I don't find belief to be volitional and I don't understand why the majority does

[Uncle_Sol]

You seem to have some rather strange beliefs for someone that calls himself a Humanist.

Perhaps you are not?

I am working my way up from the foot and will study your points next, and then Mercury's in the two threads.

My own, as it happens extremely loose, vague, approximate, entirely self-chosen self-description reads (currently) Protestant, are you at some stage going to move on to me and query whether I "am" one because my beliefs actually are strange?

How are you helping Lucian by this as it's his thread? As mere fellow ordinary member I would hope to come across responses that complement the sum total of other responses so far. Forums were (I imagined) largely thought to be meant to be a lifeline in loneliness, by spreading knowledge and insight.

Or have I got the wrong attitude to join a forum? Too superficial, ad hominem rigidity could risk putting off more than just us few. I offer that as a perhaps rather middle of the road, maybe not very strange, idea, but that's just me.

 

[Uncle_Sol]

How does He prove that it's divine?

Briefly - by the life in those who depend on Holy Spirit Whom He brings.

 

[Mercury]

As mere fellow ordinary member I would hope to come across responses that complement the sum total of other responses so far. Forums were (I imagined) largely thought to be meant to be a lifeline in loneliness, by spreading knowledge and insight.

Or have I got the wrong attitude to join a forum? Too superficial, ad hominem rigidity could risk putting off more than just us few. I offer that as a perhaps rather middle of the road, maybe not very strange, idea, but that's just me.

Your insights and expectations of forum life gel with my own. There is great benefit and satisfaction and engagement in discussing interesting topics with others spread all across the globe. Unfortuantely experience shows that forums live or die on the strength and impartiality of their owners and administrators. I've seen plenty of forums come and go because their administrators simply couldn't abide the posts of anyone who disagreed with them and so simply banned them or forced them into untennable positions where other members were free to break the rules and insult them hoping that the unwanted member would do likewise so they could justify banning them.

Many forums, particularly religious centred forums are little more than echo chambers. They are glass bubbles which the administrators police to ensure no "nasty views and fringe opinions" get through to taint the otherwise captive audience within.

Christian forums in particular all seem to suffer from an abject fear of non-Christians debating Christian related topics. It's bizarre. In fact it's discriminatory. Why for example should a non-Christian be deemed incapable of debating Theology? Why should a non-Christian be censored from discussing say any given story in the Bible? It's senseless imho. I suspect that what is behind it is a total fear of a non-Christian running rings around a Christian Theologist. Plenty of scholars have studied the Bible and are well capable of holding their own in a "Bible Study" forum section such as exists here. Yet they are prevented from posting in such areas unless they profess to be a Christian. That's frankly ridiculous. A scholar could provide a really helpful new insight into given parts of the Bible.

Regardless, it's clear to me from your various posts that you DO have the right attitude to participate in a forum. However whether you will find success and benefit from doing in any given forum is always in the hands of those running the site and how well or not they manage it.

 

[Uncle_Sol]

from Lees:

See my 48, God's revelation is His offering to our capacity, it doesn't compete against it

The 'ability of folks to engender one's belief' does not play a role in Christian belief or faith. Scientists and philosophers and secularists all engender their beliefs.

The Christians faith/belief is obtained only by God. God reveals it to him.

Lees

 

[Uncle_Sol]

Why would any rational being willingly oppose God? What did they have to lose by accepting Jesus as the Messiah?

As touched upon by several of the others, there was the straightforward wariness among His honest colleagues such as Nicodemus around the possibility of false teachers and we know where this led Nicodemus.

Beyond that, He was daringly personal. All usually warring factions united to bring to Him the woman - not the couple - involved in adultery.

Writing in the dust was a permitted Sabbath activity as it is ephemeral. Jesus commended dill tithing when it is accompanied by a kindly heart.

Ones that wanted to catch Him out - rather than check Him out - couldn't fault Him, which was His way of letting His focus be known.

 

[Lamb]

Your insights and expectations of forum life gel with my own. There is great benefit and satisfaction and engagement in discussing interesting topics with others spread all across the globe. Unfortuantely experience shows that forums live or die on the strength and impartiality of their owners and administrators. I've seen plenty of forums come and go because their administrators simply couldn't abide the posts of anyone who disagreed with them and so simply banned them or forced them into untennable positions where other members were free to break the rules and insult them hoping that the unwanted member would do likewise so they could justify banning them.

Many forums, particularly religious centred forums are little more than echo chambers. They are glass bubbles which the administrators police to ensure no "nasty views and fringe opinions" get through to taint the otherwise captive audience within.

Christian forums in particular all seem to suffer from an abject fear of non-Christians debating Christian related topics. It's bizarre. In fact it's discriminatory. Why for example should a non-Christian be deemed incapable of debating Theology? Why should a non-Christian be censored from discussing say any given story in the Bible? It's senseless imho. I suspect that what is behind it is a total fear of a non-Christian running rings around a Christian Theologist. Plenty of scholars have studied the Bible and are well capable of holding their own in a "Bible Study" forum section such as exists here. Yet they are prevented from posting in such areas unless they profess to be a Christian. That's frankly ridiculous. A scholar could provide a really helpful new insight into given parts of the Bible.

Regardless, it's clear to me from your various posts that you DO have the right attitude to participate in a forum. However whether you will find success and benefit from doing in any given forum is always in the hands of those running the site and how well or not they manage it.

It's not fear. You see, by our name we are a "haven" for Christians here and we've been open going on 10 years (next year is our anniversary).

We respect God enough that we don't entertain non-believers' false beliefs. We allow questions that seek serious answers, but we don't allow them to push their beliefs. That's not fear.

 

[Mercury]

We respect God enough that we don't entertain non-believers' false beliefs. We allow questions that seek serious answers, but we don't allow them to push their beliefs. That's not fear.

Discussion of Theology, the intrictate meaning of Bible passages does not equate to "false beliefs". It would be supremely arrogant of any internet forum to believe it holds the monopoly on the correct interpretation of every Bible passage. I presume (and hope) you don't assume such a position here?

Even amongst the Christian community there exist multiple denominations and factions whovehemently disagree about the interpretation of various Bible passages. I very often see Fundamental Christian vitriol poured out unrestrained against Calvinsts for example on many forums.
Every person should be free to post about Theology and the Bible. Censoring people is simply wrong.

 

[Lamb]

Discussion of Theology, the intrictate meaning of Bible passages does not equate to "false beliefs". It would be supremely arrogant of any internet forum to believe it holds the monopoly on the correct interpretation of every Bible passage. I presume (and hope) you don't assume such a position here?

Even amongst the Christian community there exist multiple denominations and factions whovehemently disagree about the interpretation of various Bible passages. I very often see Fundamental Christian vitriol poured out unrestrained against Calvinsts for example on many forums.
Every person should be free to post about Theology and the Bible. Censoring people is simply wrong.

This is a Christian forum. We allow Christian beliefs to be promoted even though there are some variations, not anti-Christian beliefs which deny the one true Triune God who died for our sins so that we may have eternal life.

 

[Uncle_Sol]

Your insights and ... manage it.

Building on what I take as the main essence of what you are saying, and trying to help you put it into practice most effectively, some thoughts occurred to me.

Please find out what imagination is and use it in how to interact with fellow non-administrators who are morally of supreme importance, and how to relate alchemy and your other questions to thread owners and questions.

Why don't you interact when I start threads and / or invite me to start a thread of "our" own when I say something that interests you, as I'm sure it does.

At least one of the people who found themselves finding you annoying (forgive me if that's not the right word, it is early morning here) (post 51) does not appear to be an administrator.

May I draw everybody's attention to a quaint and extremely constructive feature - alarmingly called "ignore" LOL - which is not nasty at all as its main effect is to reduce the initial visual display on an ad hoc basis and one can "take a big peep" at all times by clicking "show ignored content".

Alchemy in its different versions not all of which you agree with (I assume), has presumably its / their place in "schemes of things". I would have thought we could relate points like this somehow to the central focus of the forum, and especially depending on the context being staked out by the thread starter.

Occasionally you have brought a question of your own which I found interesting and have addressed it as a fellow ordinary human being as you may have noticed.

We all occasionally talk across a thread or bring in something not relevant, but that gets outweighed by when we are assisting with the thread starter's focus.

You will surely have noticed several of us sometimes make enigmatic remarks that harmonise well with an alchemical outlook, you could give us a thumbs up for it.

Thus: respect me, respect Lucian, don't assume third parties are speaking for administrators. People that fall for wedge driving are a too easy target. Aren't you above that?

I can tell you are copying bad "christians" because those were the main source from where it earlier got spread through our society.

Give us space and time to show ourselves up, whether we are, as individuals, like that or not, and whether at a bad moment or consistently. Place boring people like me under the quite tactful "ignore". The space is all of ours to do so for ourselves, revolving around the stated centres. I hope the administrators don't "mind" me invading their philosophical territory!

Think deeply: why do we need you (I say we do). For an alchemist some of the way you unfolded your thinking processes didn't look very deep.

Key: an I-word: Imagination; the anthropology laboratory atop your shoulders. What and who you are and we ordinary members are.

Thread starter = stakeholder.

 

[Uncle_Sol]

On post 66, if I might be permitted. What was false? First I touched on whether or how much we honour the thread starter and those who appear to attempt to address them in it.

Secondly and arising out of that, and out of life in general, when someone doesn't attribute to us a faculty of imagination when we were even able to make alchemical remarks of our own. And if you don't attribute any imagination to yourself it worries us as it's like you sometimes don't want to be interacted with by ordinary members (administrators are concretely there to own the place). You could start your own threads to invite actual exploration of some of your concerns (depending whether you really want). We can't guess, we can only be pointed by the journey you did travel, the keys you typed on the screen.

Is there ambition to be our free ally? Are pronouns relative?

Personally I would hope to stimulate or provoke other ordinary members into giving non anodyne accounts in face of our existential angst (and mine is sky high too).

 

[Mercury]

On post 66, if I might be permitted. What was false?

I assume this question is aimed at @Lamb who made post #66

I'd be interested to hear the answer too. Also there was no reply to my question of why a non-Christian should be barred from debating Theological issues in the relevant forum section.

 

[Lamb]

I assume this question is aimed at @Lamb who made post #66

I'd be interested to hear the answer too. Also there was no reply to my question of why a non-Christian should be barred from debating Theological issues in the relevant forum section.

Our first rule here states that non-Christian beliefs are not to be promoted here. We are a Christian haven.

 

[Uncle_Sol]

I assume this question is aimed at @Lamb who made post #66

I'd be interested to hear the answer too. Also there was no reply to my question of why a non-Christian should be barred from debating Theological issues in the relevant forum section.

I provided the answer to you (which is still there) but you gave up reading, or pretended to. I as ordinary member was testing you and (then) hoping you wouldn't fall.

That's how the meaning of "discuss" was made perfectly clear enough.

In any case there is no point registering, or persevering in activity, if you reject the site rules that are there to protect honest human beings.

I as an ordinary member think you dishonest - and selfish for unbalancing Lucian's thread when you don't share his enquiry at all.

You only claim to hate administrators but really it's us you hate. You are an elitist like your teachers and that's why you gravely insult us ordinary members. You can't abide that we have differing and unique views.

I challenge you: state who are your teachers. By emulating them you became a nihilist.

 

[Uncle_Sol]

I assume this question is aimed at @Lamb who made post #66

Making out forum members who are more bona fide than you, are dishonest, like you did me, falls outside "acceptable beliefs".

Also you are disputing administrator decisions and there is a rule about that, aimed at protecting forum members smaller than and more honest than you.

 

[Uncle_Sol]

Frankj post 51 -

Apologies that

You seem to have some rather strange beliefs for someone that calls himself a Humanist.

Perhaps you are not?

I didn't cotton on because you didn't cite "why can't I travel" (which he can)

He is not a humanist because he clearly says we less supremacist members than him, are not human beings.

He's also raising himself above site rules. He's malicious towards enquirers, to not go somewhere where there aren't any.

 

[Lamb]

Your insights and expectations of forum life gel with my own. There is great benefit and satisfaction and engagement in discussing interesting topics with others spread all across the globe. Unfortuantely experience shows that forums live or die on the strength and impartiality of their owners and administrators. I've seen plenty of forums come and go because their administrators simply couldn't abide the posts of anyone who disagreed with them and so simply banned them or forced them into untennable positions where other members were free to break the rules and insult them hoping that the unwanted member would do likewise so they could justify banning them.

Many forums, particularly religious centred forums are little more than echo chambers. They are glass bubbles which the administrators police to ensure no "nasty views and fringe opinions" get through to taint the otherwise captive audience within.

Christian forums in particular all seem to suffer from an abject fear of non-Christians debating Christian related topics. It's bizarre. In fact it's discriminatory. Why for example should a non-Christian be deemed incapable of debating Theology? Why should a non-Christian be censored from discussing say any given story in the Bible? It's senseless imho. I suspect that what is behind it is a total fear of a non-Christian running rings around a Christian Theologist. Plenty of scholars have studied the Bible and are well capable of holding their own in a "Bible Study" forum section such as exists here. Yet they are prevented from posting in such areas unless they profess to be a Christian. That's frankly ridiculous. A scholar could provide a really helpful new insight into given parts of the Bible.

Regardless, it's clear to me from your various posts that you DO have the right attitude to participate in a forum. However whether you will find success and benefit from doing in any given forum is always in the hands of those running the site and how well or not they manage it.

I think that there is some more wanting of explanation as to why we here at Christianity Haven do not allow non-believers to debate theology.

One big reason is because non-believers will speak blasphemy against God. Why should we allow such language toward the God that we revere?

The first rule stated in our Rules: Site Rules
Exodus 20:2-3 I am the Lord your God...you shall have no other gods before me.
Promotion of non-Christian beliefs is not allowed.

This site is a "haven" for Christians who are tired of being persecuted on the internet and having their beliefs misaligned. Yes, we have various beliefs ourselves, but we do not blaspheme the Lord. We have the basic core beliefs that Jesus died for our sins and we will have eternal life with Him.

Why would a non-believer want to come to a Christian forum to "debate" unless it was to try to convince Christians that they're wrong and to turn away from their beliefs? Well, that's exactly what isn't going to happen on this site. You are the ones who are wrong in your beliefs (yes, I say that with full confidence), not us.

 

[Mercury]

I as an ordinary member think you dishonest - and selfish for unbalancing Lucian's thread when you don't share his enquiry at all.

Hi US

I very much do sympathise with Lucian's enquiry and experiences which is why I commented in his thread. He made mention of Jesus's parables and suggested that this practice might have contributed to many people finding difficulty with belief so I tried to help by explaining what I believe was the reason for Jesus's parables and what the "Mysteries of The Kingdom" are that is associated with them.

I regret that the thread was then temporarily derailed by subsequent discussion of my interpretation of the parables and alchemy.
I hope that Lucian will forgive that side track and re-join the thread in due course.

 

[BruceLeiter]

I have no idea what I am missing, whether it be intellectual, emotional, spiritual etc. I genuinely cannot come to terms with the idea that belief / faith is volitional, namely something that we can choose to have or not have. It just doesn't seem to be that way to me. I don't know how to muster up faith in anything without evidence that I find satisfying in regards to the thing I'm supposed to have faith in.

I simply cannot understand how other people are (or claim to be) able to. I also cannot understand why the statement that "faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God" doesn't apply to me. God knows that I've spend years praying, reading Scripture, watching and listening to Christian content, yet here I am, more misotheistic than ever, because I apply the Word to my life and it simply doesn't produce the results that The Bible says it should produce.

Those who claim that faith is volitional, please answer me: can you choose to suddenly believe in any other religion? Why not? Because you have not found sufficient evidence to support the claims of those religions? Or because you were raised a Christian and Christianity states that all other religions are wrong?

Why would God demand faith as the only criteria for salvation from us while being fully aware that we are flawed beings who live in a world in which the father of lies roams around day and night? It seem absurd. We could be fooled into believing anything. Why would Jesus hold the people's sins against them ("this wicked and perverted generation will not be given any signs") and refuse to offer the Pharisees good reason to convince them of His claims? Why would The Prince of Peace come to bring a sword and division among people despite being omnipotent and omnibenevolent and, thus, able to create peace on earth without testing anyone's loyalty?

Damning people to eternal torture because of lacking faith in the current context of our current existence in a fallen world filled with deceit is absolutely unfair. If a criteria were to be chosen for deciding salvation, it should be reason. We should be provided with sufficient proof of the reality of Gospel and those who, in spite of said proof, rejected it or chose to ignore it, should be judged.

Blessed are those who believe? Why? Who not those who reason? Why not those who obey after having received satisfying proof?

You say that your faith doesn't produce the results that the Bible says it should. What do you mean? Do you expect to become perfect when you have faith? We don't. What are you referring to in the Bible?