Law That Is Complete And Easy To Learn - God's Law

Author: Best.Korea

Posts

Total: 40
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
So are you trying to say. 
It would only take like. ( 1 miracle) 
To become a , 
What did he call them again ? 
' scrolls up '


A TRUE christian ? 

Uno miracle. 

Pull ya head in this ain't no cattle train.
1 mirical. 

Surly it would take more the One mere mirical to become a " TRUE christian "
I'm thinking like atleast 4 miricals would be needed.  
At the very least. 

Maths aint your stongest subject is it Hen ?



BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@Stephen


Stephen,

YOUR QUOTE RELATIVE TO MIRACLES IN BECOMING A CHRISTIAN:  "That will take a miracle."

Well, miracles do happen, and we both hope that Miss Tradesecret gets a miracle from Jesus, as God, to not be so God-damned BIBLE STUPID as shown throughout this esteemed Religion Forum!  Like you said, it is totally impossible for Miss Tradesecret to rid herself of her Bible ignorance and stupidity, whereas it is embarrassing for her to actually state that she has read the JUDEO-Christian bible many times, and in many languages, and to be so Bible Dumb in the aftermath!  Poor 12 year old girl as shown on her bio birthday to today's date:  https://www.imagebam.com/view/MEJZ1IV

.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,321
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Maths aint your stongest subject is it Hen ?

Neither is the bible Deb. But it is a little  stronger than the Reverend Tradesecret's that claims to have memorised the bible from an early age and knows it backwards and forwards in ancient Hebrew and Greek and still reads the bible three times a year.😁
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,343
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
So we agree that spirituality is simply internal physiology and everything to do with internally created fantasy.
Nope. "Everything" mucks up your statement.

And therefore nothing to do with assumed external fantasies.
Ergo

And religion as a concept is religion as a concept, this is a truism.
No that is just your rhetoric. 

And adherence to an established modus operandi can be interpreted as religious behaviour. 
It doesn't need an established MO. Unorganised religions or spiritualists exist everywhere. 

Though I would interpret spiritual responses as special moments of brain activity, rather than as every day religious normality.
I think going to the footy is a spiritual experience for many. Almost religious for some. 

Interpretation is always the name of the game Trade.
Easy copout but you like the easy, don't you? 

And interestingly, just as you see everyone as religious.
Hmmm intriguing way you put it. I certainly think religion is inescapable.  

I see a whole lot of undevout Christians whose atheistic conditioning often manifests in their comments. You included Trade.
I never claimed to be perfect. 

Which if you consider how our databases become established is probably only to be expected.
Not really sure of your point. 

There's doubt in most Christians.
Doubt is a human thing. Everyone doubts something.  Doubt however doesn't mean not believing. Or that your view is incorrect. Doubt is a good thing. It helps us to realise that we are not brainwashed.  People who are brainwashed couldn't doubt in the first place.  Doubt is an emotion or a thought that enables us to continue to refine our positions. 
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,269
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret


For sure, at the end of the day we cannot prove something that is unprovable.

And we both know that.

We're getting there.
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,343
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
For sure, at the end of the day we cannot prove something that is unprovable.

And we both know that.

We're getting there.

Of course, it's impossible to prove something that is unprovable.  Who would really argue otherwise? 

Of course, some things are true that can't be proved.  We both know that as well. For example, assuming your great-grandparents had dinner on the 4th of April 1895 which they probably did, what did they eat? We don't know. Perhaps they wrote it down. Most likely they didn't.  We can't prove it one way or the other.  On your thinking, because it can't be proved, it didn't happen. I would agree it can't be proven, but it doesn't mean it didn't happen. 

Yet we can follow logical steps of reasoning which might provide some grounds for thinking it happened. For example, most people eat food most days.  Great-grandchildren MUST have had some kind of parents who survived.   Can we prove EXACTLY what they ate? I suppose we could try and figure out where they lived, and what kind of food was typically eaten by whatever kind of people lived in those parts with that kind of money.  But we wouldn't know really.  There would be some doubt as to what kind of food was eaten - but we would be pretty sure they did eat.  

It's the same with God and religion or spirituality.  Some things we will never be able to establish and some things we can deduce from reasoning.  Religions exist. We know that. There is a sense of spirituality that belongs only to humans and not other animals.  The world didn't make itself. Nor has it always existed. It had a beginning. Why is it that this planet is relatively unique in respect of life? 

Coincidences can only go so far.   Why is it that EVERY human culture has had a religion of some sort? Why is it that almost every religion has a similar means of salvation? Why is it that despite the millions of planets in the universe, no aliens have conclusively visited our planet?  

Doubt is fine. But it's also very personal.   
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,269
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
Some things are true that can't be proved. 

Well nice statement, which immediately brings to mind another ongoing thread concerning the concept of logical fallacy and circular reasoning.

Like I stated A. so C. and lets disregard the interim hypothesis.


If something cannot be proved then it cannot be known to be true, and therefore the hypothesis cannot be disregarded.

Well it can......Which brings us nicely back to A. so C. and lets disregard B.

Logical fallacy circularly reasoned.


Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,343
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
No. 

Dismissing the interim hypothesis is dismissing alternatives. That is even worse reasoning. 


zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,269
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
For sure.

But we cannot reach C with out firstly establishing the veracity of the alternatives.


Have a nice day Trade.


Jobs to do now.


Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,343
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
For sure.

But we cannot reach C with out firstly establishing the veracity of the alternatives.


Have a nice day Trade.


Jobs to do now.

Ignoring the evidence is not reasonable.