Is there such a thing as a Christian?

thedope:

lol

merrycan spilling


Love knows what a judgement bestows

 

Hey heeh, what's happening here?! The critchings are all itching! Their faith awaits a truth that isn't apparent?!
;D

 

Thank you for my illumination.

I am unusually direct with heeh2 because they squander their intelligence and power of persuasion in this thread.

 

I know what life entails and i know what is required for its perpetuation. Its more of a probability game when speculating about something
objective.

And faith is a judgment in that it is an affirmation to a degree.

Because they are not swerving.

I don't understand..

A2+B2 is logic.
C2 is the answer to the logic
They are equal (hence "="), but the equation explains why

If you just said C2, you wouldn't be explaining anything because there is no
logic, and no question.

Its kind of hard to conceptualize your question because mathematics
is so precise and accommodating and im having trouble with how your
asking it. If i didn't answer it, could you put it in a different example?

 

Their knowledge, rather.

or mine, perhaps....but i dont think so. (how typical, right?)

 

i've always spelled judgement with an e.
i wasn't even aware of the alternative.
that's pretty bad for an english major, eh?

 

I realize logic was required for Pythagoras to come up with his theorem.
The example of the student was meant to show that they can use the equation without logically understanding it, not that they can come up with the equation itself. So yes, C2 by itself is nonsensical, but plugging the numbers into the equation to get the correct measurement of the hypotenuse of a right triangle even if they don't understand why the equation works doesn't make the measurement any less correct. It's faith that the equation will yield the correct answer.

If you want an example that has nothing to do with math, I think thedope's car example is a great one.

 

I looked it up and judgement is an alternate spelling of judgment or vise versa.
The spell checker on this page led me to conclude that judgement was an incorrect spelling. In this instance I had faith that the spell checker was accurate. In light of this information I have amended my model for the spelling of judgment. There is a saying that faith without works is dead.

 

lol...

This is exactly what the saying "there are no stupid questions" was meant to
explain.

An equation has the answer it deserves, there is no faith involved.

In your scenario about the student who doesn't understand the math, who gives
it to his friend who do understand it, there is a discrepancy about what "using"
the knowledge is.

The original student wasn't using it, he was holding it. The only function information
has is to be understood.

 

Right now particle accelerators are operating on the faith that there is something to discover. They do not know what exactly they will discover but they put forth testable hypothesis and then experiment with the probabilities.

I am simply not getting what your argument is?

Mine is, for religious practice, there is not necessarily more requirement for faith than with any other testable hypothesis.

 

As usual in my discussions with you, the semantics usually drive us to a point where I no longer know what we are discussing.

What was this about again? How faith can only arrive at the wrong conclusion?
I think that's a fairly simple statement that doesn't require needless distinctions between "using" and "holding" information.
Equation are tools that are used, regardless of whether or not they are completely understood by their users. And they will yield the correct answer if they are used properly. Note that the knowledge of how to use them is not the same as the knowledge of how they function.

 

The underlined part is true, and it simultaneously explains why you shouldn't
argue in the affirmative. You are still talking through your double standard.

 

Reality is something that we can, but do not necessarily agree upon. What is not real does not exist. Faith is a legitimate function of the abstract mind.

 

I'm the one using a double standard?????????
May I redirect your attention to the very top quoting of your statement and have you please explain to me how else it could possibly be interpreted?
I hate having to quote myself and highlight certain things, but you obviously don't comprehend the simple things and prefer to wrap shit all up in word games.

hehh2, you could use a good dose of psychedelics to maybe knock your mind off the ledge of thought you are stuck on.

 

They have reason to believe they will discover something. Logical proof based
on objective phenomena.

The idea that they will find something is actually based on something, and
that is not faith. I do not have faith that you will understand this post, I
have reason to believe you have understood enough to give me reason to
believe that you will understand this statement.

We have no reason to believe gravity will not cease to exist, but we have
no reason to assert that it will either.

You are trying to compare rigorous testing, logic and peer review
of discernible objective facts to superstition.

Calling faith a "suspension of judgement" just isn't accurate at all.
Because faith does not "suspend judgement".

It violates its own proposition...

Its not semantics. If the original student didn't understand the equation, it
wasn't information to him, so it didn't have the same functions as it did to
the other students., when you are saying that he "used" the information.

If we keep rewording the original statement, which was "Any assertion without logical proof is an incorrect judgement." it will get lost in translation.

Information can only be used if we can understand it. It is its only function.
If you cannot understand something, how would you discover its use, or its
accuracy? You wouldn't.

Its because our judgement relies on our understanding.

??

 

Faith is a legitimate function of the abstract mind. Like I say faith without works is dead.

Like I say, there is no reason to say yea or nay. We do so on the basis of faith.

This is not so. My assertion is that religious practice does not necessarily require any more faith than any other testable hypothesis.

A judgment can be an opinion formed or given after consideration
Judgment can also be an estimate based on observation: an estimate of something such as speed or distance, made with the help of the eye or other sense.
I suspend judgment until that measurement is made because I have faith that there is a correct answer.

I am still here.

 

Then you are assuming that this small sampling of my thoughts are representative of my full extent of knowledge.

God of Peace:
PSA 145:9 The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.
ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.
JAS 5:11 The Lord is very pitiful and of tender mercy.
CH1 16:34 For his mercy endureth forever.
God of War:
JER 13:14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.
EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

Wisdom = good
PRO 4:7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.
Wisdom = bad
ECC 1:18 For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.
1CO 1:19: "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."

Sins of the Father:
ISA 14:21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities.
No Sins of the Father:
DEU 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

Righteous = Good
PSA 92:12: "The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree."
Righteous = Bad
ISA 57:1: "The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart."

God CAN be seen:
EXO 33:23 And I will take away my hand, and thou shalt see my backparts.
EXO 33:11 And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend.
GEN 32:30 For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
God CANNOT be seen:
JOH 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time.
EXO 33:20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me and live.
1TIM 6:16 Whom no man hath seen nor can see.

God tempts Abraham
GEN 22:1 And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham.
God doesn't tempt
JAS 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.

Elijah ascends to Heaven
2KI 2:11 And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.
Only Jesus can ascend
JOH 3:13 No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, ... the Son of Man.

Bear Each Other's Guilt
GAL 6:2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.
Bear Your Own Guilt
GAL 6:5 For every man shall bear his own burden.
(not that these two are within sentences of each other)

Judging = good
1 Cor 2:15 The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment:
Judging = bad
1 Cor 4:5 Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.

And even in my favorite chapter:
PRO 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
PRO 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

This is adapted from this website, since I wasn't gonna reread the Bible to find examples. I think it's pertinent to note that I did not worry about the tons of contradictions of details, but only major spiritual concerns

 

As far as the power of distinction is concerned, there are many conjugations for the word judgment.

There is a judgment, right or wrong. This kind of judgment must always be relative to time and place.

There is a judgment that distinguishes one thing from another. A circle is a circle and never a square.
This kind is not relative to time and place.

 

Main problem with every example is that they are plucked out and recited out of context. It easy to make anything say or appear however you want by taking it completely out of the original context and placing it into another.

Not to mention the fact that a lot of the supposed contradictions cited are not contradictory and presenting them as such yet again exhibits more a lack of comprehension of the reader rather than a contradiction.

Honestly, some of those examples are so ludicrous as to not even warrant response.

Lets take a look at one in context and see how the meaning changes from being a contradiction;
Galatians 6
1Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.
2Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
3For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.
4But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.
5For every man shall bear his own burden.
6Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things

In the above example verses 1 and 2 are talking of one thing, helping a "brother" who is having a hard time.
Verse 3 relates to the underlined portion of verse 1 and shifts the focus of verse 4 and the word "burden" in verse 5.

I promise you that if all the supposed contradictions were read in context, and with respect to the chronological order and circumstance in which they were written, important because the Old Testament is a HISTORY of the Hebrews, the seeming contradictions fall away. I'm not saying every word and passage is 100% infallible, just that this list of "contraditions" requires some pretty lame stretches to hold up as such

 

I read the whole Bible, and still found that it contradicted itself quite a bit. 'Tis what made up my mind about whether I was agnostic or a Christian, and made me decide I was atheist =P

That's so funny! Those are the only ones I looked up in context. I still see them as being contradictory..

The Old Testament is the Word of God, just as the New is. God is infallible; so I don't really see how he can change his mind.

But I mean, what about the example from Proverbs, if you are going to be so nitpicky? It's one line right after the other saying the exact opposite.