may disappoint, as I strongly believe that we can only know from what evidence and logic we manage to collect on any given subject, while ignoring what we unintentionally missed in the process.
And you are absolutely correct in saying that we all hang on to what others have themselves learned and now teach. Those we choose to trust, often because they go in the direction of our natural leanings. This is human.

This is why I am very suspicious of my own bias. I aim for objectivity, well aware of my subjective sensitivity.

Question; are you aware of your subjective sensitivity?

So you won't find me offering you an equally assertive argument against Christ, or "knowing" better about him.
What I am arguing against is the subjective conviction that he exists or that his message is the final Word.
You knowing from Christ does not address the validity of this source.

Does that help clear up my stance?
Please feel free to ask for more clarity. I am not the most articulate out there. :)
_________

Having said all this, and to give you something — I will say that I believe in evolution based on hard archeological evidence; the logical explanations of natural selection, and the observation that nature is cruel and cannot be the work of a god of love. I am open to being wrong on this… but so far, many different fields of science are confirming more and more Darwin's hunches and theoretical predictions… even recently corroborated with DNA. I believe it is true because it is justified by known reality. Evolution would be easy to falsify. However, it has not been to this day.
I also believe it is true because I have passionately argued against it with all I had as a theist… and failed.

This does not mean that I KNOW evolution. But this is how I know about it.
I hope my candid argument is understood for what it is.

Peace!

braincleaned

Really, in short, the argument I'm presenting is against the claim of knowing, as opposed to the more humble position of conviction open to inquiry.

Faith as epistemological immodesty, against the awarness and acceptance of our limited information and perception.

jgnat

So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ. Romans 10:17

Tec, I take it from context is that you want my interpretation on this verse? I think I've covered Hebrews 11:1 well enough.

Paul is repurposing Christ's martyrdom to establish a broader, gentile religion, and he is doing it by quoting select verses in the Old Testament. This is a persuasive argument for his audience; mixed congregations of Jewish and Gentile converts in Rome.

braincleaned

If anyone here sees flaws in my latest argument above, please, I would glady hear them pointed out. I'm here to learn and share, not to preach.

Epistemology. I Wonder 2...

Mickey mouse

tec

braincleaned

braincleaned

tec

tec

braincleaned

braincleaned

jgnat

braincleaned

Share this