The soup, the lightning bolt and the life.

Originally posted by FMF
On the contrary. Life is wonderful, rich and full.

[b][You] reject the possibility that God has revealed Himself either by and through nature, and more directly though human agency.

Not so. I have not rejected the possibility that God has revealed himself. You are being presumptuous. As I said to Suzianne last night, I have not yet met anyone who knows ...[text shortened]... orever deal that religionists like, say, you and Dasa and Muslims speculate about and tout.[/b]

"I have seen nothing to convince me..."

Please! Why accuse me of being presumptuous? I am not presuming anything. You have said yourself that you don't believe, and are unconvinced, that there is anything to know about God, or that there is anything God wants you to know about Him.

If I tell you I believe in something, and I share that with you, why do you accuse me of telling you lies. Essentially that is what you are doing.

I rely solely on the authority of the scriptures contained in the book called the Bible. You reject that authority and rely upon your own. That's your choice. It's your right. I'm not your judge in spite of what you think of me.

I'm simply trying my best to prove you are wrong. Does that mean I think I'm somehow better than you because I believe in something you don't? You would be presumptuous to think so.

The scriptures say (not me) that God became a man and lived a sinless life and died on the cross in my place and was raised from the dead so that when I believed I would be saved and receive the gift of eternal life.

It would not be good for you if what the scriptures say is true and you rejected the truth of them because you "have seen nothing to convince you" that they are true.

Are you spiritually blind perhaps?

Originally posted by josephw
Please! Why accuse me of being presumptuous? I am not presuming anything. You have said yourself that you don't believe, and are unconvinced, that there is anything to know about God, or that there is anything God wants you to know about Him.

I did not say that, josephw. My own words are sufficient. You do not need to attribute your own reworded version of them to me. I said I have not yet met anyone who knows what "God's instructions" are, or that there are indeed any "instructions" for us to known about. I have seen nothing to convince me that there is the do-this-and-you-will-live-forever deal that people like you propagate.

Originally posted by josephw
If I tell you I believe in something, and I share that with you, why do you accuse me of telling you lies. Essentially that is what you are doing.

Lies? I do not think you know what "God's instructions" are, and you have told me nothing to convince me that what you claim about immortality is anything other than what you believe and hope to be true. You think me being not convinced by your beliefs is tantamount to me calling you a liar?

Originally posted by josephw
I'm simply trying my best to prove you are wrong. Does that mean I think I'm somehow better than you because I believe in something you don't?

I have said nothing of the sort.

Originally posted by josephw
It would not be good for you if what the scriptures say is true and you rejected the truth of them because you "have seen nothing to convince you" that they are true.

If I am unconvinced by your beliefs why would I be convinced by you stating what good or bad consequence you believe might result from me being unconvinced by your beliefs?

Originally posted by josephw
The scriptures say (not me) that God became a man and lived a sinless life and died on the cross in my place and was raised from the dead so that when I believed I would be saved and receive the gift of eternal life.

I do not share your beliefs in these matters.

Originally posted by FMF
I did not say that, josephw. My own words are sufficient. You not need to attribute your own reworded version of them to me. I said I have not yet met anyone who knows what "God's instructions" are, or that there are indeed any "instructions" for us to known about. I have seen nothing to convince me that there is the do-this-and-you-will-live-forever deal that people like you propagate.

You're a tough nut to crack John.

Whether I propagate something you are not convinced is true or not, you rely solely on your own authority in doing so.

What I believe I speak of. It is the authority of the scriptures and what they say that I tell you. It isn't about me, nor is it me that you reject. You are rejecting the scriptures, not me.

You say you haven't met anyone who knows God or what "God's instructions" are.

Yes you have! You just don't know it yet.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
On the contrary, it is quite reliable when correctly calibrated and carried out, although it can only provide approximate dating the accuracy of which is affected by numerous variables. It is simply one of a number of different and unrelated dating techniques which all clearly demonstrate that your young earth position is utter twaddle.

It does nothing of a sort because they must assume again. They do not
even take the fact that God created a mature earth with mature trees,
into account.

Originally posted by josephw
Why accuse me of being presumptuous? I am not presuming anything.

You explicitly presumed that I "...reject the possibility that God has revealed Himself either by and through nature, and more directly though human agency."

I have not rejected the possibility. You presume that I have.

Originally posted by josephw
Whether I propagate something you are not convinced is true or not, you rely solely on your own authority in doing so.

Spirituality to my way of thinking is all about our discovery that each of us is in possession of authority, autonomy and extraordinary unique potential in terms of our each and every individual spirit. You have used your authority to make a decision to submit to another "authority". Fine. I wish well on that spiritual path. I do not subscribe to the authority that you have chosen to subscribe to.

Originally posted by josephw
What I believe I speak of. It is the authority of the scriptures and what they say that I tell you. It isn't about me, nor is it me that you reject. You are rejecting the scriptures, not me.

I thank you for sharing with me how you are affected by those scriptures. I hope they help you to find the meaning of life you hope to find. Perhaps they have already. Yes, I reject the scriptures. I do not believe they are "God's instructions". I do however believe you are telling the truth when you say you believe they are.

Originally posted by FMF
You explicitly presumed that I "...reject the possibility that God has revealed Himself either by and through nature, and more directly though human agency."

I have not rejected the possibility. You presume that I have.

I can see how you presume to think I presume to think you reject the possibility of God having revealed Himself through nature and the written word.

But isn't that exactly what you have done under the pretence that you have seen no evidence to convince you otherwise?

You will be convinced when you take an honest look at your condition, both physically and spiritually, and realise you are completely helpless to do anything about it.

There is only one source of remedy in all the world. The way is narrow.

I am not a religionist either contrary to what you think.

Originally posted by josephw
But isn't that exactly what you have done under the pretence that you have seen no evidence to convince you otherwise?

No. You are being presumptuous again. Perhaps it's the only way you are able to address the fact that I am not convinced by what you propagate.

Originally posted by josephw
You will be convinced when you take an honest look at your condition, both physically and spiritually, and realise you are completely helpless to do anything about it.

You are entitled to believe what you want. Do you sincerely think I am not "honest"? That is Dasa's 'catchphrase'. Funny that. It is - once again - presumptuous of you to assert that I will "realise [I am] completely helpless". This kind of approach you are taking with me is of a kind that is pointedly inferior to many of the approaches I have exposed myself to and patiently listened to and considered over the last four decades.

Originally posted by FMF
You are entitled to believe what you want. Do you sincerely think I am not "honest"? That is Dasa's 'catchphrase'. Funny that. It is - once again - presumptuous of you to assert that I will "realise [I am] completely helpless". This kind of approach you are taking with me is of a kind that is pointedly inferior to many of the approaches I have exposed myself to and patiently listened to and considered over the last four decades.

You try to present yourself as being wise, but I see you like the Emperor
with no clothes.