Shouldn't the Christian Infighting be Over?

[POI]

1213 made an excellent point in post 556 of this thread (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39327&start=550). He stated:

"People have enough understanding to get it and if someone thinks he doesn't have it, he can always ask wisdom from God to understand it correctly.".

Followed by the given Bible verse to back up his claim (i.e.):

But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach; and it will be given to him.
James 1:5

******************

Well, some here claim to have such communication with "the almighty."

For debate: If the above verse is true, as well as Christians whose claims also comport with the Biblical claim, then why do Christians not know some Biblical answers? Case/point, I recently asked about the topic of Genesis being literal, vs. not? The Christian, who answered thus far, claims (paraphrased) -- they cannot know for sure, because the author is dead. Why wouldn't this individual simply ask for wisdom, in accordance with the Bible's claim?

Reference (viewtopic.php?t=41373). Post #16.

[Mae von H]

1213 made an excellent point in post 556 of this thread (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39327&start=550). He stated:

"People have enough understanding to get it and if someone thinks he doesn't have it, he can always ask wisdom from God to understand it correctly.".

Followed by the given Bible verse to back up his claim (i.e.):

But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach; and it will be given to him.
James 1:5

******************

Well, some here claim to have such communication with "the almighty."

For debate: If the above verse is true, as well as Christians whose claims also comport with the Biblical claim, then why do Christians not know some Biblical answers? Case/point, I recently asked about the topic of Genesis being literal, vs. not? The Christian, who answered thus far, claims (paraphrased) -- they cannot know for sure, because the author is dead. Why wouldn't this individual simply ask for wisdom, in accordance with the Bible's claim?

Reference (viewtopic.php?t=41373). Post #16.

There are conditions for getting wisdom and understanding. “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.” Not many ask God for either, few claim to have heard God and pride is promoted in churches today.

Great response. it shows how the infighting will never end because Christians are always ready to judge and blame everyone else but themselves.

The above stood untrue. There are many Christians who aren’t always ready to judge although I can’t say the same of atheists. Your response, btw, is judging.

[boatsnguitars]

1213 made an excellent point in post 556 of this thread (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39327&start=550). He stated:

"People have enough understanding to get it and if someone thinks he doesn't have it, he can always ask wisdom from God to understand it correctly.".

Followed by the given Bible verse to back up his claim (i.e.):

But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach; and it will be given to him.
James 1:5

******************

Well, some here claim to have such communication with "the almighty."

For debate: If the above verse is true, as well as Christians whose claims also comport with the Biblical claim, then why do Christians not know some Biblical answers? Case/point, I recently asked about the topic of Genesis being literal, vs. not? The Christian, who answered thus far, claims (paraphrased) -- they cannot know for sure, because the author is dead. Why wouldn't this individual simply ask for wisdom, in accordance with the Bible's claim?

Reference (viewtopic.php?t=41373). Post #16.

There are conditions for getting wisdom and understanding. “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.” Not many ask God for either, few claim to have heard God and pride is promoted in churches today.

Great response. it shows how the infighting will never end because Christians are always ready to judge and blame everyone else but themselves.

The above stood untrue. There are many Christians who aren’t always ready to judge although I can’t say the same of atheists. Your response, btw, is judging.

We're allowed to eat shellfish, practice witchcraft, summon demons, have fun, laugh, play, dance, work on Sunday, do gay sex... and judge. If only your God existed to tell us otherwise!

[William]

[Replying to POI in post #57]

Christian, agnostic, other, you believe you are receiving messages from some external source(s).

It is not a case of having to believe. The messages are understandable and putting a name to them is merely for narrative purposes.
The "receiving" is done through (what is regarded as) a variety of random methods which altogether integrate "external sources" (links, quotes et al) and internal sources (mindfulness).

Don't you care if such external source(s) is/are real?

They have to be real otherwise I couldn't use them in this way. I also care that internal sources are just as real. How the messages which are generated in this manner, connect the internal dots to the external dots/pixels.

Truth is truth, right? If you both were getting true answers, the answers should be the same, right?

Yes. That is logical.

At least one of you are mistaken, likely both?

Hard to say as the pastor has not provided me with any data and so I have nothing to compare my own data with in order to ascertain whether or not we are saying the same thing differently or are in opposition with each other.

How might you discern that the answers you are receiving from some an external source(s) is both real and truthful?

Good question.
For example, if you were to provide transcripts of the pastors sayings (to show how they are in opposition to my own) how would I discern they are real and truthful rather than something you dreamed up/misrepresented?

So I am stuck with accepting your word for it or placing it to one side until such a time as it becomes noticeably relevant to the overall argument.

That is how I am currently viewing the overall message you are generating (as an external source) and in that, I do not even need to know you as an identity in order to get your message.

[1213]

Which bible?

The original scriptures.

The fabled Joseph Smith bible unmisticably states Joseph Smith as greatest Prophet of all time.

Can you give a link to that?

It is in Genesis Part of the Joseph Smith bible I try to research the exact verse.
Here some mormon explanation about the book;
https://www.centerplace.org/hs/iv/preface.htm

Here the full text;
https://www.centerplace.org/hs/iv/

Meanwhile here some explanations about the book. Seems rather anti mormon but also informative;
https://trisagionseraph.tripod.com/inspired.html

Ok, thank you. Unfortunately I don't have enough time to find where the Bible says "Joseph Smith is greatest Prophet of all time".

[JehovahsWitness]

Which bible?

The original scriptures.

The fabled Joseph Smith bible unmisticably states Joseph Smith as greatest Prophet of all time.

Can you give a link to that?

It is in Genesis Part of the Joseph Smith bible I try to research the exact verse.
Here some mormon explanation about the book;
https://www.centerplace.org/hs/iv/preface.htm

Here the full text;
https://www.centerplace.org/hs/iv/

Meanwhile here some explanations about the book. Seems rather anti mormon but also informative;
https://trisagionseraph.tripod.com/inspired.html

Ok, thank you. Unfortunately I don't have enough time to find where the Bible says "Joseph Smith is greatest Prophet of all time".

I have not seen and evidence that such a quote exists. Thank you 1213 for calling this out; if someone makes a claim it is incumbent on them to do the research and provide a source for an alleged direct quote.





JW

[POI]

That is how I am currently viewing the overall message you are generating (as an external source) and in that, I do not even need to know you as an identity in order to get your message.

But you do believe I am not part of your own personal subconscious, right? Therefore, I am (external) to you. In other words, you are not possibly only exchanging with yourself here.... Me, (POI), is not a part of your internal thought process in any capacity. You, as well as the pastor, believe you receive external communication(s) from some not-yet-verified (external source), when asking about "Noah's flood", for instance. In the case of the pastor, he believes his external source of (Jesus/YWHW/Holy Spirit/other). Many people believe the exact same thing as the pastor. And yet, when they all ask the same believed source, the exact same question, they get differing answers. What is MOST likely?

a) This source is giving conflicting answers, (which defies the claims that such claimed source is both truth and good)
b) This source is answering some earnest Christians, but not others, for some reason, which also defies claims from the same said source, (which may explain the conflicting answers)
c) There exists no such believed source in actual reality

Alternatively, you can verify that I, (POI), am not a figment of your imagination. I am external to your internal thoughts and make no claims to be truth and always answer when asked upon in earnest. Can you also do so with your perceived exchange with (the father)? If you can, then does your believed upon external source answer others, who may ask? If so, wouldn't that same believed source(s), (the father) at least also give the same answer to all others who ask the same question, (whether "the father's" answer is right or wrong in reality)?

[William]

[Replying to POI in post #66]

But you do believe I am not part of your own personal subconscious, right?

Let's unpack all this.

It is not what I believe you are that counts as anything. (not that I have any beliefs as to who you are but that even if I did, these would be beside the point.)

True or False?

1. You are a human personality.
2: You believe you have a personal subconscious.

Me, (POI), is not a part of your internal thought process in any capacity.

True or False?

It is possible for external messages to have an internal influence on the person(ality).

True or False?

You, as well as the pastor, believe you receive external communication(s) from some not-yet-verified (external source), when asking about "Noah's flood", for instance.

True.
1. It may be that the pastor believes such.
2. I do not believe nor have I ever experienced such.

False.
I niether believe in nor have I ever experienced some not-yet-verified external source when asking about "Noah's flood", except when examining human claims (as an external but unverified source).

n the case of the pastor, he believes his external source of (Jesus/YWHW/Holy Spirit/other). Many people believe the exact same thing as the pastor. And yet, when they all ask the same believed source, the exact same question, they get differing answers. What is MOST likely?

Are you sure that is what the pastor has told you he believes?

I see things very differently to that.

What is MOST likely?

a) This source is giving conflicting answers, (which defies the claims that such claimed source is truth and good)
b) This source is answering some earnest Christians, but not others from some reason which also defies claims from the same said source, (which may explain the conflicting answers)
c) There exists no such believed source in actual reality

None of the above needs to be "most/MOST likely".

Rather, what is most likely may be;

a) POI simply doesn't have enough information to make a viable case.
b) POI is misconcluding information he does have, through misreading.

Alternatively, you can verify that I, (POI), am not a figment of your imagination.

Exactly.
a) POI is most likely a human personality.
b) POI offers generated messages from his internal goings-on which appear as external objects to other human personalities.

I am external to your internal thoughts and make no claims to be truth and always answer when asked upon in earnest.

a) POI makes a claim about the personality he is, presenting it as a generated message and makes no claims to be truth.
b) William accepts this as most likely.

Can you also do so with your perceived exchange with (the father)? If you can, then does your believed upon external source answer others, who may ask?

If memory serves the personality William correctly, he thinks he has already answered this and understands that if the personality POI did not integrate the answer (overlooking it) then the answer is to be found in the data of the information/generated messages (posted already) and POI is free revisit the information and to try and critique that information or continue to ignore/overlook it or ask clarifying questions about that information before setting to the task of finding fault with the information.

[POI]

Before I begin, I feel it is necessary to restate the purpose of this OP. 1213 made the following statement:

"People have enough understanding to get it and if someone thinks he doesn't have it, he can always ask wisdom from God to understand it correctly.".

Many believe the same as 1213, including the aforementioned pastor. And yet, "God" -- (or the believed upon external source), is giving differing answers to differing folks? Why?

It is not what I believe you are that counts as anything. (not that I have any beliefs as to who you are but that even if I did, these would be beside the point.)

My entire point here is that you believe others, outside your own internal subconscious, provide you with answers to questions. Meaning, you do not adopt hard solipsism alone.

I do not believe nor have I ever experienced such.

Bingo, neither do I. And the main reason I do not believe him, and many others who make similar claims, is that the asserted "God" is giving differing folks differing answers. Case/point, about the details regarding "Noah's flood."

None of the above needs to be "most/MOST likely"

In observing the top of my response, as 1213 asserted/quoted in the OP, logic alone dictates one of the following:

a) Such a God exists and is giving differing answers to differing folks who ask the exact same question, (which then requires the believer to twist the cited passage, as well as other passages in the Bible, to still remain true).
b) Such a God exists, but sometimes chooses not to answer some, even though the same Bible verse alone states he does, (which then again requires the believer to twist Bible passages to taste again).
c) Such stated "God" is imaginary, and such person(s) is/are formulating their own conclusion(s) about "Noah's flood', (which would explain why differing Christians give differing answers to the same question).

Which answer above requires the least amount of twisting? Hint, it does not reasonably look to be a) or b)...?

[William]

[Replying to POI in post #68]

Before I begin, I feel it is necessary to restate the purpose of this OP. 1213 made the following statement:

"People have enough understanding to get it and if someone thinks he doesn't have it, he can always ask wisdom from God to understand it correctly.".

Many believe the same as 1213, including the aforementioned pastor. And yet, "God" -- (or the believed upon external source), is giving deferring answers to differing folks? Why?

I can't tell that either 1213 (in the quote) or the pastor mentioned by you, believe that when they interact with their idea of God they believe that is an "external source" or if they also think this can happen internally.
There is not enough information for me to make a call.

It is not what I believe you are that counts as anything. (not that I have any beliefs as to who you are but that even if I did, these would be beside the point.)

My entire point here is that you believe others, outside your own internal subconscious, provide you with answers to questions. Meaning, you do not adopt hard solipsism alone.

That is not the way I deal with information.
(Hard solipsism takes solipsism to an extreme level by claiming that not only is the existence of other minds uncertain, but it also casts doubt on the existence of an external, independent reality altogether. In the context of hard solipsism, one may question whether the external world, other people, and everything outside one's own mind truly exist, or if they are elaborate illusions or figments of the individual's imagination.)

I do not use solipsism at all and deal with external information as no different than internal information (re its source - being processed internally and then externalized).
This is also true of the external. If the door to my house is always where I expect it to be, then I don't believe it will be there the next time I go home. Rather, I know that it will be.

I am always aware that belief and knowledge are used in a conflated manner (used interchangeably) - and this is part of the "data of existence" I have come to know as true rather than believe. This, because I have developed an understanding of the nuanced nature of language and epistemology.

(I am a realist/use realism re information.)

I do not believe nor have I ever experienced such.

Bingo, neither do I.

You niether believe in nor have you ever experienced some not-yet-verified external source when asking about "Noah's flood", except when examining human claims (as an external but unverified source)?

And the main reason I do not believe him, and many others who make similar claims, is that the asserted "God" is giving differing folks differing answers. Case/point, about the details regarding "Noah's flood."

You do not believe interacting with a strictly external God concept being. ("Him" - whomever that is.)

Of course, it would be different between us as to why we do not believe in "Him". You do not believe without the experience and I do not believe without the evidence that 1213 and the pastor are speaking about the same "Him" or have differing beliefs on who that "Him" is. Those are real nuances which also have to be considered before conclusions can be reached and set-lists internalized and then externalized are drawn up and present to others.

In observing the top of my response, as 1213 asserted/quoted in the OP, logic alone dictates one of the following:

a) Such a God exists and is giving differing answers to differing folks who ask the exact same question, (which then requires the believer to twist the cited passage, as well as other passages in the Bible, to still remain true).
b) Such a God exists, but sometimes chooses not to answer some, even though the same Bible verse alone states he does, (which then again requires the believer to twist Bible passages to taste again).
c) Such stated "God" is imaginary, and such person(s) is/are formulating their own conclusion(s) about "Noah's flood', (which would explain why differing Christians give differing answers to the same question).

Those come from an Atheistic perspective (lacking belief in God(s) or not knowing if God(s) exist) and are an expected (type of) externalized set (constituting a generated message) one would expect from any Atheist.

All (a,b and c) are based on the assumptions;
1. God is external/source externally.
2. Both personalities have the same outlook about who "Him" actually is.

So IF 1213 and the pastor disagree THEN it is likely the answer is not among the list you have provided.
It may be a mix of those answers or even some other answers.
My point being, that (basing one's set example on) assumption, won't provide us with true information.

[POI]

I can't tell that either 1213 (in the quote) or the pastor mentioned by you, believe that when they interact with their idea of God they believe that is an "external source" or if they also think this can happen internally.

In the OP, 1213 states that when people do not get it, they can ask the Bible God for wisdom. Many claim to receive such responses/answers from the Bible God. But their answers do not align. Why don't they? There is enough information to reach a logical conclusion here.