Does God Exist?

Like haveing a child vaccinated you have to have "faith" in the vaccination though knowledge of how it works and observation of those vacinated and not vacinated, because you don't directly see the effect of the vaccination in your own children.

Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld. (Hebrews 11:1)

 

See, that is what I've telling you, you've been just throwing away parts of the Bible because you're too lazy to do the work that's necessary. It's a shame that you're slaming the door on your understanding.

 

You don't really mean that, do you? In reality no matter what proof is given you, no matter how "reasonable" you will reject it.

It might be interesting for you to note that most of Jesus’ miracles were performed in front of large crowds and that even Jesus' most vocal opposers did not claim that Jesus did not perform the miracles but only that his ability to do so came from Satan and not God.

 

Okay, fine.

 

I know you believe that I "worship" the Bible but as I've told you over and over again, no I don't. The Bible is not God but should be respected as God's word and as a way to better know and understand God and it will help us to know how to draw closer to him.

 

This is not a good line. Evident means plain, obvious, clearly seen or understood. Evident demonstration is a plain, obvious, clearly seen or understood, action or process
Showing the existence or truth of something by giving proof or evidence. Not beheld is the opposite of those things. It may be a pretty mouthful of words or seem like a sure definition but they don't mean anything in practice as they are contradictory positions that cancel each other out. Assured expectation of things hoped for simply means personally confident by virtue of demonstrable reason. Dictionary definitions of the word faith are plain enough.

Faith without works is dead.

Now I will say again what I had said before in greater detail so as to doubly focus on the meaning. As we work with symbols.

You have an advantage because you were taught the keys to the kingdom. To those who haven't been already learned these keys, their interest in having them makes them accessible. The degree of interest dictates the rate of discovery and this is why it is said first seek god with everything you have and everything else will be given to you. There is nothing more beneficial to the body of man than for him to first establish his own well being. Adopting this open eyed interest in discovery is becoming as a little child, the state of the beginners mind. From this position we are able to learn anew and learn to apprehend the world through the christ mind. Let the mind be in you that is in christ, and we see christ in each other as we become like him. This is the remembrance, re-membering, of the body of christ.

What are the keys? The understanding of your powers of perception and creation, as in, theses things you will do and things even greater than these.

The first key to the function of perception is in the perception of value, The measure you give is the measure you receive or this proportion is reflected back to you in every appearance and circumstantial detail as you give the world all the meaning it has for you. You are responsible for and to what you see and what you think. It is from these positions that all reactions are orchestrated.

 

Well truth be known, I had faith in God and his works long before I knew what the Bible or for the matter any other book, had to say on the matter.

 

You do like to go on.

 

The words should be respected because of their demonstrable virtue. It is not a matter of what I believe it is demonstrated in the words you speak. You are giving a godlike quality to a book by suggesting that it is in fact the word of god. The word is made flesh, not book. Words are inspired and interpreted through the contemplation and demonstration of personal relationship. The only time that it is shown god wrote anything was in pieces of stone, a metaphor for the land itself. What about drawing closer to each other which is the other aspect of our discipline? Does your interpretation put you at enmity with the conceptions of men? Can you look on another man and sense that his proportions and virtues are precisely equal to yours? As far as the study of holy scriptures being profitable, I agree and there are holy scriptures in most coming to know god systems.

 

Are you judging me again?

 

I already addressed that. Meaning you have nothing substantial to say in response.

 

No, I am talking about words and their effects on our consciousness and I asked you some questions. If you think I am inaccurate speak for yourself in more understandable detail and for sure if you answer the questions I will understand your position better. I am not judging you by asking you to be self reflective of your own positions.

 

So you believed in god but decided later what the proportions of that belief should look like?

The proportions you espouse are those of recrimination. The original sin of adam, yada yada. Redemption from that involves conceiving a different proportion or recognizing our enduring virgin relationship with creation.

Let me ask you if scientific theories may be abandoned by virtue of better information why not the same for some biblical proportions?

 

As far as the treatise on scientific faith versus religious faith, there are degrees of conviction evident in both realms and the distinction is only relevant within the context of making that argument. Faith in every iteration speaks to the mental constructs of the individual and is not defined by conviction to a specific detail. That would be "faith in."

 

This may be nitpicking but I don't think there is "faith" in science. By definition the scientific method requires one to be skeptical which is in contrast to faith and in theory, anyone could test any given scientific theory. If there is a faith aspect correlated with modern science, it's in ascribing to the preceeding philosophical beliefs. Perhaps most notably, science requires a "faith" in empiricism. That is to say things we can observe, experience and/or describe as you mentioned, have some basis in an actual existence.

Now as I mentioned earlier, some QM seems to be stretching these definitions a bit but this has led some people to suggest that some Theoretical Physics should not even be considered science.

 

What is wrong with my understanding? The fact is that the bible is in fact a closed book for you and you can only build on the framework of your previous conclusions. The work that is necessary is applying terms to your experience it is not coming up with a theology that seeks to reconcile what cannot be reconciled. I don't just throw away any part but all parts are scrutinized for experiential meaning. This issue came up in political thread where Nerdanderthal is using printed statistics in service of lame brain ideas. Turns out he lacks empirical experience to go with his statistic picking and this gives a false view of potential going forward. I still have not discerned meaning on some issues as they have not demonstrated themselves in my life as yet.

If you were present to miracles I was asked to perform you would say and have said that is is not by virtue of holy spirit because what I say is not what the bible says. So in fact you do not look at what I say on the merits of what I say in terms of life's potential but only in comparison to your own interpretation of the bible. This is what can be called an adulterated view or cheating on the living spirit before you while engaged in a love affair with your interpretation of letters. The phenomena is described in the book you revere. The pharaseedic scribe neither enters in himself nor allows anyone else to enter.

 

In applying terms to our common experience we can see that claims that god told a people to slaughter another is simply an egotistical cultural justification for their actions. The same thing happens today in terms of war on terror and the like.We feel justified in prosecuting wars.

 

i guess the only way to prove your point is for you to show me some "reasonable" proof and see what happens.

 

One glaring experiential contradiction is the idea we are given free will vs. there is a price to pay for exercising it.