08 Jun '19 14:36>
@fmf saidSo I did, but not only yours by intent.
You said something about my intellect.
@fmf saidSo I did, but not only yours by intent.
You said something about my intellect.
@secondson saidWhat does "intellect" have to do with what we are talking about?
So I did, but not only yours by intent.
@fmf saidNot entirely.
You believe that people having different beliefs from you is caused by their intellects?
@secondson saidYou believe your God figure needs some degree of "intellect" to spare humans from "damnation"?
Not entirely.
Consider the dichotomy between the spiritual and the intellect. If in fact there is. One can grasp only so much with the intellect, but if there exists components of the ideas and concepts relative to the existence of a creator that can only be "known and understood" by the agency of one's spirit, and if, as Jesus said, "you must be bor ...[text shortened]... by either an intellectual assent, or to make it a reality in one's life, by spiritual regeneration.
@secondson saidMy "intellect" tells me that humans have many God figures. What is my "intellect" supposed to tell me about the God figure you favour?
If there be a God, then there is only one. If there is truth, it is God's truth.
virtually anything.
@philokalia said"Either there is a God, or there isn't."
Well, you are explicitly right about the existence of other possibilities when it comes to Christ's resurrection, etc.
You are also right that someone could take a sophist's definition of what constitutes a "Christian" and say that Gandhi was one, but by any conventional definition, he was not.
--
Either there is a God, or there isn't. Of course, there is also ...[text shortened]... ] correct?
And if Orthodox Christianity is correct, then every other spiritual path is incorrect.