I plan to add some commentary to this post at a later time, but thought that I would immediately share it here at Talk Wisdom so that readers can see the ridiculous nature of man's concept regarding the religion (after all...it is a belief...isn't it?) known as Atheism.
Update: Sometimes it pays to wait to complete a blog post. Note the two drastically different comments already posted.
Even better, see Protein Wisdom's latest post!
In case you missed my previous post, please see The Christian Concept Of Servant Hood where there is an interesting discussion going on in the comment section. This current post is actually a continuation of what my friend Steve said there:
"I think GM's comment was well thought out and typical of someone who has a problem accepting the thought that there is something smarter and much more powerful than men, but that's understandable."The atheism description above reiterate's Steve's point that atheists/agnostics/skeptics often have "a problem accepting the thought that there is something smarter and much more powerful than men."
Several days ago, I was reading Dr. David Jeremiah's September issue of Turning Points. Within the commentary about "What's Controlling You?", was the following information:
The Greatest Natural StrengthLet's hold up there for a moment.
Think about how important "control" is. I don't mean the negative dimension of being a controlling person, I mean self-control--the ability to resist impulses and temptations and accomplish only those things that are true, noble, just, pure, lovely, of good report, virtuous, and praiseworthy (Philippians 4:8). It's no wonder that Roy F. Baumeister and John Tierney, in their new book Willpower: Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength, cite research indicating that "most major problems, personal and social, center on failure of self-control: compulsive spending and borrowing, impulsive violence, underachievement in school, procrastination at work, alcohol and drug abuse, unhealthy diet, lack of exercise, chronic anxiety, explosive anger. [Note from Christine - Hey! That sounds like much of what the Democratic National Committee and their zombie members follow in their platform!!] Poor self-control correlates with just about every kind of individual trauma: losing friends, being fired, getting divorced, winding up in prison." 1
So why don't we just exercise more restraint and develop greater self-control? It's obviously not that easy because there are many other powers at work in the world that seek to control, or at least strongly influence, our thinking and thus our behavior. The media seeks to shape our opinions and thus our behavior. Substances can gain control of our mind and behavior through addiction and altering of our physiology. Controlling and devious people seek to influence the thinking and behavior of the naive, immature, and the uninformed. [Christine: Democrats!!] Political platforms seek to control how we vote. [Time out for a moment. Need a glaring example of lies, half truths, misinformation and seeking to control how people vote? See the following blog post about Clinton's speech last night!
Mr. Bill: 'Who You Gonna Believe, Me Or Your Lying Eyes'?
When a bull or a bucking bronc rider at a rodeo gets thrown from the saddle, out comes the rodeo clown to distract both the animal and the audience while the fallen rider is pulled to safety. Bill Clinton's speech last night was something like that. More ]
Back to the article.
Philosophical worldviews seek to change how we view the world. And most important, our fallen human nature has powerful desires of its own that lead us toward ungodliness. [Christine: Atheism is just one example!]
Question.
IF IT IS POSSIBLE NOT TO BE CONTROLLED BY ANYONE OR ANYTHING IN THIS WORLD, WHAT IS THE SECRET?
Any of these controlling powers that do not influence us in the direction of Christ-likeness and the values of the kingdom of God are from one and the same source: Satan. "The whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one" (1 John 5:19b). Satan knows that if he can influence and ultimately control the thinking of any human being, he can keep that person from ever displaying the image of God on earth through a life of peace, joy, and fellowship with the Creator-God of Scripture.
With all of the turmoil going on in the world today, how is it possible to still have a life of peace and joy? The answer is through fellowship with the Creator-God of Scripture. Countless times, we have seen brave people who have lost almost every material thing they owned through fire, hurricanes, and/or floods but still have the grateful spirit to God for keeping them safe and saving their loved ones.
Even those who lost family members and friends on 9/11 still remain faithful to God because of Christ's promises.
We all lose loved ones. Everyone dies a physical death. It is only a matter of when. Those who live by faith and not by sight are blessed by the God of the Bible because even though they may not have seen or touched the wounds of Christ (like doubting Thomas did), they STILL BELIEVE. Jesus said of Thomas, "you believe because you have seen me. Blessed are those who have not seen, yet believe."
Back to the Turning Point article:
Researchers like Baumeister and Tierney do us a favor by pointing out how powerful and critical self-control is. But here's the problem from a biblical point of view: If the lack of self-control is due to fallen (sinful) human nature, won't it take something stronger than fallen human nature to fix it?
GREAT QUESTION!!!
THE GREATER SUPERNATURAL STRENGTH
The apostle James gives us the anatomy of sin--the life cycle of sin, if you will: "Let no one say when he is tempted, 'I am tempted by '; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed" (James 1:13-14).
What is the first step? It is being "drawn away...and enticed," either by our "own desires"--the desires of our flesh--or by influences of other controlling powers around us. What we need is a power greater than the power of our flesh or the power of Satan who uses the systems of this world to entice us away from God. And clearly, Christians have such a power:
* Romans 6:14: "For sin shall not have dominion [power] over you, for you are not under law but under grace."
* 1 Corinthians 6:12: "All things are lawful for me, but all things are not helpful. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any." When Paul says"all things are lawful," he clearly does not include things that are sinful. Rather, he means choices that are not sinful but are still not wise, choices that represent the good or better in life but not the best. Our goal in life should be to live exactly as Christ lived--doing only what the Father led Him to do (John 5:19, 6:38; 8:28, 12:49).
Tall order...isn't it? However, it is a description of the sanctification process (which lasts our entire lives) that we go through to continue to grow and become more Christ-like each day.
If it is possible not to be controlled by anyone or anything in this world, what is the secret? How do we remain close to our Commander, giving up our personal desires and control into His leading so as to live a "defended" life, protected from the powers seeking to control us?
The answer is clear: the power of the Holy Spirit. Galatians 5:22-23 says, "But the fruit of the Spirit is...self-control." Note: Self-control is the fruit of the Holy Spirit, not the fruit of our intelligence, our willpower, our resolve, our determination, or our strength. Yes, those play a part--the Holy Spirit strengthens and empowers our intelligence, willpower, resolve, determination, and strength. But the power comes from Him, not us!
So how do we stay empowered by the Spirit?
*First, if you are a Christian, the Holy Spirit dwells in you (Acts 2:38).
*Second, don't grieve (Ephesians 4:30) or quench (1 Thessalonians 5:19) the Spirit by disobeying or resisting the will of God.
* Third, confess your sins as soon as you are aware of them (1 John 1:9).
* Finally, ask the Holy Spirit to fill you afresh with His presence--the very power and purpose of the Lord Jesus Christ (Ephesians 5:18).
In Master and Commander (the movie), from the cabin boy to the first mate, all aboard the HMS Surprise followed the lead of their captain. In the movie, the captain was referred to as "Lucky Jack," but in reality he was the master of that ship not because he was lucky--he was the master because he had the knowledge and wisdom to be in command. For us as Christians, we don't live by luck either. If you remain empowered by the Spirit, giving mastery to our Lord and Savior, He will protect and guide you. You will be under the control of no one and nothing except the Lord Jesus Christ, your true Master and Commander.
Hat tip: Turning Points Magazine and Devotional, September 2012, pp. 17-19.
1 Roy F. Baumeister and John Tierney, Willpower: Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength (New York: The Penguin Press, 2011), 2.
Posts
24 comments:
Heh heh! Good one Christine and give "hubby" a two thumbs up from me for this one.
I find it amazing the denial of even "intelligent design" by unbelievers. As complicated and perfectly balanced the universe and everything in it is ... it could never come together by chance.
I use one analogy: If I had all the parts to a watch in a bag and shook it up then dumped them out on a table, how many times would I have to do it before all the parts fit together? And if they finally all did come together what would wind it? A watch is complex ... but nothing like the workings of the universe and the creation of life itself. Then consider creation of the eternal soul ...
Atheists will mock such a simple explantion, but it's the simple things that confound the wise.
Such a strawman, hostess! You imply that atheists have no belief at all. Atheists have many beliefs; gods and the supernatural aren't among them, that's all.
It's nota religion. We have no popes, no pastors, no imams. We have no holy books that one MUST read in order to be part of “the Collective”. We don't feel the need to 'confess' to something we're not guilty of. We don't have special buildings where everyone goes once a week to compare clothing. None of us get special parking privileges or tax exemptions.
But we do like to deal with facts, not fantasy, and most of us that the universe as we see it is so marvelous that there is no need to complicate it with unnecessary, unnatural things.
”CHRISTIANITY: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
...Yeah, makes perfect sense.”
Does it matter what we believe? Sure it does...to a point. I may believe all I want that if I flap my arms hard enough, I could fly across the Grand Canyon, but all the belief in the world won't let me do that.
Jesus said something about his followers moving mountains even if their faith was no bigger than a mustard seed. It would take one, maybe two, examples of that to make me reconsider my position, but it hasn't been done, not by you nor anyone in the history of Christianity. Therefore, I believe that you can't do it. Which implies your belief is not sufficient, or...
Tell your husband I said so.
Wow Steve! What a contrast in comments between yours and GMpilot's! Yours is full of awe for Creation and acknowledgement that there IS a Creator (and needs to be at that!!) behind the wonders of the universe; and his is full of denial and mocking!
Now it's time to complete my post.
CJW: ”The atheism description above reiterate's Steve's point that atheists/agnostics/skeptics often have "a problem accepting the thought that there is something smarter and much more powerful than men."
Oh, what might that something be? Have you seen it? Can you describe it? Can you introduce others to it? I assume you mean God. Your God, or somebody else's? God is not obvious in the way that the sun is, or a horse is. Everyone agrees on those. It's the things we cannot see that we try to dress up the way we like, that we ascribe abilities and powers to, without any evidence that they actually have them. This God you talk about might be Odin, or Omikami. Yahweh is the Jewish God. Although evangelical Christians like to invoke his name, they won't follow his rules; that would make them Jews. (Lev 24:14 says people like me are to be killed. Would you do it? Why or why not? I mean, that's what God's Word™ says...and you do believe it, right?)
First you call atheism a 'religion', then you try to claim it isn't. I'm confused. Burn the strawman.
So, you've seen Master and Commander. I commend your taste, but not your argument.
Mr. Pilot;
I'm at work right now and the rich bastards expect me to do "work" around here to get paid, so I'll have to be brief.
Yes sir, we all see the overwhelming evidence of God every day, all around us. The thing is, Christine and I recognize God's handiwork and you don't or won't. Because there is a sun and horses makes it obvious they had to be created ... the "watch" can't come together by chance sir. Believing that it can is much more bizarre than believing intelligent design. "Intelligence" is the key.
Christine is a much more patient person than I as personally, I don't give a rat's rear-end if you or anyone else belives in God. Our "job" is simply to tell you about Him ... "warn them from me" it says. You're free to believe it or not. It's a wonderful thing being a free moral agent.
Gotta go for now.
Very well said, Steve. I'll be back later for more. It's time to share more about the evidence (personal story segment) that I have seen.
When I first shared an amazing incident that happened before my dad died 0ver 17 years ago, many people shared THEIR stories of evidence of the unseen world where God and his angels live.
I will write this much, for now. The salvation that Steve and I share is a personal salvation - not a "collective" as GM stated previously. Every single person makes an individual decision between God and himself/herself. Just like the snowflakes in nature, each is different from the other. Like Steve just stated, "it's a wonderful thing being a free moral agent." But those who reject God's offer of salvation through the cross of Christ are foolish...VERY foolish.
I have had some thoughts about exactly why Christ appeared when he did and not during our technologically advanced society. I reasoned that with the modern drugs we have now (and didn't have back then) a death could have been faked - with the recipient rising again and claiming that a death had occurred. And, why the cross? Why not lethal injection that today's criminals get when the death penalty is imposed? There are many reasons why the cross was chosen. One being that it was a common (but very brutal) form of execution back in biblical times. It is not something that is easily forgotten or dismissed by the people who witnessed it.
More later...
steve: “.. the "watch" can't come together by chance sir. Believing that it can is much more bizarre than believing intelligent design. "Intelligence" is the key.”
Well, there IS a little difference there, Mr. steve. We know that watches are designed because we designed them, and to do one thing only: to tell time. We came up with the concept of 'time', we have used light, and water, and mechanical movements (which we designed and built) in order to help us do this. I can go to a Timex or Bulova factory and see watches being made.
What you're talking about is creation out of nothing, not manufacture from existing materials.
Living (aka created) things all have the appearance of being just “good enough”, whereas a truly intelligent designer would have used the best possible design. (not to mention that an all-powerful intelligent designer would always have the best possible design. If, for example, a civil engineer designed a city sewage system to run right through an area where people gather, he would be fired immediately. Yet your proposed designer has done just that; in the human anatomy.
”Christine is a much more patient person than I as personally, I don't give a rat's rear-end if you or anyone else belives in God. Our "job" is simply to tell you about Him ...”
Well, several dozen people have come ahead of you, at least in my case. The 'job' has already been done, and if you don't give a rat's rear end if I don't believe, why do you bother? I'd always had the idea that there was some sort of commitment to this Great Commission that Christians are so on about.
”You're free to believe it or not.”
Okay, I don't. 'Bye now.
I put a copy and link to this post on Loopy's blog. If you get a chance visit her site at ...
http://loopyloo305.com/
You seemed to miss the point on the watch thing, but that's okay. I was simply talking (writing in this case) about odds of certain things happening by accident.
Why do I bother? I simply addressed specific questions directed at me... other than that I come here to read Christine's posts and comment when I can.
gmpilot: we do like to deal with facts, not fantasy
At bottom, atheism is grounded on the secular scientism cosmology and universal evolution myth which claims that all that exists is brute matter in motion.
According to this myth, brute matter spontaneously generated itself from nothing. Then as the story goes, after millions of years of evolution life miraculously emerged from matter. This nonsensical belief is called abiogenesis, which really means life came from death.
Because abiogenesis is patently absurd, some scientists such as Francis Crick propose panspermia, which means that earth was seeded with life either by passing meterorites or by extraterrestrials.
The critical and absolutely unresolvable problem for secular atheism is the origin of life. No matter which way it turns, secular atheism cannot account for
life anymore than it can account for matter. By extension it cannot account for consciousness and the mind of man, meaning it cannot account for the facts you claim to hold.
In conclusion, it is your own belief system that is fantasy, story, and myth gmpilot.
I was going to wait, Christine, but then I remembered your history of follow-ups. So I thought it would be best to comment before you lost interest entirely:
CJW: ”1 have had some thoughts about exactly why Christ appeared when he did and not during our technologically advanced society. I reasoned that with the modern drugs we have now (and didn't have back then) a death could have been faked - with the recipient rising again and claiming that a death had occurred. And, why the cross? Why not lethal injection that today's criminals get when the death penalty is imposed? There are many reasons why the cross was chosen. One being that it was a common (but very brutal) form of execution back in biblical times. It is not something that is easily forgotten or dismissed by the people who witnessed it.”
If it hadn't been Joshua-bar-Joseph it would have been someone else. The woods were full of prophets at the time. They must have been, for Jesus to warn against the others who he said would follow. Probably all of them were proclaiming the imminent coming of the Jewish warrior-prince who would reunite Israel, drive out the Romans, and re-establish the throne of David. As we know—because the Jews themselves tell us—the man known as Jesus did not fulfill these prophecies.
Just because the ancient Palestinians didn't have smartphones does not mean they were any less smart than people of today; it simply means they didn't have the ability or resources to make them.
There were drugs back then that might have been used to fake death. We know that they knew of poisons. A greatly diluted poison could have easily provided all the symptoms of death without actually killing. But Jesus was a condemned man, and a commoner as well. He would never have been allowed poison, which was considered an 'honorable' way to die. (As an aside, in Leviticus 5 God instructs priests on how to prepare and administer a concoction that would cause a pregnant woman to abort, as part of a test to determine if a wife had been unfaithful. If they knew how to do that 3500 years ago, then making a coma-inducing drug should have been possible, too.)
Why the cross? The public spectacle would have been part of it, of course, but hanging has long been equally popular and even more grisly. The practice of dropping the condemned through a trapdoor to snap his neck is relatively new. In the past, the victim was often merely hoisted to a high place and slowly strangled to death. In both hanging and crucifixion, the corpse was often left to rot; a very brutal example. (Joshua, ever merciful, took his bodies down at sunset.)
Decapitation doesn't even need men to cut and prepare the wood—it only needs a sharp blade. It was good enough for John the Baptist, and those unfortunates in 2 Kings 10:6. If Jesus had been beheaded instead of being nailed to a plank, we might not even be having this exchange now.
I agree that such things are not easily forgotten or dismissed. OTOH, such executions were civic events—even in this country—and it is only within the last century that they stopped being public spectacles.
Welcome, Anon.
Please explain what 'brute matter' is, and how it differs from ordinary matter.
The basic concept of panspermia goes back to the 5th century BCE, but it does not address the origin of life; merely how it may have gotten here. That whole “Chariots of the Gods/Ancient Astronauts” craze in the 1970s was merely panspermia with spaceships. I don't subscribe to that. It simply moves the origin of life to off this planet, but it still does not explain its origin.
Evolution also does not attempt to explain the origins of life; it addresses how that life changes over time. It does NOT claim that 'all that exists is brute matter in motion'; you're thinking of physics. Abiogenesis is what you're arguing against. If you really believe your definition of abiogenesis, then Jesus actually applied it, since he died and came back to life.
I suppose your preferred alternative is an omnipotent superbeing who sat in darkness in a timeless time.
Where did this being's intelligence come from? Where did its powers and abilities come from? How did this being develop self-awareness, or sentience? How long (remember, there was no “time”) before it realized ”Hey...I'm in the dark!”, and decide to speak light into existence? Why did this omnibeing feel the need to 'create' anything at all, let alone ourselves?
In many times, in many places, asking questions like that was sure to get you killed. Even a small child can wonder, “Where did God come from?” But we're told “He just IS, that's all.”
You are correct that atheism cannot account for the origins of life or of matter. But atheism is not science, any more than any religion is. As I stated above (and which you must have seen), atheism is a disbelief in gods and the supernatural.
steve: ”You seemed to miss the point on the watch thing, but that's okay. I was simply talking (writing in this case) about odds of certain things happening by accident.”
So was I. I was pointing out that we know that watches don't come together by 'accident'.
”Why do I bother? I simply addressed specific questions directed at me...”
No, I meant why did you bother telling me about your God if you don't give a rat's rear end if I believe or not? I may have misinterpreted that sentence, but it seemed pretty clear.
”...other than that I come here to read Christine's posts and comment when I can.”
So do I. We agree on that, at least.
gmpilot: Evolution also does not attempt to explain the origins of life; it addresses how that life changes over time. It does NOT claim that 'all that exists is brute matter in motion'
No, Darwin did not try to account for the origin of life. But what he did do, whether wittingly or unwittingly, is regurgitate a revamped and revised version of the ancient Egyptian cosmogony, the Evolutions of Ra (the Sun God). Whereas Ra created himself over time beginning with his first incarnation out of Nu (primordial matter or watery abyss), Darwin simply skipped the deity part and posited life evolving out of primordial waters....this is materialism.
Whereas the evolutions of Ra speaks of metempsychosis, or progressive incarnations of spirit over vast periods of time within thousands of different kinds of life forms, Darwins materialist variation speaks of the progressive incarnations of life over vast periods of time within thousands or even millions of different kinds of non life-bearing and life-bearing forms.
Both cosmogonies are types of naturalism, which means that all that exists is nature, or cosmos. While Darwinism harkens back to the materialist nature philosopher Epicurus and before him to ancient Egypt, Teilhardism, the favored theory of spiritual scientists, harkens back to the Upanishads of India.
Whichever variant you choose, Darwinism or Teilhardism, neither system can account for matter, life, soul, spirit (mind).
Anon: ”No, Darwin did not try to account for the origin of life. But what he did do, whether wittingly or unwittingly, is regurgitate a revamped and revised version of the ancient Egyptian cosmogony, the Evolutions of Ra (the Sun God)...Darwin simply skipped the deity part and posited life evolving out of primordial waters....this is materialism.
I never said that I wasn't a materialist. However, you still haven't explained that 'brute matter' you brought up in your first post.
”...Darwins materialist variation speaks of the progressive incarnations of life over vast periods of time within thousands or even millions of different kinds of non life-bearing and life-bearing forms.
Both cosmogonies are types of naturalism, which means that all that exists is nature, or cosmos.”
Yeah, that's pretty much it. He had no need for a supernatural agent to explain life, so he left it out. Your point?
”Whichever variant you choose, Darwinism or Teilhardism, neither system can account for matter, life, soul, spirit (mind).”
But your system can, right?
AFAIK, Darwin was not trying to 'account for' matter (he was working with existing matter, i.e. birds, sea life, etc), consciousness, or any of that. He merely noted that species appear to change over time, described his observations, and attempted to explain why this was so. Did a fine job of it, too.
I'm not familiar with Teilhard, unless you're referring to Teilhard de Chardin, whom I do know of. But I'm fairly sure he wasn't trying to account for all those, either.
Now if you can do it, there's a Nobel Prize and a place in the history/science/philosophy books, just waiting for you to collect it. But you're not going to do it here. You haven't even announced exactly what your intentions are; all you've plainly said is ”The critical and absolutely unresolvable problem for secular atheism is the origin of life.” Not being a biologist myself, all I can say is “I don't know.” If you do know, demonstrate it. Tell us the method you used to determine it, so others can repeat and confirm or disprove it.
Oh, a correction: abiogenesis implies that life comes from non-living things, not dead ones. My related question remains: was Jesus' revival abiogenetic? Or was he simply not dead to begin with?
Sigh, it's written to go from the presence of a foolish man when thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge. But it also says to have patience with all ... so, you asked why do I bother (to tell you about God) since the job of telling people (you) about God has already been done by others before me, if I don't really care. THAT is precisely the reason! You've been presented with the truth many times and obviously don't, won't whatever accept it. Why would I try or give a rat's rear end over some one that's already "been there".
I think you're very intelligent and articulate ... but your understanding is very limited. Hoping you and your family have a great Sunday.
Welcome Anonymous. Thanks for your input here. I may not be the best to share in what you are writing, but I appreciate your attempt to increase GMpilot's understanding.
Steve, you have GM pretty well figured out. He has been posting here for many years now, and still refuses to acknowledge the truth. His outright rejection of Jesus Christ and the Word of God is evidence that there will be some who are sealed unto destruction. It is sad to say, but true.
I wanted to share a special personal story tonight, but God has a way of bringing about a change of plans. The end of Dr. Jeremiah's series on "Jesus is Enough" is one of THE BEST SERMONS I have ever heard! And I've heard a LOT of great sermons!
If you care to see today's T.V. prsentation, go to LightSource: Turning Point Ministry's "The Mediator." You can fast forward to today's topic. But there is also a sneak peak at the next series - Portraits of God's Love at 17:33.
steve: ”...so, you asked why do I bother (to tell you about God) since the job of telling people (you) about God has already been done by others before me, if I don't really care. THAT is precisely the reason! [...] Why would I try or give a rat's rear end over some one that's already "been there".”
Not to put a gloss on it, but all you've done is repeat the question back at me. If you tried to tell me because others have tried, it may be because you think they did it wrong. If you really
don't give a rat's rear end about my accepting your tale, I figure you're doing it because it's your duty to tell me. If so, you can sleep well; you've done your duty. But if you don't actually care one way or another, then basically you're saying, “screw you buddy, I've got mine and I don't care if you get any.” You've burned a lot of bandwidth for nothing.
Been there, heard that. Nothing new. Some have been nicer than you, some not as nice.
My request still stands, though. If you can open the doors to your Omnifactory and I can see things actually being created rather than manufactured (unlike that watch you used as an example), I will reconsider. I'm stubborn, but I'm not stupid.
And I've had a fine Sunday, thank you.
GMpilot, How long will ye vex my soul, and break me in pieces with words? And be it indeed that I have erred, mine error remaineth with myself.
Beyond reading your belligerent writings I've witnessed here for quite some time I wouldn't know much about you. If I remember correctly you're the one that told me ..."several dozen people have come ahead of you, at least in my case. The 'job' has already been done" ...
so sir, even though I'm not as "nice" as some, if the job has been done then it's been done. I wish only the best for you.
If your soul is so easily vexed, pray for strength, that you might not be so easily vexed...or comfort yourself with the thought that I'll get 'mine' after I'm dead.
All I've done here is ask for you and Anonymous to provide some support for your claims. If that makes me 'belligerent', then I suppose I am. But if you can't provide that support, that is not my fault.
I also said that some were not as nice as you; do try to look on the positive side, eh?
This blog being what it is, and the fact that we both come here, means we shall 'meet' again. The topic may reemerge. If so, let's both not enter into it with notions about what one 'sees' or doesn't.
Have a good day.
gmpilot: I never said that I wasn't a materialist. However, you still haven't explained that 'brute matter' you brought up in your first post.
"Brute matter," the earth stuff Epicurus described as the only thing that exists, for which reason no god or gods, spirits, souls, or afterlife exist. Reason was left but only because earth stuff (chemicals)somehow stimulates it.
"Brute matter," the evil stuff into which the souls of men had inexplicably fallen and from which souls sought escape. From Plato to Plotinus, to the Gnostic Arnobius and to present day Eastern Hindus (brute matter=prakriti stuff), matter was and is still held to be evil.
"Brute matter," the stuff that evolved out of the Abyss (Void, Chaos) and from which the Egyptian Sun God Ra "created" himself.
"Brute matter," the stuff out of which a god-force has finally emerged after millions of years of evolution, according to Teilhard de Chardin.
GM -
Jesus will fulfill the Jewish prophecies when he returns.
He is the only prophet who died for the sins of all mankind and rose again ALIVE; witnessed by the 12 disciples and 400 others over the course of 40 days before his ascension to the Father.
But historic facts don't matter to you.
Christine: He is the only prophet who died for the sins of all mankind and rose again ALIVE
Dig deep enough and at bottom you'll discover that Westerners who reject Jesus Christ are offended by Him, are deeply unhappy about themselves but blame the living God for their unhappiness, are enormously egoistic, and desire above all some kind of annihilation of self. For these primary reasons they utterly hate the idea of bodily resurrection.
For more on these matters read:
Bus Ride from Hell
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/kimball/120904
CJW: “Jesus will fulfill the Jewish prophecies when he returns.
When will that be? He plainly stated that some of those who heard him speak would still be alive when he came back. I would love an opportunity to speak with someone who actually met Jesus, rather than the charlatans who simply claim they have.
”He is the only prophet who died for the sins of all mankind and rose again ALIVE; witnessed by the 12 disciples and 400 others over the course of 40 days before his ascension to the Father.”
You used to say “500”, like Paul did; what happened to that other 100 people? And do we have any testimony by any of them? Even Thomas who actually touched the body, has little to say about it himself. Why was Jesus not seen by his enemies when he came back? If a few of them had reported him walking around, it would certainly lend credence to the story. But not only are they silent, the disciples are too, at least for the 7-week period now known as Pentecost.
”But historic facts don't matter to you.”
History has always been my favorite subject, and Jesus is a historical figure. He's more real than Robin Hood, but not quite as real as, say, Abraham Lincoln.
As I've said many times before, my opinion is that Jesus actually existed, that he lived and likely died in the manner the stories tell. It's the divinity part that doesn't matter to me.
Considering your own weak grasp of history, which you've displayed here before, perhaps you should think twice before accusing me of ignoring it.
Post a Comment