God kind of Faith versus Intellectual faith( Belief):


God kind of faith requires heart knowledge


Intellectual faith (belief) requires only head knowledge

http://www.inchristalone.org/HowGetFaith.htm

What in the world are you talking about? Who ever said or implied water is lord? Are you reading what one says? Or just the words?

The ENTIRE reasoning of mentioning the water was for the simple fact of showing what faith truly is. Remember, faith doesn't only apply to Jesus. Faith is a general word. Faith is what you believe to be true weather that is having faith that tomorrow will come, having faith you will be able to pay your bills, having faith your house won't burn down, having faith that you will find someone to love, ect, the list goes on and on.

Let me ask you a serious question. How do you know for a fact that most the world is covered in water? How do you know for a fact that there are 7 continents? How do you know for a fact the world is a spherical shape? ect. How do you know these things for a fact?

Maybe because someone has told you this is true? And if that is the reasoning, that is putting faith in what they tell you being true. You trust in their words. That is all faith is. Believing something is true.

That would still be putting faith in these surveys. Putting faith in that they are correct. Putting faith in that they are true.



There is no single Bible, as the individual books, their contents and their order vary between denominations. Mainstream Judaism divides the Tanakh into 24 books, while a minority stream of Judaism, the Samaritans, accepts only five. The 24 texts of the Hebrew Bible are divided into 39 books in Christian Old Testaments, and complete Christian Bibles range from the 66 books of the Protestant canon to the 81 books in the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible.

The persecutors of the Church for the first three hundred years of Christianity destroyed everything Christian they could lay their hands on. Over and over again, barbarous pagans burst in upon Christian cities, villages, and churches and burned all the sacred things they could find. And not only so, but they compelled Christians to deliver up their sacred books under pain of death and then consigned the books to flames. Among these, doubtless, some of the writings that came from the hand of the apostle and evangelist perished.

So who knows what we might have been lost with the knowledge of Jesus our lord and God our father himself. Who knows how much information may or may not have been lost. We only contain limited resource(s) of knowledge because some of it was taken away from, was destroyed.

well actually it stems from a disagreement you christians were having about depression

Cowboy posted how depression is a lack of faith in Jesus, and if one has Jesus in their life they wouldn't be depressed (of course no one would ever use this as an example of how Cowboy preach the gospel)

you and other Christians proceeded to explain to Cowboy that depression was not necessarily a lack of faith

then Cowboy contradicted himself about how he took medication for his depression, but once it was pointed out that taking medication for depression is a lack of faith, then he contradicted himself again and claimed that God gives medication

I don't remember anything in the bible about Jesus or the holy ghost healing the people with prescription drugs or that God gave a prophecy that he would one day decend from Heaven and get a job handing out medication at a Pharmacy or on a street corner

but anyway..claiming that God gives medication for depression is clearly preaching

One does not have 'faith' that one can pay ones 'bills'... One simply 'works' to ensure bills are payed.

In like fashion one does not have 'faith' that ones house will not burn... One has faith that IF ones house should burn... God will still provide air to breath and life to live.

I know the world is spherical because I have flown high above it.

I know there are 7 continents (plus antartica) because I have seen their shape from the air.

Faith tells me that the earth is but a small part of creation...

Faith tells me that soon mankind will explore that part of creation which is beyond the earth...

and 'be fruitfull and multiply' will fill the stars.

(why think small when we are in HIS image)?

Depression is a result from the deficiency of serotonin. If you don't believe that, do some research.


You can correct the problem without prescription drugs by taking a supplement called 5-HTP. You can also raise serotonin levels by exercise. But depression causes lack of energy so people don't want to exercise. 5-HTP will balance your system and you will have more energy, think clearer etc.

This has already been explained to you far too many times.

INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE

Yes, there is an element of "faith" that the evidence is true and has not been HOAXED.

However as matter of practical rationality there is no reason to believe that so many people would have conspired to created such a HOAX. So it simply a matter of being reasonable and not paranoid that this overwhelming information is more likely true than not.

However, this same idea cannot be applied the the biblical fables. There is no independent historical evidence to support their outrageous claims. Non whatsoever. In fact, it is extremely easy to believe that they are indeed nothing more than the superstition rumors of men combined with a purposeful desire to indeed create a HOAX of a "God" that will condemn those who do not obey what the authors of these stories say are "God's Commandments".

So I have every reason to suspect that these are just superstitious fables and mythologies, and absolutely not reason to believe that they are anything more than this.

YOU are being totally unreasonable in your expectations that anyone should believe in these unsupportable outrageous fables.

In fact, I'm sure that you dismiss the Greek fables of Zeus. So why aren't you also dismissing the Hebrew Fables of Yahweh. There really isn't all that much difference between them. They are both outrageous stories of Gods sitting on thrones threatening people to obey them. And they are both appeased by blood sacrifices, etc.

You dismiss one as being totally without merit, and then cling to the other one and act like everyone should accept it as some sort of absolute truth.






That's exactly correct. And there's no reason at all to even think that they were all referring to the same "God". It's just a collection of superstitious tales. As they were collected together and slowly canonized the scribes who did this retold the stories using language and references to make them appear to all be speaking about the "same God". They probably actually believed this themselves. I'm not even suggesting that these transcribers were purposefully trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. They were probably just trying to arrange all of these tales into a single coherent story. This is something that would naturally evolve in a society where everyone believed that all of these stories were associated with their view of "God".

In fact, Greek mythology was precisely the same thing. It wasn't one book either. It was a whole collection of various myths. But ultimately they all contained references to "Zeus" because that's was their MAIN superstition of who the God of Gods was.

It's no different in these biblical myths. Future writers knew of previous stories and just expounded on them. Just like they did in Greek mythology. There is nothing unique about the bible.



And who knows what might have gotten INTO this collection of stories as well!

All you're basically saying here is that these stories are totally untrustworthy, contaminated, and incomplete.

What sense does it make to try to claim that these stories represent the "Infallible word of God" when you yourself recognize that they are incomplete and contaminated?

Such a doctrine would be completely untrustworthy.

In fact, let's go back to the idea of geological surveys.

When you are handed an geological survey atlas you can see that all the maps are saying the same things. You can actually USE these maps to get around in the real world. Follow the map and you get to the places where it says you should arrive at.

Yet you claim that you can only have "faith" that these maps are correct? Not that's WRONG Cowboy. Just go out and visit the places on these maps and you will see for yourself that they are indeed correct.

But now if you look at the Bible what do you have? A collection of utterly outrageous stories that can in no way be confirmed. By your own confession much information is missing, and the information that has survived has been randomly selected by various denominations and religious sects based on pure GUESSING.

The Jews don't accept that Jesus was the only begotten son of God.

The Muslims don't accept that Jesus was the only begotten son of God.

And even the Christians don't all agree on which stories to place their faith in. The Catholics and Protestants have different standards in what they accept as being "Holy Scriptures".

Finally, (and for me this is a MAJOR POINT), you say:


So who knows what we might have been lost with the knowledge of Jesus our lord and God our father himself.

Well God and Jesus would KNOW!

They would also be able to see that humans have totally contaminated the whole picture and are constantly arguing about it.

If they have any sense of benevolence at all, they'd get their butts down here and start speaking from Clouds, or burning bushes, or whatever they could find to use as a megaphone, and do the RIGHT THING and try to straighter out the MESS that they created!

And yes they most certainly would have created this MESS, if only by their continual insistence on playing hide-and-seek and refusing to communicate with the human races except via obscure undependable contaminated and incomplete HEARSAY RUMORS.

~~~~~~

It makes absolutely no rational sense whatsoever that a supposedly wise benevolent God would who plans on judging people fro all of eternity based on whether or not they followed his instructions, to allow his instructions to become nothing more than obscure outrageously absurd contaminated hearsay rumors.

And you expect me to believe that this God is going to turn to a non-believe of this crap and say:

You didn't believe in those outrageous hearsay rumors!

You go to hell my child!

~~~~~~

That is itself utterly absurd beyond absurd.

~~~~~~

This is why I say that these Abrahamic religions based on these convoluted undependable outrageously absurd stories cannot possibly have anything to do with any rational or righteous God because the very claims that they make are themselves totally irrational and unrighteous.

END OF PROOF!

As far as I'm concerned this proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that these fables can't possibly have any more merit than the fables of Greek Mythology.

You're obsession with these ancient stories is entirely your own delusions. You have NO RATIONAL REASONS to support them.

Period.

I agree with you completely MorningSong.

You say:

God kind of Faith versus Intellectual faith( Belief):

But a person shouldn't need to have a story to believe in this kind of spiritual essence to life.

I can accept this. I don't need to believe in Zeus, or Yahweh, or Thor, or Odin, or Jesus. Those can all be man-made myths and I can still believe in a spiritual essence to reality.

So that kind of "faith" doesn't require religion, dogma, or any specific story. All that's required there it to believe that there is indeed a spiritual magickal essence to reality.

Also, if there is such a reality, then it will be true whether a person believe it or not. So "faith" is really totally unimportant to the reality of the situation unless faith is important to the individual (i.e. they feel frightened, insecure, lost, or whatever if they don't have faith)

But "faith" itself is not important to spiritual essence. Spiritual essence either exists or it doesn't totally independent of "faith"

I don't need to have "faith" in a spiritual essence of reality because I can accept that whatever will be will be.

But I do confess that the idea of a spiritual essence to reality is indeed more attractive than not. But then again, that can indeed also depend upon what that spiritual essence is like.

If Satan is "God" wouldn't we be better off if there were no "God" at all?

Thus the only "Faith" that I truly need to have to have peace of mind is the following:


I believe that IF there is a spiritual essence to reality, then this spiritual essence is true and just. And therefore I need not worry about anything because I am also true and just.


That's the only "faith" I need to have. Anything beyond that is moot.

Morning Song wrote:

Intellectual faith (belief) requires only head knowledge


I personally don't believe there is any such things as "Intellectual faith".

Intellectually you either have REASONS for accepting that something has a high probability of being true, or you don't. No "faith" is required in intellectual reasoning. Save for perhaps a "faith" that you aren't being HOAXED by scrupulous deceivers.

Intellectually I have absolutely no reason to believe that the Biblical stories of a God have anymore merit than the Greek stories of a God.

So intellectually I cannot "believe" in the Bible because it is not worthy of "Intellectual Belief" by my reasoning.

But like I say, the Bible (or any other specific stories of a particular "God") are not important to FAITH.

I have absolutely NO FAITH in the Bible.

But I do have "FAITH" that if spirit exists it's righteous and just.

~~~~~~

I live by the following principle:


God only needs to be as righteous as me.


If God is as righteous as me I have nothing to fear from a spiritual essence of reality.

On the other hand, if God is not as righteous as me, then how can it even claim to be a "God" in the first place? It necessarily would be lesser in character than a mere mortal human (i.e. me)

So, in short, I have absolutely nothing to fear from any "God".

The only thing I would need to fear is a demon, an entity that isn't even as righteous as myself.

So I can't lose unless God is a demon.

And if God is a demon, then everyone loses.

So obviously I have the greatest faith of all.

"Heart Faith" is when you hear voices that tell you to sacrifice your child on the altar and you do it

"Intellectual Faith" is when you hear voices that tell you to sacrifice your child on the altar and you tell your psychiatrist about it and ask them for permission to do it

All faith is intellectual faith. Someone told you something, and for whatever reason you decided to believe it. From that point you seek and find more reasons to believe it. You find your own personal evidence.

Its all intellectual faith, even if you just believe a certain authority. Sometimes you will trust in an authority figure even against your own good judgement. You shouldn't.

Trust your own good judgement, but don't close your mind to any new information.

Sound to me like you're speaking more to the issue of denial.

Moreover, I have never taken the view of "seeking more reasons to believe something". That is to one-sided.

I prefer to seek more "evidence" in general. One way or the other.

For example, let's say I have a "Theory" I can put the theory to a "test". Am I seeking more reasons to "believe it". No. I'm seeking to test whether or not it will stand up. If it does indeed stand up to the test, then I may put it to more and more tests.

If it continually passes these tests, from "your perspective" it may appear to you that I'm merely seeking more reasons to "beleive" it, but in truth I was actually testing it to see if it would "fail".

The fact that it keeps passing tests, and never failing them should not be pushed onto me as a desire to find more reasons to "believe it".

Evidently my original "Theory" must have had some merit.

However, if I am constantly in "denial" of all the tests that it FAILS then I am indeed just seeking reasons to believe it and ignoring all the reasons I have for rejecting it.

So what you are talking about is "denial", not honest intellectual inquiry.



You shouldn't need to have any 'intellectual' faith. You either have sounds reasons for believing in something (i.e. no faith required), or you don't. In which case any "faith" you might have is not truly based on intellect in the first place.



Most often when people refer to "their own good judgment" they actually mean that they are following their gut instincts or intuitions.

In fact, you'd truly need to be irrational if you have actual intellectual knowledge about something and you ignore that knowledge when making a judgment.

The key is being able to recognize what is worthy of being classified as intellectual knowledge, versus what is actually based on nothing more than "hope" with no genuine intellectual evidence to support it.

~~~~~

Finally, everyone uses the term "belief" quite differently.

There is very little that I actually "believe" in with absolute conviction. Even the Laws of physics could suddenly change for no apparent reason out of the blue.

The only thing I "believe" is that I experience reality in a temporal fashion and that things that I've done or learned in the past have consistently panned out when applied to the future.

That situation has been my entire life's experience thus far.

Could that situation change?

Sure. In fact, we even know of actual mental disorders that can inflict people and change that status of that reality for them instantly.

In truth we can "know" nothing other than we are indeed perceiving and experiencing things in a way that appears to have some order to it and have some degree of temporal consistency.

Other than that we can't truly say that we can 'know' anything.

However, having said this, it doesn't follow that we should then run off and start worshiping Zeus just because we ultimately can't know anything with absolute certainty. That very fact itself would also apply to Zeus, or Jesus, or anything for that matter.

So Cowboy's argument is basically as follows:

We can't know anything, therefore Jesus is Lord.

Now that is utterly absurd.

I trust my own judgment,, if only that was a sufficient enough answer for these threads,, they might not be so lengthy,,lol

HUH.... How the heck did my post end up back on this topic..

because it wouldn't be proper etiquette to respond to your questions off the topic in which you presented them

I so hate it when I get lost in what you say.. I have no etiquette and still have no idea.

you write a post to me and I respond to it?

LOL ok is that how it goes...
i didn't understand your response..

Hmm and as for me and other Christians, I dont know if i am a christian, There are many different beliefs and I havent worked out exacty what i do believe.
So if I said I was a christian I could be wrong, Ido believe in God, but I believe in lots of things so am not sure

Hmmm my son was asked to leave his church that he had gone to for 4 years on Sunday as he started dating a girl 10 years older than him..

This is part of the reason I would never commit my life to anything to do with religion.

He was the youth leader and drummer in their band, Now he is not allowed in the doors, as he could be a bad example..

What the heck gives people the right to think they are God

yep i am not a happy chappy.. I could understand if he was sleeping with her or doing something wrong, but he is isnt so what is the big deal.
They have told him he is no longer a Christian. So Nope i definatly would never ever associate myself with being called a Christian as it is thrown around like they are something special, when the majority whom you meet are the most judgemental on earth.

And I am sorry if that offends anyone but as far as i can see its the truth.

There is a BIG difference between "religiousity"

and "christianity".