To quite the contrary, I read all of the responses very carefully. Sometimes I agree, and sometimes I do not. If your claim seems suspect for some reason, then I ask questions to make sure that I understand your position. Sometimes the 'answer' received looks like one(is helpful) and sometimes it doesn't. For instance, the response above in no way serves to answer the question. Rather, it neglects answering and focuses instead upon what you believe about my actions - which has nothing to do with the question. I'll try again, but phrase it differently this time, perhaps a little more generality will help move things along...

Do we, as fallible humans, have good reason to think/believe that we've gotten things right when we seek to understand the world around us(which entails understanding divinity)?

If so, what would those reasons be?






What else could be reasonably concluded from that Pan? I asked a clear question that gets directly to the 'heart' of the matter at hand(pun intended), and you answered by asking an irrelevant question. I mean, surely we all know that it is quite certain that my thoughts on the matter do not serve as your answer to the question that I asked you. So, based upon your previous testimony in addition to the question you asked, I figured that you meant that own's own thought could properly judge divinity. I mean, how else could that question constitute being an answer? However, I was unsure, so I asked if you meant human thought determines divinity, because I wanted to know if I had understood you correctly.






Yes, and as already noted in this post, that was obviously being taken into consideration. In fact, the heart claim(s) are the basis upon which subsequent questions are being asked. The entire conversation was began by me with the intent to find out what you meant by the claims that you had been making. Quite simply, I do not find that your claims are worthy of belief, and none of your answers have served as reason to change my mind. I do not accept that one;s one's heart, thought, or conscience(however you'd like to put it) serves as a dependable guide, because that quite simply does not pan out when we look at real life. So, you can save the 'historical account' of our conversation, it is not necessary. It seems to me that I've a good grasp upon what has been discussed thus far.






A bunch of words that say nothing at all. Such ambiguity serves in opposition to clarity, which is what I'm seeking.






You're sorely mistaken, and it may be "funny" to some, but it serves as a clear sign to others. I mean, now you're going to tell me what I want? How could you possibly know that?

It does not follow from the fact that that's been your position when debating me that it's mine.

To quite the contrary, questions do not necessarily imply anything at all Pan. Although questions can imply lot's of things, they cannot do so all by themselves. Knowing that much should serve as caution against thinking that we know what's going on in the mind of our interlocutor. Since it has come up, I'll offer my own thinking so that you'll be able to have more accurate information about my wants rather than just what you (falsely)believe them to be.

It was not a rhetorical question, it was a legitimate one(which has yet have been answered, by the way). I asked whether or not you thought/believed that your conclusions were the only ones that could possibly be true because I wanted to know that, not because I already thought it. The question was aiming not at you personally as a target, but rather it was meant to serve as a segue to bigger and better things. Namely, what sound judgment takes.

So, I did not necessarily think that I already knew the answer to the question. I asked because I wanted to know the answer. Your response offered much more than that.






Some call that doing philosophy.






I'm well aware that everyone has their own opinion, but that is trivially true. I mean, it offers nothing more than showing how they're all the same. The differences shed light. What does offer more, is our knowing that not all opinions are equally well thought out. Opinions are about the facts, and not all can bear the weight of careful inspection. Not all opinions have what it takes to answer the pivotal questions, the answers of which will clearly show how well we understand what it is that we think/believe.






This is false.

In order for it to be true, I would have had to have refused to read scripture for my self and come to my own conclusions. Seeing how I've read the Bible several times over, and studied about it as well, the above claim clearly does not have what it takes to be true. Given what the facts are/were, it cannot ever obtain truth, for the claim cannot possibly correspond to that which it contradicts. Claims are expressions of belief. The one contained in the above quote is false.






Well, you've figured wrong.

The opinion here is based upon your belief regarding what you think "logical people" are, and more importantly it shows that you also believe that all "logical people" are same since you've clearly claimed that "logical people think they know everything..."







What I think about my own capability is utterly irrelevant. Knowing what it takes to be able to render sound judgment is what is at stake. That being said, in order for anyone to be capable of determining which scriptures are divine and which ones are not, sound judgement must be capable of being rendered. The judge would have to have a true understanding of what constitutes being each of those things. In other words, in order to be capable of judging whether something is or is not "divinely inspired", one must first know what being "divinely inspired" looks like, or it seems in your case 'feels' like.

Bibe translators were/are also very meticulous and

careful in translating the bible into different languages.

Translators make very sure the MEANING of scriptures does not

change whatsoever.

If you don't know the meaning, you are liable to change it anyway. Unwittingly, without trying.

Proof:

The Bible is infinitely complex.

Man's mind is finite, it can only know so many things.

To get the meaning of the bible, one must have a mind that is capable of accepting everything in the bible.

But man has no such mind.

Therefore meaning of the bible can NOT be translated.

Sin, I would only ask for proof if you were to make a claim about what is written in te Bible. Opinions don't require proof to anyone except the one who voices the opinion.

Anyway, I still don't know what you're trying to say...

Basically, putting it simply:

A child burning ants with a sun and magnifying glass.

Somewhat how I see God..

Not all nice and caring..
..but angry and lonely.

Sad for you...

So you think God has tortued you in the past?

Me personally? No.

According to what I've been informed:

"He doesn't alter 'free will'."

Meaning, everything that's happened has been the result of either a stranger's free will or my own.

However, how this world and our society has molded itself, is a direct result of HIS "will" and "actions".

"Actions speak louder than words."

I barely recall any situations in the Bible where God (Father) has done much of any said "good" actions.

Thus for me to assume he is all merciful good and loving; is beyond my capability.

I think sending Jesus (or whatever name he's going by) was his "cop-out" to his own actions and his way of "removing his liability" in what his creations now engage themselves in.

Weird, but I figure God is really unknowable.

Anyways, if he exists outside of our reality and is eternal, what does this life really mean in the larger scheme of things?

Life is a gift, whether temporarily or forever. It's how you spend your days that will define what you think of God and life itself...

If you spent your days burning ants, I could understand your position.

And my prediction still stands as true...

sin and sorrow,

If you don't believe in God, why do you talk about it so much?

..is it wrong to be curious?

A part of me wants to..
I did once..

..but due to never getting "answers".
..I drifted far from it.

So when I meet those that are "certain".
My curiosity sprouts.

I don't see curiosity. I see antagonism. You have to make up your own mind.

Just live your life as if....

as if it were the only one you will ever have.

Be healthy, be happy.

Whether or not there is a God or life after death is not anything you can do anything about. You have life. Don't waste it.


That's my friendly advice.

So, I take it that you just expect me to just accept your answers as though they're true even though they cannot be?

LOL, what answers of mine cannot be true?

You don't research your claims.
You don't support your claims.
You do NOT grasp the topics.

You just don't get it...

The ones that I've already talked about, and given the reason(s) why they cannot be true. Those would be the two posts which you keep ignoring the content of. Now if you really wish to know the answer to the question, then go back and read those posts a little more carefully, because it has already been explained.

Or perhaps you could just explain how you know that you've judged correctly.