god told me to post this here

"If you had worshiped God the supreme who is beyond the material with full faith, full confidence, and rejection of intellectual doubt you would have had different results."

Yes... an immaterial god you have never proved to exist.
A system of faith I have already proved to be worthless
because it is glaringly full of contradictions.

Your whole belief is just a made up assertion with
nothing to back it.

Just how do you suppose anyone is supposed to detect
the immaterial with material senses? Absurd.

You claim faith.... yet faith is an impotent instrument which
simply allows you to believe whatever you want.
Which allows for millions of contradictions between millions
of users.

Total absurdity. The weakest non-argument I have heard to date.



peace

axeman


Quote from ARogueTrader:



Apparently you have a concept of God that requires proof on a material and physical level.

No wonder you failed at faith, you were worshiping a material God based on your mental conception of God as a material being.

If you had worshiped God the supreme who is beyond the material with full faith, full confidence, and rejection of intellectual doubt you would have had different results.

Right tool, right job, right application.
More...
 
Quote from axeman:

Just how do you suppose anyone is supposed to detect
the immaterial with material senses?

peace

axeman
More...

Someone cannot detect with the intellect and the 5 material senses that which is beyond the senses, but they can detect with full and perfect faith.

Because you failed at faith, made a conscious decision to trust in the doubting nature of the intellect, you lack the experience of proof that others have.

Just as the man who would not eat a particular food until he had proof of its taste first, the intellect requires proof before faith, yet faith is the means of proof for that which is not limted by sense and intellect. Faith accepts, the intellect rejects, different natures of the mind.

No wonder the intellectuals when they apply their senses and limited relativistic logic only become so confused.
 
The only person confused here is you, that is clear.

You appeal to faith as a means to discover the unproven non-material.

Yet, faith is nothing more than a blind belief.

You have not proven faith to be worth anything in any way.

There are probably millions of people in the world who
"FAITH" something that contradicts the supposed knowledge
you have also acquired through faith.

This proves, beyond any doubt, just how completely
flawed this ridiculous system of knowing absolutely ANYTHING is.

The only defense you have been able to provide so far
is that THEY are wrong because of a misapplication of faith,
thereby implying that you are RIGHT.

Talk about pompous :D

Fact is.... you have given no rational man anything even
resembling the tiniest of reasons to accept faith as
anything beyond pure superstition and fantasy.

If you have nothing else to offer than basically: "I know im
correct because im the only person who can correctly use faith",
then there really is no further point in discussing this.

You simply BELIEVE, all reason aside.

I on the other hand, REJECT such unsubstantiated fantasies.

peace

axeman

Quote from ARogueTrader:



Someone cannot detect with the intellect and the 5 material senses that which is beyond the senses, but they can detect with full and perfect faith.

Because you failed at faith, made a conscious decision to trust in the doubting nature of the intellect, you lack the experience of proof that others have.

Just as the man who would not eat a particular food until he had proof of its taste first, the intellect requires proof before faith, yet faith is the means of proof for that which is not limited by sense and intellect. Faith accepts, the intellect rejects, different natures of the mind.

No wonder the intellectuals when they apply their senses and limited relativistic logic only become so confused.
More...
 
Quote from axeman:

The only person confused here is you, that is clear.

You appeal to faith as a means to discover the unproven non-material.

Yet, faith is nothing more than a blind belief.

You have not proven faith to be worth anything in any way.

There are probably millions of people in the world who
"FAITH" something that contradicts the supposed knowledge
you have also acquired through faith.

This proves, beyond any doubt, just how completely
flawed this ridiculous system of knowing absolutely ANYTHING is.

The only defense you have been able to provide so far
is that THEY are wrong because of a misapplication of faith,
thereby implying that you are RIGHT.

Talk about pompous :D

Fact is.... you have given no rational man anything even
resembling the tiniest of reasons to accept faith as
anything beyond pure superstition and fantasy.

If you have nothing else to offer than basically: "I know im
correct because im the only person who can correctly use faith",
then there really is no further point in discussing this.

You simply BELIEVE, all reason aside.

I on the other hand, REJECT such unsubstantiated fantasies.

peace

axeman
More...

Pompous is the assumption that "I am not, nor can I be wrong."

You assume you did not fail in the practice of faith.

You assume that limited relativistic logic and 5 limited senses would be the correct tools to evaluate the existence of that which is absolute, and not relative in nature.

The physical senses are wholly dependent on the human mind and body, which is not absolute in nature, but subject to changes. During each and every day, most people experience 3 distinct realities, waking, dreaming, and sleeping.

People choose the waking state of mind as reflective of "reality" but that decision is made in the waking state of mind.

Completely circular logic.

From these basic proof-less assumptions, belief systems are generated, and projected as some kind of proof beyond question.

When a proof depends on the tools used for proof to constitute proof, there is no check against that proof, nothing independent or separate to evaluate the consistencies.

You failed at the practice of faith in God, it was a conscious decision. You had alternative choices.

Yet, you claim to be able to sit in judgment of those who did not give into their intellectual doubts, and deem they to be incorrect in their own experiences of what is real in their lives, and what constitutes fact.

Your scientific philosophy can be rejected just as easily, as it rests on faith of perception, and faith in the intellect as delivering a vision of truth.

Truth doesn't change by definition, yet the intellect and sense change all the time. The rules of logic continue to remain, but as human beings gain different perspective, their conclusions change.

You have chosen to have a fixed relativistic perspective, and formulate assumptions accordingly, which is a choice, but hardly a proof.

Just like you can program a computer to process any program, a program can be free of bugs (logic fallacy) and follow the rules (logical reasoning process) of computing, but have nothing to do with the reality of human experience.

Those who limit themselves to relativistic logic and the 5 physical senses are limiting life to only those tools.....and we all know man is much more than physical senses and intellect.

I have never met a person who functions completely like a computer. They may try, but their emotions, feeling, and humanity will betray their attempt to control life over the course of time.

Humanity is much more than reason and sense, and God which is the supreme absolute intelligence, absolute heart, and absolute soul in which man is in the image is beyond relativistic logic and 5 limited senses.

People are free to choose what they want.

They can be content with limitations in life, or they can seek more.

The well does not go to the thirsty.
 
"Pompous is the assumption that "I am not, nor can I be wrong."

Which is precisely what most theologians state.
God exists PERIOD.

Science freely admits it can be wrong, has been wrong,
and even has a built in mechanism for self correction.

Thanks for making it clear which side is truly pompous :D


"You assume you did not fail in the practice of faith."

Nonsense. I freely admit faith did not work for me.

As for the rest of your post..... you continue to SKIP
the fact that your FAITH based beliefs are completely
unsupported fictions full of huge glaring contradictions,
which support an immaterial god, which you have never
shown to exist or even proven to be immaterial.
You cant even prove the immaterial exists.

You haven't given us any proof that the immaterial exists.
You haven't given us any proof that the immaterial is detectable.
You haven't given us any explanation why faith fails so
completely in so many ways with so many contradictory outcomes.
You haven't given us any proof of a single monotheistic god.
You haven't given us any proof of any god.
You haven't given us any proof, period.


I might as well believe in witch doctor visions, Mrs Cleo,
and native american animal spirit talk. They can justify their
beliefs just as well as you can, through faith.

Might as well believe in anyone who has "faith" in whatever
supernatural claim they present.
Your faith clearly allows you to believe whatever makes you
feel good. Thats fine... but personally, I rather believe in
something I can fully support, and reject mythologies
based on internal feelings alone.


Well.... since you haven't provided us with any new, or any
reasons at all, to believe in such fictions... ill leave it up
to the individual to decide.

The intellectually honest and rational person pretty much has
to choose to reject faith along with all other human created supersitions.

peace

axeman
 
Quote from axeman:



"You haven't given us any proof that the immaterial exists."

If the proof of the material is by material means alone, that means that the proof is circular.

"You haven't given us any proof that the immaterial is detectable."

The material is only detectable by materials means, there is no objective or independent check on this, therefore the conclusions cannot be checked against anything that is independent and impartial.

Materialism is an assumption of ultimate reality and truth, lacking anything beyond human experience, which is subjective.

"You haven't given us any explanation why faith fails so
completely in so many ways with so many contradictory outcomes."

Right tool, right job, right application=success.

Wrong tool, wrong job, wrong application=failure.


You haven't given us any proof of a single monotheistic god.

Show me something greater than the greatest.

You haven't given us any proof of any god.

Proof of God is beyond material intellect and senses.

You haven't given us any proof, period.

I have proved you failed with your practice of faith.


I might as well believe in witch doctor visions, Mrs Cleo,
and native american animal spirit talk. They can justify their
beliefs just as well as you can, through faith.

If you believe witch doctors, Miss Cleo, etc. have all the qualities and characteristics as supreme God, you will achieve supreme God in due course of time if your faith is perfect.

Might as well believe in anyone who has "faith" in whatever
supernatural claim they present.

Supernatural is not necessarily supreme.


Your faith clearly allows you to believe whatever makes you
feel good.

The supreme good feeling is the goal, and the supreme God is the source of that good feeling.

Thats fine... but personally, I rather believe in
something I can fully support, and reject mythologies
based on internal feelings alone.

You are free to reject whatever you like, it is part of human nature to made decisions.


Well.... since you haven't provided us with any new, or any
reasons at all, to believe in such fictions... ill leave it up
to the individual to decide.

You can call something fiction, but it doesn't make it so. I am unable to provide anything new about supreme God, as He is not new.

It is, was, and always will be up to the individual what choices they make in life.
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top