Ah, I see. I accept that. Does this mean you're not going to explain the claims that you're making?

See that? You DON'T read what I post...


http://mingle2.com/topic/show/322134?page=10


2nd from bottom...



Care to answer those direct questions yet?

What question was asked that I did not answer that you would like me to? I'm willing to answer any question which is relevant, so if you ask and tell me how it is relevant, then I'll answer, if in return you'll answer the one that you keep ignoring.

1. "Simple... Do you think that killing an animal or a human to "atone" for your sins is divine?"

2. "If you are going to claim that Hitler passed the "heart" test, you will have to testify that you agree with his actions."


You wanna know how I know if I'm right regarding a moral decision? Good luck with that...


Unless of course you wish to explain your moral position regarding the above 2 questions and this:
"If a 40-year-old devoutly religious man wholeheartedly believes in the Word, and partakes in developing a personal relationship with a 14-year-old female and that relationship has a sexual aspect, isn't that man's and that female's 'hearts', so to speak, that are judging(determining) whether or not the relationship is acceptable?"

Meh.

Thought so.


My prediction still standing true and proud!

Take a bow.

Some do and some don't Pan. That is my point. What I, or anyone else thinks is irrelevant. It cannot be both, divine and not divine. If it is human thought that determined divinity, then the verses would be both... divinely inspired and not divinely inspired, which is impossible. A verse cannot be both, for one is the negation of the other. Do you understand that?



This makes no sense whatsoever, I already explained why. Perhaps it wasn't understood, for some reason. So, let me state it simply...

Hitler's actions were judged right by his own heart(conscience), not mine. It does not follow that I must agree with his actions.



No, I don't. Evidently we have more evidence here that what you're guilty of you project onto others, myself included. My question is how do you know that the conclusions you draw are true? Your criterion for judging whether or not something is true has already been shown to be in error several times over.



This changes the subject. Moral positions are not in question, although I'd look into a thread should you start one. What is in question is much more fundamental than a moral position.

How do you know that you've judged correctly? What criterion must be met in order for you to know that something is true(or not)?



My position is that one's own heart, if by "heart" we mean conscience, is the only thing that judges one's own actions.

Now, how do you know that you've judged correctly?

1. "Simple... Do you think that killing an animal or a human to "atone" for your sins is divine?"

2. "If you are going to claim that Hitler passed the "heart" test, you will have to testify that you agree with his actions."

He's after your opinion, Creative Soul; not everyones.

And you accuse others of not reading what you write. Do you not feel some kind of obligation to answer?

LOL!

I answered, gave my reasoning behind my answers and when you asked how I know if I judge correctly, I asked for your answers...



I'll lift my prediction, you may answer the questions now...

I'm giving it, and I'm explaining why I hold it.

One's own conscience(heart) cannot be said to be an adequate guide to determine what is or is not true, and that includes knowing which verses are divinely inspired and which ones are not, assuming that they are either or both. We know that that is the case because different people arrive at different and oppositional conclusions, all based upon their conscience.

In order to know what is or is not true, one must first know what it takes to be true, and being written in the Bible does not qualify in and of itself. So, if anything, he and I most likely agree that some things in the Bible do not seem to be divinely inspired.

My question still stands... unanswered

I'm not sure if you're being deliberately dishonest, or you just do not understand how incoherent your answers have been. I mean, I've already shown how they are in error, and you said that you did not care - which I can accept. However, you've not answered the important one. That is the question whose answer underwrites all others.

Do you (have an explanation for how you)know that you've judged correctly?

blah, blah, blah, dishonest, blah, blah,
blah, blah, , incoherent, blah, blah, blah,
blah, blah, blah, error, blah, blah, blah, blah,

The following two questions began my participation in this thread...

1.How on earth do we humans determine which of the biblical scriptures are divinely inspired and which ones aren't? 2. I mean, what could be possibly used as a criterion in order to judge which ones are to be believed and which ones aren't?



These answers cannot be true. According to the facts, as they occur, different people arrive at different conclusions regarding the same matters. SO... if 1."God's law was written on the hearts of all men" is true, and 2."if you test it and if your heart rejects it, then you know the answer" is also true, then we could not have different people coming to oppositional conclusions regarding the same matters. However, We do have such disagreement. It only follows that at least, if not both, of those claims are false.

Unless you know if another person is lying, you know NOTHING!

But Peterpan,

Creative is right that no two religions agree on the Bible. If what you say is true, then everyone should agree on what it means, and what scriptures are divinely inspired.

Probably no two persons agree.

So you don't make a lot of sense.

We do not need to know if another person is lying in order to know that different people come to oppositional conclusions regarding the same matters.