To explain knowledge of God

[Drich]

if we seek desperately enought we will find anything we set out to find. 'Science' has proven this over and over again.

And that is why A/S/K cannot be a reliable method.
I'm glad you said it yourself. At least, you seem to be aware of the pitfalls of such methodology.

Again A/S/K is the method we use for anything we really Need. God is telling us to put forth the same effort with Him as we would to feed ourselves if we had nothing to eat.

[FatAndFaithless]

At least I know food is real and can see the consequences of lacking it.

[pocaracas]

And that is why A/S/K cannot be a reliable method.
I'm glad you said it yourself. At least, you seem to be aware of the pitfalls of such methodology.

Again A/S/K is the method we use for anything we really Need. God is telling us to put forth the same effort with Him as we would to feed ourselves if we had nothing to eat.

But it can lead to the wrong god.

And if it can, it will and it does. How many different conceptions of god do you find in the world, today? not to mention all the ones that came before and are no more...

Also.... if it can lead to any god, then it does make you wonder if the method exploits some mechanism in your mind and no god is required for it to look like it works.

[Drich]

Wait...is Drich seriously crediting his A/S/K "method" with the scientific advances we've experienced since the dawn of man?

and it leads to successful business, marriages, children, health, wealth, scientific discovery technological break throughs and any and everything else that can be difficult to obtain from the dawn of man

(bolding mine)

Drich..if that's how you think science works..... That's not how science works. Especially considering religion has been historically hostile to science and naturalist explanations.

"that's not how science works Drich"



'that's not how science works''
lol..
Ahhh, that was funny.

Ever heard of the scientific method? It is a eight step version of Ask Seek Knock.

Ask:
Formulation of a question, create a hypothesis

Seek:
Prediction, Testing, Analysis

Knock:
replication, External review, data recording
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

[FatAndFaithless]

Sorry, you don't get to retrofit your flawed understanding of the scientific method into your theological bullshittery. Mainly because science isn't about making claims of absolute certain truth (which is what your "method" purports to do), it's about finding the best current model that can be refined and changed and updated as new evidence arises (something which you can't really do with knowledge of God).

So...no, you're still holding a sack of fallacies and presuppositions. I'll pass, thanks.

[Drich]

But it can lead to the wrong god.

So?
Again that what this life is about. We have been given this span to show us where our hearts lie. If we are content on serving an empty God then we do not have the burning desire required to serve the God of the Bible. If one wants to worship the God of the bible then He will keep Knocking till He finds Him.
Being side tracked into the wrong religion for a while is not the unforgivable sin. Finding contentment there and Ignoring the urgings of the Holy Spirit to push past your contentment is.

And if it can, it will and it does. How many different conceptions of god do you find in the world, today? not to mention all the ones that came before and are no more...

Indeed, how many fine hair like wires are their in a sive or screen? The purpose of all those false religions is to seperate out those who want to worship the God of the bible from those who do not.

Also.... if it can lead to any god, then it does make you wonder if the method exploits some mechanism in your mind and no god is required for it to look like it works.

Yes it does. For as you 'good people' prove there is a growing number who do not want to worship a God at all. So you A/S/K for a world view that places man/man's morality in place of God.

Again not everyone is intended to goto Heaven. This life is to sift out those who do from those who do not want to serve God for all eternity.[/quote]

[Cyberman]

Not even close enough to be wrong. Your Ask Seek Knock is a self reinforcing loop, forcing you to repeat the process until you can delude yourself that you've reached the conclusion you presupposed before you started. The Scientific Method is a mechanism for testing your hypothesis literally to failure point and then evaluating whatever survives to determine if it represents reality, or else requires modifying or even abandoning.

The peer review stage is a vital part of the process. It serves to correct errors and bias by having independent observers replicate your methods, with the aim of disproving your conclusions. It is not a mass circle jerk where everyone sits around confirming each other's delusions.

[Drich]

Sorry, you don't get to retrofit your flawed understanding of the scientific method into your theological bullshittery. Mainly because science isn't about making claims of absolute certain truth (which is what your "method" purports to do), it's about finding the best current model that can be refined and changed and updated as new evidence arises (something which you can't really do with knowledge of God).

So...no, you're still holding a sack of fallacies and presuppositions. I'll pass, thanks.

'My method' only points out the natural process which man undertakes when he wants or rather needs something. As I have pointed out many times now this method (while expounded upon) is still at the core of everything we do.

like it or not.

All We have been asked to do in Luke 11 is place the same effort in finding God as we would put in to anything else we really want.

[FatAndFaithless]

You can keep asserting that as much as you want Drips, but it doesn't mean it's true. And I'll pass on the God thing. If he wants me to believe he can come find me.

[Drich]

Not even close enough to be wrong. Your Ask Seek Knock is a self reinforcing loop, forcing you to repeat the process until you can delude yourself that you've reached the conclusion you presupposed before you started. The Scientific Method is a mechanism for testing your hypothesis literally to failure point and then evaluating whatever survives to determine if it represents reality, or else requires modifying or even abandoning.

The peer review stage is a vital part of the process. It serves to correct errors and bias by having independent observers replicate your methods, with the aim of disproving your conclusions. It is not a mass circle jerk where everyone sits around confirming each other's delusions.

It can if one wants to be in said loop, just like one can use the scientific method to create a similar loop. Some examples: Hole in the Ozone, Pluto's planetary status, The predicted ice age by the year 2010, global warming, global cooling, global climbate change.. Again same methodology, same circular result up until the point where someone decides the truth is more important than the perservation of the traditional beliefs/status quoe. Then like A/S/K the scientific method is used to push past the old foundations of science and pours a new one. If one keep this process up eventually they will come to the truth.

This is all God asks of us. That we hold to him in the same way as we would hold to the method we use to come up with the crazy crap to give us the illusion of control of the world we live in

---

You can keep asserting that as much as you want Drips, but it doesn't mean it's true. And I'll pass on the God thing. If he wants me to believe he can come find me.

let me know that works out for ya