(September 26, 2013 at 11:45 am)Airyaman Wrote: So you are open to the idea that Paul could have been wrong?

Yes - or rather, depends what exactly you mean by "open to." I agree that it's possible. Christianity is called a faith, you know, and I haven't been able to move any mountains, so my faith must be smaller than a mustard seed.

Assuming first there's any power at all in faith.

(September 26, 2013 at 11:56 am)John V Wrote:

(September 26, 2013 at 11:45 am)Airyaman Wrote: So you are open to the idea that Paul could have been wrong?

Yes - or rather, depends what exactly you mean by "open to." I agree that it's possible. Christianity is called a faith, you know, and I haven't been able to move any mountains, so my faith must be smaller than a mustard seed.

Well you'll have to forgive me, I am new to navigating MyBB forums, much more used to Simple Machines and vBulletin. Plus, there are many pages to this thread so I am not sure I can dig through and find out what this discussion about Paul vs gnomes is really about. Can someone give me a quick synopsis?

(September 26, 2013 at 11:56 am)John V Wrote:

(September 26, 2013 at 11:45 am)Airyaman Wrote: So you are open to the idea that Paul could have been wrong?

Yes - or rather, depends what exactly you mean by "open to." I agree that it's possible.

Let's do a little reasoning:
The word of God is infallible.
Paul received his info from scripture and revelation.
Paul is possibly wrong.
Therefore, the word of God is possibly wrong.

Hmm...I think you've taken your first step into a larger world.

(September 26, 2013 at 11:56 am)John V Wrote:

(September 26, 2013 at 11:45 am)Airyaman Wrote: So you are open to the idea that Paul could have been wrong?

Yes - or rather, depends what exactly you mean by "open to." I agree that it's possible. Christianity is called a faith, you know, and I haven't been able to move any mountains, so my faith must be smaller than a mustard seed.

Careful, you don't wanna talk about that red herring you pointed out.

(August 30, 2013 at 3:56 am)Godschild Wrote:

(August 29, 2013 at 6:02 am)findingdoubt Wrote: It seems to me the whole premise of a very powerful Satan who can delude you into believing a lie and you won't know it undermines the entire religious enterprise.

The thing about being deceived by Satan is,
you don't know your deceived!

How does a fundamentalist Christian know that aren't deceived and should be Jews or Muslims, or Hindu's or whatever?

I've been thinking about blogging on this point.

It seems that Christian demonology undermines Christianity because even if they say the evidence looks good to them they can't disprove that Satan is just deceiving them.

Just as no one could really prove that Satan is not deceiving them when apologists make the claim that they are, Christians cannot disprove that they are deceived.

The witness in their spirit just might be the devil.

So since by their religious claims there is an equal chance that their religious claims are crap their religious claims are crap!

.. well it's been here for 2000 years and going strong.

And that is seriously unfortunate. If only you people would stop treating these lousy (woman hating, bloodthirsty, slave driving, homophobic, etc) fables as some sort of divine truth or guidance we'd be all set.

(September 26, 2013 at 1:16 pm)Beta Ray Bill Wrote: Let's do a little reasoning:
I take it on faith that the word of God is infallible.
Paul received his info from scripture and revelation.
Paul is possibly wrong.
Therefore, the word of God is possibly wrong. That's why it's called a faith.

I'm right where I was.

Fixed that for you.

(September 27, 2013 at 8:08 am)John V Wrote:

(September 26, 2013 at 1:16 pm)Beta Ray Bill Wrote: Let's do a little reasoning:
I take it on faith that the word of God is infallible.
Paul received his info from scripture and revelation.
Paul is possibly wrong.
Therefore, the word of God is possibly wrong. That's why it's called a faith.

Well Paul defines faith as being assured in what you cannot know. Kinda frankly that is ridiculous, as I could believe in anything if I followed that logic.

I'm right where I was.

Fixed that for you.

Faith: Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

Proof: The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true.
Evidence: that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief
Truth: conformity with fact or reality

So, John V, don't you see why faith is an illogical choice? That faith has nothing to do with proof, evidence or truth? Wouldn't you rather live in a world of verifiable truths that you can test and understand their meanings to human existence? Faith gives you something to believe in, something to base your values on, but without any facts or evidence. You can spend every day praying or going to church, but there it is a purely psychological benefit. If you want a physical reward, something you can put your hands on to love, not just your ideals, than accept the proof and evidence found by man, not imagined by.

I would rather believe in ideals that I can verify, not ones that vary from church to church, all across the world. That is why faith is not true, because no one agrees on what it means. There is so much more to "love" than the contradicting definitions in the Bible, or in faith.

(September 27, 2013 at 12:49 pm)Beta Ray Bill Wrote: Faith: Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

Proof: The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true.
Evidence: that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief
Truth: conformity with fact or reality

So, John V, don't you see why faith is an illogical choice? That faith has nothing to do with proof, evidence or truth?

No, I don't see that. Using your definition, faith could be based on evidence other than material evidence, such as testimonial evidence. Further, that's an unusual definition. I checked several others and they don't specify "material evidence."

Quote:Wouldn't you rather live in a world of verifiable truths that you can test and understand their meanings to human existence?

Yes. I would like to know without doubt what happens when we die, and how life began, and a bunch of other things which are not as yet verifiable truths.

Quote:Faith gives you something to believe in, something to base your values on, but without any facts or evidence. You can spend every day praying or going to church, but there it is a purely psychological benefit.

OK, that's good reason for religion.

Quote:If you want a physical reward, something you can put your hands on to love, not just your ideals, than accept the proof and evidence found by man, not imagined by.

What proof and evidence, and what physical rewards?

Quote:I would rather believe in ideals that I can verify, not ones that vary from church to church, all across the world. That is why faith is not true, because no one agrees on what it means. There is so much more to "love" than the contradicting definitions in the Bible, or in faith.

What ideals are verifiable and invariable across times and cultures?