witchcraft (wicca) and christianity

[georgesbluegirl]

Hence agnostics, who are the people who don't believe it's possible to prove or disprove the existence of God (Undecided seems to be more of an agnostic to me, but I could be completely wrong). It's true though, it DOES take a leap of faith to be an atheist, because you can't disprove God's existence. Atheists are relying on their own reason, and then making that leap beyond what they can know into what they believe.

[sachi]

At some level, georgesblue girl , we all have some kind of faith system.

Something we believe, or don't believe- that is our statement of faith

even science is not the ultimate source of proof of everything because it also moves into a theoretical, speculative realm.

[UndecidedFrog]

Dear All,

This is just my opinion. You don't have to accept it if you don't like it. DISCLAIMER: I am not a christian.

Wow! what a plethora of responses. Thank each and every one of you for taking the time to repond. Now to try to answer each and every one of you.

larryt wrote:

Do you mean "He never existed at all as a person on this earth" or " He did not rise from the grave and therefore is dead like all other men?

I don't know if he existed or not, and I don't know if he rose from the grave or is dead like other men. I have no evidence for or against. Hence, I do not believe any incredible claims.

sachi wrote:

Since you do not think Larryt's interpretation is accurate.

What is the accurate interpretation ofthat scripture, in your understanding . . .?

Seriously.

My understanding is that private interpretation is the opposite of public interpretation. So I read the passage to mean that scriptural prophecies are meant for public interpretation (everyone has to agree what it means), or no interpretation (it means what it means, plain and simple), but not private interpretation (one's own particular interpretation).

georgesbluegirl wrote:

Yeah, Undecided, there seems to be a lot of unclear and circular reasoning. Kind of like how people try to prove the Bible is infallible by using quotes from the Bible. I understand faith, obviously, but circular logic just confuses people or frustrates them

It seems that you understand my frustration about circular reasoning. Why is it that you out of these many can sympathize with me?

His son wrote:

Just a few of God's statements about His Word

Thank you for providing me with additional excerpts from the bible which basically reinforce my understanding of the previous passage 2Peter1:20.

JesusisGod2 wrote:

Now I know that you say that you dont believe in Jesus, so ask God and He will lead you to the truth.

Thank you for your suggestion. I hereby most humbly ask God to lead me to the truth in the next 2 days. Is that enough?

sachi wrote:

Well that is also a statement of FAITH.

The aetheist has a much trouble scientifically "proving" the non existence of God as the Christian has scientfically supporting his belief.

I do not believe in Jesus, because I have no reason to believe. Show me the evidence and maybe I will change my mind. A statement that someone does not believe something is not a statement of faith, it is a statement of disbelief. The definition of an atheist is from the latin roots. "A" means without. "Theist" means belief in god/s. Therefore, atheist means one without beliefs in god/s. Why would atheists try to disprove something that isn't provable or disprovable? Why would I waste my time trying to prove to you that the invisible pink dragon that flies over my house doesn't exist? I think beliefs are personal, and it is pointless to try to prove or disprove beliefs. But then, that's just my opinion.

Regards,

UndecidedFrog

[georgesbluegirl]

Undecided,

I was waiting for somebody to bring up Invisible Pink Unicorn (or in your case, Dragon) theory! My friend has an assertion of belief in IPU in bumper sticker form.

As for why I can sympathize...circular reasoning frustrates me, and I'm a Christian myself! I've certainly had experiences of questioning my faith - I think every good follower of any religion should, at some point - and I also have many friends that believe differently than I do. I respect your atheism, even though I don't agree. You seem intelligent and together and legitimately frustrated that you aren't really getting answers. It seems like when I mention I'm Catholic or state something that differs from mainstream Christian Evangelist response, I immediately get asked if I "believe" and then statements that I should "reexamine where my faith lies" follow. Likewise, people seem to throw Bible verses at you at every turn. I like hearing what you have to say, you've got interesting ideas. I feel frustrated often too when I'm faced with circular logic. Anyway, that's why I'm sympathetic here.

[larryt]

Undecided,

Thank you for your response.

I don't know if he existed or not, and I don't know if he rose from the grave or is dead like other men. I have no evidence for or against. Hence, I do not believe any incredible claims.

From your answer to my question you don't have the info to believe or disbelieve. Have you ever had the desire to know if these things we talk about are true. If our claims ARE true then it would be benificial to you to find out. If what we say is true you will end upin the lake of fire, and I'm sure you wouldn't want that. If it is true that it exists then no amount of disbelief on your part can change that. (Unless you are Christian Science and then everything is a figment of our imagination. I don't think so!) Our discussion is based on premisses. The premiss for the Christian is that God exists and that God is a personal, interactive God. We get this premiss from nature and the heavens which are replete with evidence of God's existance. With that premiss can you see that what we believe makes sense. It is not circular reasoning if one starts with an a priori premiss.

If I might comment on

My understanding is that private interpretation is the opposite of public interpretation. So I read the passage to mean that scriptural prophecies are meant for public interpretation (everyone has to agree what it means), or no interpretation (it means what it means, plain and simple), but not private interpretation (one's own particular interpretation).

In regard to interpretation - understanding of the bible: When the plain sense makes sense, make no other senes.

And

Thank you for your suggestion. I hereby most humbly ask God to lead me to the truth in the next 2 days. Is that enough?

We have to come to God on His terms, He makes the rules. The bible says

Heb 11:6  But without faith [it is] impossible to please [him]: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and [that] he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Jas 4:6  But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.

If you are to understand what christians say you must understand the premiss. If we are wrong you have nothing to worry about. If we are right then you are in deep trouble. What do you want to believe?

LT

[UndecidedFrog]

Dear larryt,

This is just my opinion. You don't have to accept it if you don't like it. DISCLAIMER: I am not a christian.

Thank you for replying. I think there are 2 issues that I disagree with in your reply. They are:

1) The use of Pascal's wager in your argument for belief in god.

2) The use of a priori premises (read postulate) for god's existence

Blaise Pascal was an ancient philospher who argued that you can "game" god by believing in him for the potential rewards "just in case" he exists, for not believing in god could, as you say, place you in a "lake of fire." Of course, you see the obvious problems with that kind of argument, don't you? One, do you really think a god worthy of belief can be fooled so easily? Two, how do you know in which god to believe? Since most gods are jealous ones, they will not suffer one to believe in others. Given this, you stand an approximately 1 in 10000 chance of choosing the correct god. Not good odds.

The premiss for the Christian is that God exists and that God is a personal, interactive God. We get this premiss from nature and the heavens which are replete with evidence of God's existance.

I understand your second argument better. But it is still circular reasoning, because you have to first assume the premise is correct a priori. That is postulating an existence for god. If you have already postulated something, it is not necessary to prove the postulate. E.g. Believe first so that you can believe? I'm sorry, my brain isn't quite wired that way.

I experience much of the external world as you do larryt, I see much beauty in the world, and I see much ugliness as well. However, I do not see a god in it. And if you do, that's fine with me.

Regards,

UndecidedFrog

[Guest Gladiator4God]

DISCLAIMER: i AM a Christian

[larryt]

UndecidedFrog,

It is not circular reasoning to observe something and draw a conclusion. If I take all the parts of a watch and put them in a can and shake them up, will it ever become a watch? I don't think so. By the same token if I see a watch in front of me I can make some conclusions about that watch that I can observe with my senses. I can see that it has a designer for it has a design. If I see a design in nature I can conclude that there is a designer. This designer is what is refered to in the language of today as God. Finding out who this God is and what God is like is beyond me. It is up to God to reveal something about God's self. It has been a long time since studying philosophy and I don't remember all the ins and outs, names and places. But philosophy didn't answer the questions I had way back then. Why am I here and what happens after I die. I didn't want to end up in some bad place if there was such a place. If there was a God I wanted to know, really I did. If God didn't exist then I didn't loose much by asking for a meeting. "God if you exist I want to know." is what I asked. I have since found out that He has left us a record so that we can know everything we need to know. I waded through the eastern religions, catholicism, agnosticism, new age philosophy, witchcraft and almost satanism. God caught me before I got that far.

Thank you for the discussion.

LT

[UndecidedFrog]

Dear larryt,

This is just my opinion. You don't have to accept it if you don't like it. DISCLAIMER: I am not a christian.

Thank you for your response, and the willingness to discuss why you believe as you do.

If I take all the parts of a watch and put them in a can and shake them up, will it ever become a watch?

The answer, of course, is that it depends. Please tell me how many tries you intend to try, how hard you shake the can on each try, how big or small the can is relative to the size of watch parts, and how many tries has been unsuccessful. With that information, we can probably come up with the probability of success. Similarly, to complete your analogy to the world and nature, we need the same sort of information for the world.

If I see a design in nature I can conclude that there is a designer.

Larryt, you may see a design and therefore a need of a designer. I think this is the crux of where we differ. I do not see a design, and therefore no need for any designer.

It is up to God to reveal something about God's self.

I couldn't agree with you more on the above statement. I cannot think why a god who is given qualities of omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence would not want to be known to all his creation. Why would a god want to play hide and seek? I have asked him to reveal himself to me many times. If he exists, he has chosen not to reveal himself to me. If this god does indeed exist, let him make himself apparent and reveal himself to me, if that is his wish. If it isn't his wish, he must really mean for me to continue in the path I am on.

I too have studied comparative religious beliefs. I have not found any that satisfy me. That is why I am who I am today, one without any beliefs in any god/s.

Regards,

UndecidedFrog

Edited September 18, 2004 by UndecidedFrog

[Catsmeow]

Yeah i agree... so many males do that to girls... i agree, even though i do not abuse my power as a male.

Trinity,

I like your style.