@philokalia said
I have to admit... in your case, it would be poisoning the well.

It's interesting that you were not astute enough to discern this pages ago when I talked about how the 'debating point' raised by this thread applied to my case. Instead, you were intent on talking about my "wickedness" and urging me to go see a thread about "evil" etc. etc. As I have said on several occasions, I find it interesting how religiosity can distort intellectual and interpersonal behaviour.

@fmf said
The question was: What would you say constitutes a sincere and sufficient effort by a person to know and understand and consider your beliefs? I don't see how it's "hogwash". Not everyone is Christian. If someone was going to give up studying Christianity [reading and talking to people about it] having had a view perhaps to converting to it, how many months of this would have constituted a sincere and sufficient effort to 'give it a chance', so to speak?

The question, "What would you say constitutes a sincere and sufficient effort by a person to know and understand and consider your beliefs?", misses the mark, especially considering what it is one should be considering.

What "constitutes a sincere and sufficient effort" "to know and understand" another's beliefs falls on you.

What's more is the nature of what it is to be believed. It's not enough to give credence to another's beliefs. The thing to be believed has a life of its own. Believe God.

But your humanistic ideological world view won't allow you to activate your intellect to the extent necessary for grasping the spiritual implications of which your question refers to.

If one is not "born again", then all one really has are five physical senses with which to "know and understand" spiritual truth, and they fall woefully short of what is necessary to produce a "sincere and sufficient effort" to believe the truth relative to things spiritual. Not to mention what it takes to "know and understand".

All that in spite of your spurious sincere and sufficient effort to know and understand another's beliefs. You already know.

@secondson said
All that in spite of your spurious sincere and sufficient effort to know and understand another's beliefs. You already know.

"Spurious"?

@secondson said
But your humanistic ideological world view won't allow you to activate your intellect to the extent necessary for grasping the spiritual implications of which your question refers to.

My "intellect"?

@fmf said
How long a time would you say was a sincere and sufficient effort to wait and see if the phenomenon described in "Matthew 7,8" works on a person or not?

You have till the end of your life to come to terms with the truth.

@fmf said
"Spurious"?

Deflection

@secondson said
If one is not "born again", then all one really has are five physical senses with which to "know and understand" spiritual truth, and they fall woefully short of what is necessary to produce a "sincere and sufficient effort" to believe the truth relative to things spiritual.

I use more than just my "five physical senses" when I post on this forum. I think everyone does ~ regardless of whether or not they subscribe to the exclusively Christian notion/ideology about being "born again".

@fmf said
My "intellect"?

Deflection

@fmf said
I use more than just my "five physical senses" when I post on this forum. I think everyone does ~ regardless of whether or not they subscribe to the exclusively Christian notion/ideology about being "born again".

Describe your sixth sense.

@secondson said
Deflection

Perhaps you don't know what the word "spurious" means. I don't regret my almost three decades of being a Christian, nor do I think it was a waste of time or even futile, let along "spurious". Maybe you have used the wrong word?

@secondson said
Describe your sixth sense.

There isn't a "sixth sense".

I think our humanity ~ or the human spirit that each of us has ~ draws on the fact we are evidently endowed with metaphysical faculties and a capacity for projecting ourselves in abstract ways and also we are affected and influenced and shaped by the abstract projections of other people. We do this with ideas and emotions and communication, and I believe this is all within the realm of "spirituality".

I don't think any healthy and conscious human being can ever be thought to be limited only to just the "five physical senses". It's a kind of ridiculous and faintly dehumanizing idea that you are peddling, frankly.

@fmf said
There isn't a "sixth sense".

I think our humanity ~ or the human spirit that each of us has ~ draws on the fact we are evidently endowed with metaphysical faculties and a capacity for projecting ourselves in abstract ways and also we are affected and influenced and shaped by the abstract projections of other people. We do this with ideas and emotions and communication, and I b ...[text shortened]... cal senses". It's a kind of ridiculous and faintly dehumanizing idea that you are peddling, frankly.

Frankly, I think you're confusing intellect with metaphysical capacity.

Like this phrase, "...evidently endowed with metaphysical faculties...". You're imagining things.

I thought you said you don't believe in the supernatural. Metaphysics is merely talk about abstractions with no basis in reality.

If you deny the the spirit has substance, then you are only a bundle of nerves giving you the illusion of metaphysical substance. Apparently you think that gives your life meaning.

@secondson said
Deflection

You said something about my intellect. You believe that people having different beliefs from you is caused by their intellects?

@secondson said
Frankly, I think you're confusing intellect with metaphysical capacity.

On the contrary, it is you who is using the word "intellect" incorrectly.

@secondson said
I thought you said you don't believe in the supernatural. Metaphysics is merely talk about abstractions with no basis in reality.

You don't think there is a metaphysical side to the human mind?