OT from how to turn a believer

[jfoldbar]

12 hours ago, mikeco said:

It would seem that you were not brought up a Christian. But that you were brought up with Christian beliefs. A Christian does not think about believing that Christ exists, for they KNOW he exists. Do you think about believing that your parents exist or do you know they exist? Same thing. A Christian can however, out of anger or the cares or pleasures of this world, turn from following Christ. But they can never deny his existence because, they know. He has made himself real to them in a way that is impossible for others to grasp unless they also know him. It would seem that you may have believed in him but never knew him. The good news is, there's still time.

Some scientific beliefs are correct and some are not. And that's why it doesn't work for everyone because those who know, know that the error is not with them but with that which denies Christ.

If this is preaching...my apologies. Just trying to answer the question of "why it doesn't work for everyone."

"knowing" christ exists and "knowing" your parents exist are 2 different things. we can see,hear,touch our parents. this can not be done with christ. please dont confuse "knowing" something and " believing" something.

perhaps someone with more science knowledge can confirm this. but i would consider that there is no such thing as a scientific belief. there are facts,theories, and then a long list of things we dont know yet. but no belief.

Edited September 15, 2017 by jfoldbar

[mikeco]

10 hours ago, jfoldbar said:

"knowing" christ exists and "knowing" your parents exist are 2 different things. we can see,hear,touch our parents. this can not be done with christ. please dont confuse "knowing" something and " believing" something.

 

That's the point I was trying to make...to people who truly know Christ...they aren't 2 different things. But the people who only think they know Christ and who think they are Christians will not understand this. For it is impossible to not know that Christ exists, IF you know him and he has revealed himself to you. Hence, there is no confusion to those who are truly Christians.

The problem is that millions THINK they are Christians but they do not really know that Christ exists. They only believe that he does and are afraid to admit that they do not know for sure. Thus they replace him with religion or patriotism or saving the whales or any number of other things, trying to find meaning in their lives, and trying not to confront the fact that they are not sure. You have been willing to admit that you're not sure, and that's a good thing. The question before you now, is whether you really want to follow him long enough to find out that he exists, or whether you don't.

But to those who know him and not just believe, that's "why it doesn't work for everyone", for how does one "unknow" someone they know?

Edited September 15, 2017 by mikeco

[MigL]

According to Mikeco, there are Christians, and those who are simply deluding themselves.

I was born in Italy, where everyone is a Roman Catholic ( at least they were in the 60s ).
I have practiced it in the past ( and have the sacraments of baptism, communion and confirmation ), but did not have to study science, or think about it much, to realize that I had no need for it. It simply became a redundant part of life for me, so, much like the aether in Relativity, I discarded it as useless.

However I have known some very critical thinkers who have gone the other way, and found religion later in life. Usually after realizing their life was in a downward spiral, or suffering some great trauma in their family life. One gorgeous, black girl that I had such a crush on, back in high school, recently moved back into town after her husband died of cancer, but I avoid her like the plague because she's constantly preaching. Another acquaintance lost a daughter in an automobile accident, and now he attends mass regularly.

These people are seeking answers, and hope, that science simply cannot provide.
My thinking is that they are simply grasping at straws, much like a cancer sufferer who undergoes unproven/unorthodox treatment because they are afraid.
Do I begrudge their need for a 'crutch' ? Of course not.
It is not a case of being scientific OR being religious.
The two are based on two totally different concepts, belief in one case, and evidence on the other.
( I'll leave it to you to decide which is which )

 

[beecee]

18 minutes ago, MigL said:

According to Mikeco, there are Christians, and those who are simply deluding themselves.

I was born in Italy, where everyone is a Roman Catholic ( at least they were in the 60s ).
I have practiced it in the past ( and have the sacraments of baptism, communion and confirmation ), but did not have to study science, or think about it much, to realize that I had no need for it. It simply became a redundant part of life for me, so, much like the aether in Relativity, I discarded it as useless.

However I have known some very critical thinkers who have gone the other way, and found religion later in life. Usually after realizing their life was in a downward spiral, or suffering some great trauma in their family life. One gorgeous, black girl that I had such a crush on, back in high school, recently moved back into town after her husband died of cancer, but I avoid her like the plague because she's constantly preaching. Another acquaintance lost a daughter in an automobile accident, and now he attends mass regularly.

These people are seeking answers, and hope, that science simply cannot provide.
My thinking is that they are simply grasping at straws, much like a cancer sufferer who undergoes unproven/unorthodox treatment because they are afraid.
Do I begrudge their need for a 'crutch' ? Of course not.
It is not a case of being scientific OR being religious.
The two are based on two totally different concepts, belief in one case, and evidence on the other.
( I'll leave it to you to decide which is which )

 

I was born an Australian Catholic, although I have not checked in recent times re any possible excommunication. 

The text in your post I highlighted does though conform with my total way of thinking. I used the analogy the other day in a post, (forget where) like a child refusing to let go of his Teddy bear. My Mrs is a true Christian in every sense of what that should entail...kind, generous, tolerant, (after all she has put up with me for 42 years!) and would give her right arm to help someone in dire need or stress...sometimes to a fault. I never ever attempt to change her mind:she never ever attempts to change mine, although probably once every year at Xmas she will ask me to accompany her to church.  My Son, obviously now a full blown adult, is tending to my way of thinking, but like me, tolerates his Mother, and appreciates the extreme goodness in her, despite the crutch she leans on.

Edited September 15, 2017 by beecee

[MigL]

Tolerance...
It's a beautiful thing.

[jfoldbar]

mikeco.

could you please explain how one can "know" someone or something as you claim.

"knowing" something means it can be proven beyond doubt. if you have such proof of god/jesus then perhaps you could share your proof to the rest of the world, and end all the confusion.

[mikeco]

7 hours ago, jfoldbar said:

mikeco.

could you please explain how one can "know" someone or something as you claim.

"knowing" something means it can be proven beyond doubt. if you have such proof of god/jesus then perhaps you could share your proof to the rest of the world, and end all the confusion.

I see it a bit differently. Knowing something does not necessarily mean that it can be proven beyond doubt but that it has been proven beyond doubt. And to me, the existence of Jesus Christ has been proven beyond a doubt.

Do I have such proof? It certainly is proof enough for me, for Christ makes himself known to people in different ways. But the question for you would seem to be, do you want proof and are you willing to follow Christ if he provides it? Most people just want the proof, but God only provides it to those who will follow him.

For example, there is a question that the world has wondered about for ages. As a follower of God, I knew that he was the only one who had the answer. So I decided to ask him, not for proof that he existed, because I already knew that, but because I wanted to know the answer to the question. But I didn't hear a thing. I kept praying 2 times a day for months, and still no answer. I finally decided that I would keep praying until one of two things happened; either God would tell me the answer or I died, whichever came first. After about two and a half years of praying twice a day about this particular thing, God gave me the answer. He does not give up his secrets easily but his secrets are amazing.

So if proof from God is what you want, then you must ask and not give up.

19 hours ago, MigL said:

According to Mikeco, there are Christians, and those who are simply deluding themselves.

 

 

And of course there are people like you and beecee who have decided for one reason or another that Christ simply isn't real.

Tolerance is indeed a beautiful thing...well put.

[Itoero]

1 hour ago, mikeco said:

see it a bit differently. Knowing something does not necessarily mean that it can be proven beyond doubt but that it has been proven beyond doubt. And to me, the existence of Jesus Christ has been proven beyond a doubt.

The existence of Jesus Christ? I thought Scotty beamed him up a long time ago. Don't you think it's odd that many Christians believe in different things which they all think are proven beyond doubt? Why doesn't your god make the evidence for his existence  scientifically provable to form global 'religious' equality? Does your god like all the pointless killings due to religious inequality? If a theistic religion get's scientifically proven it's of course not a 'religion' anymore.

 

[beecee]

3 hours ago, mikeco said:

And of course there are people like you and beecee who have decided for one reason or another that Christ simply isn't real.

Tolerance is indeed a beautiful thing...well put.

There are many reasons why I see Christ in the biblical sense as just another myth. One being of course the power of scientific explanation/s and the universe, the other being the state of the world today and in the past and how any self respecting God or any form of IDer can leave things continue or even allow the obvious injustices and cruelty.

[toolsoftrust]

On 5/2/2017 at 0:12 AM, jfoldbar said:

i was bought up a christian. went my own way in my early 20's. now i am completely neutral simply cause 'the jurys still out'.

i tend to lean towards science because i like the thought of something that can be proven rather than just believed. for me, logic overrules feelings.

something i sometimes wonder. for me to turn from a strong believer to on the fence, all i had to do was simply read the other side of the story. hear both arguments. why doesnt that work for everyone?

 

sometimes i find things like this

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211511/Why-born-believe-God-Its-wired-brain-says-psychologist.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-people-fly-from-facts/

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ulterior-motives/201107/you-end-believing-what-you-want-believe

 

there are so many studies showing that humans generally just believe something or not. and usually if you believe it then no amount of proof will change your belief.

 

so i guess a few things i wonder are. while i was raised a christian and know the bible, how do i know i was not pre wired to believe science and so was easily turned away from my belief. how do we keep ourselfs honest, given that we are all human, and so are all susceptible to believe either way.

 

if i could turn so easily, why cant another person with the same'facts' that turned me. surely a fact is a fact regardless of who the learner or those facts are.

 

 

are there people out there who have a strong science background, and have suddenly ditched that to believe in god

The problem with so-called "facts," in science, is that science is a community, that jointly accepts *evidence* (not proof), as fact; the only facts that are truly proven, are events having already occurred.  

For example, there's no guarantee that any certain community will not be attacked tomorrow.  Yet if a national informer were to report to a primary officer of such planned attack, it would be considered strongly.  Such tactics are wise, and based on knowing.  Yet the scientific community does not ever take human testimony as evidence, because evidence isn't proof.  If a trusted friend told you about covert plans against you by a known enemy, you would accept his testimony.  But you dismiss any testimony about Jesus.

Edited September 16, 2017 by toolsoftrust

[mikeco]

5 hours ago, Itoero said:

The existence of Jesus Christ? I thought Scotty beamed him up a long time ago. Don't you think it's odd that many Christians believe in different things which they all think are proven beyond doubt? Why doesn't your god make the evidence for his existence  scientifically provable to form global 'religious' equality? Does your god like all the pointless killings due to religious inequality? If a theistic religion get's scientifically proven it's of course not a 'religion' anymore.

 

I'm not sure I can answer all those without straying too far from the original question in this thread, but I'll try.

All Christians agree that one must receive Christ and his Spirit in order to even begin to follow him. Beyond that, yes there are disagreements and a lot of them. But I don't think it's odd. God could have made everything perfectly clear but I believe the reason he didn't was because he wanted Christians to learn to mature. And there's no better way to do that, than to have people learn to overcome their pride, by discussing their differences. PRIDE is the problem of the human race, especially Christians, and has been from the very beginning. If God had made everything clear, then there would be no opportunity for people to humble themselves and learn to overcome their pride by learning to accept another person's point of view. God didn't make things confusing. He simply left some things rather vague...for a purpose. Unfortunately, Christians in America seem to be arguing more than ever. Disagreements are fine but arguing involves pride.

 

"Why doesn't your god make the evidence for his existence scientifically provable to form global 'religious' equality?"

Christ did miracles, yet there were countless people who were unwilling to follow him. Miracles also take place today, but I suppose what you're really asking is why God doesn't make his existence known beyond doubt. I suspect the reason is twofold. First, not one person would follow him who was not already willing to do so. Ask yourself, would you be willing to receive Christ and follow him if he made himself known to you? If you hesitate to say yes, then the problem is not one of proof but of willingness. Second, if God were to reveal himself beyond doubt, then those who are unwilling to receive him would be held more accountable for that truth.

 

Killings in the name of religion and pretty much everything else take place because of pride. To really understand this, one would need to understand God's definition of pride, but that would probably be be too far off topic for this thread.

[mikeco]

8 hours ago, beecee said:

There are many reasons why I see Christ in the biblical sense as just another myth. One being of course the power of scientific explanation/s and the universe, the other being the state of the world today and in the past and how any self respecting God or any form of IDer can leave things continue or even allow the obvious injustices and cruelty.

 

 

From reading about your relationship with your wife, you seem to be a man of understanding and wisdom. Yet I wonder, if Christ were to reveal himself beyond doubt, would you receive him and follow him? I suspect probably not, and if that is the case, then the issue would not seem to be one of scientific proof, but of willingness.

 

I do not understand why God would allow a world such as this. He didn't create it this way, yet the only way for him to have ensured absolute peace, would have been to create us without a free will, and hence pride would never have been an issue. We then would have been zombies. Happy zombies, but zombies nevertheless. I sometimes wonder if that wouldn't have been preferable to the horrific cruelty in this world that pride has brought about. But it would have been against God's nature for him to deny us free will. 

[swansont]

On 9/15/2017 at 6:10 AM, jfoldbar said:

"knowing" christ exists and "knowing" your parents exist are 2 different things. we can see,hear,touch our parents. this can not be done with christ. please dont confuse "knowing" something and " believing" something.

perhaps someone with more science knowledge can confirm this. but i would consider that there is no such thing as a scientific belief. there are facts,theories, and then a long list of things we dont know yet. but no belief.

Words often have more than one meaning. "belief" is one of them

9 hours ago, toolsoftrust said:

The problem with so-called "facts," in science, is that science is a community, that jointly accepts *evidence* (not proof), as fact; the only facts that are truly proven, are events having already occurred.  

For example, there's no guarantee that any certain community will not be attacked tomorrow.  Yet if a national informer were to report to a primary officer of such planned attack, it would be considered strongly.  Such tactics are wise, and based on knowing.  Yet the scientific community does not ever take human testimony as evidence, because evidence isn't proof.  If a trusted friend told you about covert plans against you by a known enemy, you would accept his testimony.  But you dismiss any testimony about Jesus.

Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. Memory is malleable.

It's also untrue that "the scientific community does not ever take human testimony as evidence". Plenty of science, especially biology, uses human description. There are population counts done by humans. Testimony is frowned upon, though, in the many cases where instrumentation is more reliable.

[DrP]

On 9/15/2017 at 8:58 PM, mikeco said:

But to those who know him and not just believe, that's "why it doesn't work for everyone", for how does one "unknow" someone they know?

They realise that they have been deluded, making excuse after excuse for a god that doesn't exist. They realise that they have fooled themselves in a kind of self hypnotic way to believe something that is clearly not true. They realise that they have been believing out of fear of punishment for unbelief or becuase so many others around them believed it. Hopefully then they forgive them selves for this apparent stupidity and backward thinking using the skills they learnt from christianity about love, mercy and grace. They move on, drop Dumbo's feather and continue to fly.

 

 

3 hours ago, mikeco said:

Yet I wonder, if Christ were to reveal himself beyond doubt, would you receive him and follow him?

Every case of every person claiming revelation beyond doubt is a case of delusion. There has never been a case where someone claims evidence of god where that evidence cannot be explained in some other natural manner.

Baptism in the Holy Ghost?  Not proof of god  - there are clear physical, emotional and psychological explanations.

'Feeling his presence? - again - emotional.

Wonder at the universe?  -  Explained by the numinous everyone feels when overwhelmed by the vastness of the beauty of the universe and the realisation of how small we are.

Miracles?  -  never a single case of one being proven out side the realm of probability and co-incidence. They all seem to be shit ones anyway...  where are the seeing blind or the lame that now walk?....  there are none - other than the ones that have been cured by medical science.

 

What other 'proof' have you got?  You are probably basing your whole faith on a delusion  -  lets hear your evidence for the being....  you probably are confusing evidence for some inner feeling or some crazy stream of coincidences which you have misread as a sign from god. This is usually accompanied by some confirmation bias on the part of the deludee. Seriously - what do you have other than wishful thinking, self hypnosis, error and misjudgement? Don't live your life in fear of punishment for allowing yourself clear rational thought - it is a shit place to be in. 

 

[mikeco]

7 hours ago, DrP said:

They realise that they have been deluded, making excuse after excuse for a god that doesn't exist. They realise that they have fooled themselves in a kind of self hypnotic way to believe something that is clearly not true. They realise that they have been believing out of fear of punishment for unbelief or becuase so many others around them believed it. Hopefully then they forgive them selves for this apparent stupidity and backward thinking using the skills they learnt from christianity about love, mercy and grace. They move on, drop Dumbo's feather and continue to fly.

 

 

Every case of every person claiming revelation beyond doubt is a case of delusion. There has never been a case where someone claims evidence of god where that evidence cannot be explained in some other natural manner.

Baptism in the Holy Ghost?  Not proof of god  - there are clear physical, emotional and psychological explanations.

'Feeling his presence? - again - emotional.

Wonder at the universe?  -  Explained by the numinous everyone feels when overwhelmed by the vastness of the beauty of the universe and the realisation of how small we are.

Miracles?  -  never a single case of one being proven out side the realm of probability and co-incidence. They all seem to be shit ones anyway...  where are the seeing blind or the lame that now walk?....  there are none - other than the ones that have been cured by medical science.

 

What other 'proof' have you got?  You are probably basing your whole faith on a delusion  -  lets hear your evidence for the being....  you probably are confusing evidence for some inner feeling or some crazy stream of coincidences which you have misread as a sign from god. This is usually accompanied by some confirmation bias on the part of the deludee. Seriously - what do you have other than wishful thinking, self hypnosis, error and misjudgement? Don't live your life in fear of punishment for allowing yourself clear rational thought - it is a shit place to be in. 

 

Christ said his followers would hear him and he sometimes speaks amazing things. Things that no other person knows.

 But you and I disagree and I am content to leave it at that. Best regards.

Edited September 17, 2017 by mikeco

[Strange]

1 hour ago, mikeco said:

Christ said his followers would hear him and he sometimes speaks amazing things. Things that no other person knows.

That should make it possible to test. Get him to to tell us something no one else knows and we can then check if it is correct. (It needs to be something testable, though. Maybe the winning lottery numbers for the rest of the year....)

[jfoldbar]

mikeco.

the way you describe that you truly 'know' god/jesus by simply believing in him more than another cristian who doesnt really know christ, also fits with any and all other belief that humans may have. 

for example.

if both me and my friend believe in the easter bunny but later he doesnt believe in the easter bunny and i still do, that would mean, according to your description,  that i have proof enough for me that the easter bunny is real, therefore making it so. and since he didnt truly 'know' the easter bunny is real then it was easier for him to lose faith in the bunnys existance.

 

 

[mikeco]

10 hours ago, jfoldbar said:

mikeco.

the way you describe that you truly 'know' god/jesus by simply believing in him more than another cristian who doesnt really know christ, also fits with any and all other belief that humans may have. 

for example.

if both me and my friend believe in the easter bunny but later he doesnt believe in the easter bunny and i still do, that would mean, according to your description,  that i have proof enough for me that the easter bunny is real, therefore making it so. and since he didnt truly 'know' the easter bunny is real then it was easier for him to lose faith in the bunnys existance.

 

 

If you re-read my comments, you will see that they are about knowing that Christ EXISTS, not about knowing Christ better than someone else, or about believing in him more than someone else. And the reason I know Christ exists, is because he has revealed his existence to me. He has done the same for millions of other Christians and that is why we know he's alive because he has made himself known to us, not because we have a "deeper, special" kind of belief. When Christ makes himself known, it no longer has anything to do with belief.

I have however, known followers of Christ, who had not experienced Christ's existence. I don't know why they hadn't and perhaps that was the situation you found yourself in. But I do know that a person will not experience the existence of God, if they stop seeking him.

From your comment, if you believe in the Easter bunny, then the question is, what did the Easter bunny do to make its existence known to you? Or do you simply believe in the Easter bunny? Your friend appears to simply have a belief in the Easter bunny's existence, without ever having had the Easter bunny make itself known to him. Hence, it would be easy for your friend to no longer believe.

If you have a "deeper" belief than your friend but still have never had the Easter bunny make itself known to you, then you also may eventually choose to no longer believe, just like your friend.

But of course, we're not really talking about an Easter bunny. The question is, are you willing to seek Christ until he makes himself known to you? If not, is it because you don't really want to know that he exists? 

Edited September 18, 2017 by mikeco

[MigL]

A '"deeper, special" kind of belief'...

The first step is convincing yourself 'you' are special.
Then the next step on the road to religious bigotry, is that other's beliefs are not.
And then it becomes very easy to abuse them and their beliefs.

Welcome back to the dark/middle ages.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mikeco]

12 minutes ago, MigL said:

A '"deeper, special" kind of belief'...

The first step is convincing yourself 'you' are special.
Then the next step on the road to religious bigotry, is that other's beliefs are not.
And then it becomes very easy to abuse them and their beliefs.

Welcome back to the dark/middle ages.

 

My original comment however will show that it's not about being special, or a "deeper, special" kind of belief.

Edited September 18, 2017 by mikeco

[jfoldbar]

if i want easter eggs, and i get easter eggs, this is proof for me the easter bunny is real. this is not a belief but proof.

whats the difference?

[Area54]

55 minutes ago, jfoldbar said:

if i want easter eggs, and i get easter eggs, this is proof for me the easter bunny is real. this is not a belief but proof.

whats the difference?

We know there are many alternative methods of producing Easter eggs. For one thing we can visit a factory that manufactures them.

Your desire for Easter eggs and the subsequent success in obtaining them is proof that they exist, not how they are produced.

[DrP]

On ‎17‎/‎09‎/‎2017 at 3:58 PM, mikeco said:

Christ said his followers would hear him and he sometimes speaks amazing things. Things that no other person knows.

....and Rumplestiltskin said that if you guess his name he'd disappear..  so what? It's a line in an old fictional book.

On ‎17‎/‎09‎/‎2017 at 3:58 PM, mikeco said:

 But you and I disagree and I am content to leave it at that. Best regards.

We disagree on what?  What constitutes evidence for something being real? A warm fuzzy feeling in your heart is not evidence of anything external being real  -  it is well explained through psychology. Be honest to yourself - what actual evidence do you have?

 

[jfoldbar]

9 hours ago, Area54 said:

We know there are many alternative methods of producing Easter eggs. For one thing we can visit a factory that manufactures them.

Your desire for Easter eggs and the subsequent success in obtaining them is proof that they exist, not how they are produced.

and we know there are perfectly logical explanations for the things that people claim are proof of god. that doesnt stop people ignoring those and still choosing the god.

just like i can ignore that the most likely explanation for getting easter eggs was my parents when i wasnt looking, and choose to believe that it was a mythical easter bunny. cause that makes me feel good.

 

as drp just said. a warm fuzzy feeling in your heart doesnt constitute proof that what you believe happened, actually did happen. and you are lying to yourself if you try to make it so.

[mikeco]

On 9/19/2017 at 2:54 PM, jfoldbar said:

as drp just said. a warm fuzzy feeling in your heart doesnt constitute proof that what you believe happened, actually did happen. and you are lying to yourself if you try to make it so.

I certainly don't disagree, and if you re-read my comments, you will see that I never said that it does.