It's not that I care much, but I'm feeling left out

Well considering there is a ton of evidence that the brain can do a lot of these things. I understand the feelings, however the brain and make you feel a lot of things.

(August 22, 2014 at 9:51 am)Stimbo Wrote: That's the point though, isn't it Drich? You have to check your bible to interpret your warm fuzzies, because there's no other framework in which you can distort your experiences to get a preconceived answer. You've made AiG's mission statement your personal mantra: no evidence can be accepted if it runs counter to the bible. You don't worship a god; you worship a book. Which is doubly sad, given what book it is.

How is what I do different from any other learned behavior? At some point understanding comes from a book, and from this foundation greater understandings can be obtained.

---

(August 22, 2014 at 10:07 am)Cato Wrote:

(August 22, 2014 at 9:15 am)Drich Wrote: Luke 11 applies to you as well.

Irrelevant. God has still not offered me anything.

Define "offer you."

---

(August 22, 2014 at 11:00 am)GalacticBusDriver Wrote: You know, Drich. Back when I was still trying to believe the bullshit I got down on my knees and fucking begged for a sign.

Got crickets.

Your a/s/k bullshit works just fine for people who already harbor belief. For people who've realized it's all bullshit, not so much. You trolling a/s/k isn't going to change anything. It pure bullshit, just like the rest of that book of voodoo you cling to so desperately.

How do you know your atheism is not apart of the answer to your prayer?

---

(August 22, 2014 at 11:06 am)Stimbo Wrote: So basically, what we're saying is A/S/K is great for confirming what you already know or want to be true. Not so much for actually determining truth in the first place.

How did you come to this conclusion? A/s/k is used anytime we strive to obtain something not readily avaiable.

---

(August 22, 2014 at 11:08 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(August 22, 2014 at 9:22 am)Drich Wrote: What post number?

25. I asked quite clearly what the limits were to this test of yours, so that it could be falsified, and your response was to just compare the search for god with the search for a wife, despite the fact that we can all confirm that women exist, and when asked exactly how long one should persist with whatever it is you want us to do, you just said "god is infinite."

Do you have your answer now?

---

(August 22, 2014 at 11:08 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: The whole process of A/S/King presumes a god to exist in the first place. It's just another horseshit ploy.

How in asked is one presuming anything? To a/s/k is to search for truth

---

(August 22, 2014 at 11:32 am)Stimbo Wrote: I'll throw in a free anecdote to illustrate that point.

A few years ago, a young lady of my acquaintance found herself being assessed by social services with a view to removing her young son into the care system, and thence adoption. I was heavily involved and in fact wrote my own report on their report, highlighting all their gross distortions and omissions (got commended by her solicitor for it, too).

Anyway, after the assessment workers had delivered their report, we had many heated discussions over the phone with the social workers and guardian. They would point to something in the report which said that the assessors had witnessed such and such. I would immediately point out that the assessors were wrong and the report was misleading, and present evidence why. The response was just to point to another part of the report. Try as we might, we just couldn't get through to them that it's pointless justifying a report, false or otherwise, with another part of the same report.

Sorry stimbo I do not see the connection. I see the one your inferring but it is not valid. As what we witness outside the 'report' is being compared to the report, and not sections of the report being compared just to other sections.

Your thinking of a catch all anecdote to answer circular logic. What you don't seem to understand is your circle is broken when outside evidence is being compared to source material. We do this all the time in life. For instance when your driving on a trip, and are using gps or a map. The map does not determine the landscape nor does it tell the roads which way to go. It simple records the geography so that one can compare his experiences to what the documentation records.

Sorry stims but the bible works the same way, and again your story does not apply.

---

(August 22, 2014 at 1:03 pm)Losty Wrote:
Sorry, but is it really worth my time? No it's not.
You can just ignore that comment from me then, I must have been confused by whatever you said. I didn't click the like. I always wonder why you call it that. Is it an auto correct glitch?

when one is saddled with dyslexia one has an auto-incorrect glitch built in and sometimes even if I were to proof read something a dozen times I would not catch that mistake.

It's a thorn given to me to keep me from getting too out of control.

Quote:God himself has never offered me anything. Not ever.

how do you know that? If God were to offer it personally, would you in your heart recognize Him if He decided to go any other way besides master and commander of the universe?

Do you really know the shepards voice when call by him?

Quote:So I don't know what this offer you got from god is, but I didn't get it.

if you don't know what it is or who God is out side the failed picture that you yourself determined is not real, then how can you say you did not get an offer from him?

Quote:Can you give me some advice on how I should go about asking, seeking, and knocking? I apparently did it wrong before.

We ask in prayer, nothing fancy. Just a "dear God, if your up there show me what I need to see and or experience to establish and maintain a belief."
We seek in reading the bible, asking questions in places like this and church, and we simply open mindedly follow where ever that leads us.
(If in church it could lead you to atheism for a time) if in atheism it can lead you back if you let it, and if you continue to being faithful to this process. (Knocking)

That's it

The only faith that is required is that of a mustard seed. (The smallest bit) I believe that can be found in the prayer portion. And even then you do not have to pray aloud with your eyes closed. Just earnestly in you mind, ask god to open you eyes ears and heart so you can see, hear and receive Him. And the most important part is to keep doing it till you find Him.

Once you let go of a time frame and an expectation, and are willing to give you life to this pursuit if nessary, at that moment or short there after God will show up.

Starting with Spiritual fruit, and then moving onto Spiritual gifts. The more faithful you are to what He gives the more you will receive.[/quote]

---

(August 22, 2014 at 1:04 pm)LastPoet Wrote: It's not that I care much, but I'm feeling left out

Out of what?

---

(August 22, 2014 at 1:26 pm)bladevalant546 Wrote: Well considering there is a ton of evidence that the brain can do a lot of these things. I understand the feelings, however the brain and make you feel a lot of things.

Again, what God offers is what you need to establish and maintain a solid belief. For most 'feelings' don't cut it.

"You have to believe in order to see" is some pretty good horseshit there, Bubba.

(August 22, 2014 at 9:22 am)Drich Wrote:

(August 21, 2014 at 9:20 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: Since it has obviously worked for you, you should inform us, in depth, of every single exact thing one must do in order to properly knock and get an answer. No metaphors. No vague statements. No bible quotes, unless you care to translate them so that we have clear and explicit guidance. Leave as little as possible open to interpretation. Nothing short of maximally-precise step-by-step instructions will be adquate, because if you're right, we obviously need them.

I said this a few dozen times now.

We ask in prayer, nothing fancy. Just a "dear God, if your up there show me what I need to see and or experience to establish and maintain a belief."
We seek in reading the bible, asking questions in places like this and church, and we simply open mindedly follow where ever that leads us.
(If in church it could lead you to atheism for a time) if in atheism it can lead you back if you let it, and if you continue to being faithful to this process. (Knocking)

That's it

The only faith that is required is that of a mustard seed. (The smallest bit) I believe that can be found in the prayer portion. And even then you do not have to pray aloud with your eyes closed. Just earnestly in you mind, ask god to open you eyes ears and heart so you can see, hear and receive Him.

You can even keep posting your regular venom, but eventually you will simply not want to.

That's vague and full of metaphors. It's precisely what I didn't ask for.

Which specific parts do I read? Which specific questions do I ask? To whom, specifically, do I ask them? What is the response I'm supposed to look for? How can I confirm that the response is authentic? What, specifically, do I do to be absolutely certain that I'm actually hearing the Christian god and not some other god, or my own imagination? How can I know with absolute certainty that the answer isn't just confirming a bias?

And why must I have any faith at all to get an answer? Why should my complete skepticism stop him from giving me an answer? I want the truth. I want to know it's the truth, and I want to know it's the truth in spite of whatever faith I may or may not have. With even a mustard seed of faith, I'm putting mud in the water and I simply can't trust any results I get.

That aside, you can't simply choose to have faith in something. It's not a switch you can flip. I know you think we lack faith because we want to not believe in your god, but it's really because we can't believe in him without an objective reason for that belief to exist.

Those of us who call ourselves agnostic atheists do so because we have a mustard seed of 'faith' in the notion that we're not completely right. If that's not enough, then this is a completely buggered process from start to finish.

"Once you let go of a time frame and an expectation, and are willing to give you life to this pursuit if nessary, at that moment or short there after God will show up."

You see I think this is where my issue lies. When I was asking and seeking and knocking, I didn't have the luxury of time. I needed either some god to show up and save me, or for myself to give up on the idea of a god and save myself. If your god exists, he was too late. I was pregnant with 2 young children, giving up my life to keep knocking for a god who was clearly not answering would have been completely selfish parenting. These days I am safe, my kids are safe and happy, my life is okay, and I'm recovering as much as I can from the scars religion left me with. So, I guess, I really have no use for a god now that I don't believe in one. It's kind of funny how that works eh? If your god reveals himself to me and has a valid excuse for the shitty job he's been doing then I'll think about re-converting...maybe.
I do appreciate your answer, but you just told me that if I pray and am willing to devote my life to seeking and knocking for a god I don't believe in, then my metaphorical heart will recognize the voice of his call. Lolwut?
So there's no amount of ask/seek/knocking will ever provide any real evidence for a god. Just what I thought.

Oh btw the like/link thing, I was asking because my auto correct refuses to accept the word gave. It just changes it to have every time a constant struggle with that.

(August 22, 2014 at 4:28 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: "You have to believe in order to see" is some pretty good horseshit there, Bubba.

Yup.

(August 22, 2014 at 3:40 pm)Drich Wrote: Define "offer you."

For fuck's sake. It's English Drich, not Swahili.

Sorry Drich, but all your hand-waving rationalising boils down to "I'll see it when I believe it". You have no outside evidence other than what you already want to be true. You're not comparing your book to the evidence, you're comparing the evidence to your book. And when the book says the evidence is wrong, instead of questioning the validity of the book you're dismissing the evidence. You're like a tourist in Tokyo, using a map of the New York subway system and declaring the city to be wrong.

(August 22, 2014 at 4:28 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: "You have to believe in order to see" is some pretty good horseshit there, Bubba.

To lay it out further: you're saying that there's no objective way your god can be known. You're saying that the only people who experience your god must be biased.

Color me surprised.