I am Christian. If your world view is more rational than mine please come show me.

a reply to: akushla99

Then you have at least misrepresented what you are asking posters to compare anything to...these points I raised as a question to you were lifted (not deduced) from YOUR posts...and it is very clear to me that you are being duplicitous and evasive (that's my honest opinion)...

i didn't ask you to come to the thread and tell me what I believe. I said come show me. Meaning I have my views, you have yours lets discuss. You see you are jumping straight into biblical theology when you might not even believe in a God. You responses are worded in an odd fashion, at least to me. It makes our conversation vague. You may notice those who have the proper attitude I will address any concern they have.

a reply to: akushla99

This post is just silly man. The response No was to the entire premise. Why don't you quit talking about what I believe and tell me what you believe? Then I will gladly tell you what I think on the same topic. If its the thing about the rivial. Thats a strawman adjust the premise to proper theology. God doesn't view Satan as a rivial, nor do Christians or I think he did. That premise is flawed from the get go.

a reply to: roth1

I would never ask you to just believe those things happened naturally. Those things are miracles. We would first have to talk about the question is there a God or no?

a reply to: Dewts

Except your opinion of those things is based on the lens through which you view reality. You could have totally misinterpreted the data at hand.

a reply to: BlueMule

Just a friendly heads-up. I'll be choosing the Babylonian creation story.

I'll let you kinda steer the conversation. I guess I'll give you a friendly heads up and say I think the Genesis account is polemic against the creation myths that surrounded the Jewish culture. Enuma Elish especially.

Oh, but I do believe it. What's more, all sacred texts and all mystics are. Not just the Bible and Jesus. I am not asking you to believe that though.

Is not also possible the the Bible is the only immanent act, and the threads you see are bits of truth surrounded by Satan's lies?

Well, if I take your meaning correctly, the answer would be a) Divine inspiration, and b) comparative religion. I can see the esoteric threads that run through the entirety of world religion and myth.

How do you know the inspiration is divine?

a reply to: chr0naut

one person's rational and logical framework may not necessarily overlap with yours.

Rational discourse follows rules. When these rules are broken one becomes irrational, and in order to continue in a rational conversation must change their views. I think on the topic a world views one must be logically consistent and coherent with external reality.

I am not discussing these topics on a degree of certainty, but on a degree of probability.

a reply to: puzzlesphere

All other views that claim to "know" are irrational.

Your claiming to know that things are all shades of Grey. Are you now irrational?

If we really want to reduce everything to black and white, the only rational view for anything unknown (that's anything without externally verifiable facts... such as the nature of the universe, or God, or infinity, etc...) is "I don't know".

Why is the only rational view for anything unknown "I don't know?" Just putting the word rational in their doesn't make it so. Mathematical concepts have no externally verifiable facts about them. Are you saying we can know nothing of mathematical concepts? Love has no externally verifiable facts about it. Do we not know love?

As for morals, they only exist within context... or put another way; the context of any given situation is what will define the moral framework for that situation. .

My side of morals is speaking of moral ontology. The statement "the context of any given situation is what will define the moral framework for that situation." This is moral epistemology. For the most part, epistemologically speaking we agree. However it is when we come to the existence of Moral truths that I believe we disagree. I believe their is such a thing as Good. It exist within external reality, and can be observed in human interaction and your own thought.

Since a transcendent consciousness is an unknown, that leaves the only rational approach to morals being that they are an individuals' construct developed within the context of a person’s life to base decisions on.

I think you need to define unknown for me.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: roth1

I would never ask you to just believe those things happened naturally. Those things are miracles. We would first have to talk about the question is there a God or no?

NO god, and those are claims of crazy people.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: BlueMule

Just a friendly heads-up. I'll be choosing the Babylonian creation story.

I'll let you kinda steer the conversation. I guess I'll give you a friendly heads up and say I think the Genesis account is polemic against the creation myths that surrounded the Jewish culture. Enuma Elish especially.

Yes. Did you read the pdf I gave you about Genesis 5?

I'm not a fan of polemics. Its hard to know how much of the content is twisted by it.

The Jewish scholars who wrote their literature were motivated by something other than impartial mystical investigation of the transcendent mystery source. They were motivated, at least in part, by a desire to preserve and solidify their cultural identity.

Is not also possible the the Bible is the only immanent act, and the threads you see are bits of truth surrounded by Satan's lies?

No, that's just not the way religion works. That's the way cultural identity building works. We are good, they are Satan. We paint our identity in bright shiny colors against the dark backdrop of the Other. We project something onto the Other. Our shadow-self.

How do you know the inspiration is divine?

Because when you study comparative mysticism, comparative mythology, and comparative religion long enough, you begin to see the ways and patterns and feel of the Divine when it is freed from the twisting influence of non-mystics, bureaucrats, warmongers, etc whose primary concern is culture building. That is to say, the social function of religion and myth. As opposed to the mystical function.

👣

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

"First comment of mine after the OP: " I made the statement about only adhering to Biblical teachings so I wouldn't get a lot of people coming on here attacking beliefs of young earth creationist or catholics orpentecostal. I wanted them to know that what I believe comes from my own personal views. " Quote SOTL ph 15

Here's the problem...again...because you've spent 17 pages throwing logical fallacies at the majority of the posters...with mine, specifically the strawman which is based upon the premise that you would 'present' an argument to be 'misrepresented'...you haven't 'presented' a solid image of what you are saying - so, the strawman is irrelevant...here's what you wrote in the OP...(redacted)

"I am Christian. I don't cling to any teachings other than the Bible...My world view is that of a biblical world view...

(which is a personal view of the bible [Å99])

...The purpose of this thread is not however to discuss my world view
...The purpose of this thread is for those who think their world view is more rational than an accurate biblical world view to put their world view up for philosophical analysis...basically the question that is being posed is if you think Christianity is wrong, what is the better more plausible option that you have come up wIth"
"I wanted them to know that what I believe comes from my own personal views" SOTL pg 1

...so...are they personal views?...or are they 'a biblical world view'?

...and if they are your 'personal view' based on the bible...they are your personal 'interpretation' of the bible, that has prompted you to aver 'I am christian', and then asking posters to give you thier interpretation of a biblical worldview that is an Interpretation...
Your convoluted, opening OP could have been better & simply posed as 'How does your worldview differ from what is written in the bible?'

The irrelevance in the opening OP, was, inserting yourself into an explanation of the OP...clearly, the request in the OP had nothing to do with you, except as an exercise in 'rationality'...notwithstanding the premise that not all christians think alike etc...except fundamentalists to a larger degree...the request is a vague one, since You, would need to know what ALL other christians think to hold it against another interpretation to rationalise...the request is sooo general in its scope, as to be, just as irrelevant.

It was solely You who brought attention upon Yourself, any attention You did recieve by declaring in the first sentence, in three words, that You were christian...when the request has nothing to do with You (except that You created the thread).

The End

originally posted by: isofakingwetoddid
Why doesnt GOD just forgive Satan?

'Cuz Satan isn't sorry and doesn't want to be forgiven. Satan thinks he's right and God is wrong. If Satan was actually sorry and asked to be forgiven, then that conversation about forgiveness could take place.