PlaClair “The fact that we can only approximate the truth may not satisfy you if you’re stuck in a theistic mind-set. But it is the truth. How many times do human beings have to get things wrong, in religion, science, and everywhere else, before you accept this obvious fact? “
Me: Jesus said “you shall know the Truth and it will set you free.” He never said everyone who is of the faith will get everything right that he taught so apologies are sometimes needed when struggling with discernment of spiritual vs natural vs carnal issues and the resulting use of good judgment and tact.
I enjoy and am thankful for a being in, not stuck as you say in, in a theistic mindset. It’s true. I have been given a new view and the perception/discernment to go with it. I’m not proud of it because it wasn’t me who changed my mindset. I enjoy having new gifts/abilities I lacked most of my life. I once thought as child ..but when I became a man I put away childish things as the scripture says. I’ve put away the old mindset and I now have the mind of Christ which is really different to say the least especially in the realm of maturity and character. I don’t try to win arguments for one thing.
PlaClair “You’re presuming two things here: (1) that Jesus and God are who and what you claim them to be and (2) that you can know that. Because there is no basis for either presumption, the steady progress of knowledge through the means and methods of science is vastly preferable to theistic wishful thinking that has not brought us any nearer to the truth in the thousands of years of its history. Your argument is like the old joke about the man who drops his wallet on Elm Street but goes looking for it on Walnut street because he likes the neighborhood better. And that’s without even addressing the gaping moral holes in your theistic narrative.
Me: I don’t make a claim of any kind. I simply read the Bible and listened to a good pastor/teacher after being moved to investigate HIS claims. Also I didn’t “know” jack about Christianity until I did the previous sentence. I was ignorant and defiant like most unbelievers are until I decided to believe the Bible and Jesus. I admitted ignorance, I read, recognized and heard the truth so I submitted to it. I confessed to being what He said I was, a sinner in need of salvation. Now I continue in following His instructions. How do I “know”...because the Bible tells me so. There’s nothing presumptuous about it. Sounds childish but its not its child-like simplicity that baffles so many intellectuals. I was told I was too smart for my own good and those few who had the courage to say it to me were right. I was wrong. Bigtime.
Gaping moral holes? I would need an example for that one. And its not my theistic narrative. Its what we call testimony and teachings. I’m not telling any stories except my own and only where it might aid understanding Him not me. I care about atheists because I was one or close to it and it nearly cost me my soul. I think its best to put that in here so you and other readers don’t get the wrong idea about why I’m in this forum. I have no personal agenda here. Just passing along truth as I have been freely given it and a little evangelizing. Atheists sometimes knowingly or without realizing it do the same thing so its fair I believe.
Godless people and morality. F. Dostoyevsky said “without God all is permissible” What do you think he meant? Can there be a moral standard without God? Onto…
Josh McDowell in “More than a Carpenter” has in chapter4 called What about Science? gives a clear example of the fallacious inconsistent application of the scientific method that this forum is rife with ...in my opinion. I’ll leave it as a study for others to look up scientific method based proofs vs Josh’s legal-historical type proof. This is the sort of proof that is used in legal proceedings.
He says “if the scientific method were the only method we had for proving facts, you couldn’t prove that you watched television last night or that you had lunch today.There’s no way you could repeat (and its only good for repeatable things) those events in a controlled situation.
The other method of proof, the legal-historical proof, is based on showing that something is a fact beyond a reasonable doubt. We reach a verdict on the weight of the evidence (oral, written testimony and exhibits) and have no RATIONAL (logically sane) basis for doubting the decision. With this method to determine the facts you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you had lunch today. Your friends , the waiter and a receipt prove this. SO…Jesus my friend, the Apostles-His servants and my brothers/sisters in Christ and the Bible and a boat load of history.
Get it? It’s used every day around the world and has been for millennia and with the exception of corruption because we are dealing with people, it is very reliable. And that’s where you will go to the corruption and run away from all I just wrote based on the past stuff I’ve read from you and others of that scientific mindset. That’s my presumption.
There’s my response. Not as a courtesy but as a concerned caring person.