(November 10, 2010 at 8:39 pm)tackattack Wrote:I don't think you can state that they didn't do enough verification. They could turn round to you and claim exactly the same and they would not be short of biblical authority in doing so. If you allow for the possibility that you are right then you have to concede that they could also be either. My position is that you are both wrong.(November 10, 2010 at 4:19 pm)Captain Scarlet Wrote:subjective experience alone is not proof of my understanding of God. My only point was that you have to experience something first before you can decide whether it's real or not. They may or may not have had an experience prior to analysis, idk. The examples you used though obviously did not do enough (or any) other verification prior to acting on blind faith or delusion. If they had, perhaps they'd see it was their own desires or a delusion that had caused the experience.Scripture (the Holy Bible in my religion) when analyzed as a whole does not condone the murderous. While I concede that there are incidences of atrocities recorded as being in God's name, Jesus came to teach us the error of our previous interpretations and uses of the old testament, and when looked at humanistic-ally are of selfish motivation not an external to selfish desires.
If Jesus existed, and I'll concede that it is at probable, he was was alleged to say lots of things, as an orthodox Jew who accalimed the OT. He probably used is own humanistic qualities to tone down some of the shrill stuff.
"I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence"...Doug McLeod.