< 1 2 3 4 5 >  Last ›
 
   
 

“I’m convinced he and I will sit on the same fence and chat amicably about the foolishness of certitude.”—saralynn, 24 November, 2013

 
bbearren
 
Avatar
 
 
bbearren
Total Posts:  3864
Joined  20-11-2013
 
 
 
30 October 2014 14:26
 
GAD - 30 October 2014 11:56 AM

So basically you don’t follow anything your gods holy books say.

Only one God, not gods. And I dare say I don’t read it as you might. RE the reading of Scripture, I’m not obligated to your rules, or those of any other human on this earth, for that matter.

[ Edited: 30 October 2014 14:48 by bbearren]
 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6436
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
30 October 2014 14:30
 
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:26 PM

I’m not obligated to your rules, or those of anyone else, for that matter.[/size]

You’re obligated by the rules of nature, are you not? And if God is nature as you have claimed, aren’t you therefore obligated by god’s rules? Are god’s rules different from the rules of nature? If not, what makes nature god?

[ Edited: 30 October 2014 14:44 by Jb8989]
 
 
bbearren
 
Avatar
 
 
bbearren
Total Posts:  3864
Joined  20-11-2013
 
 
 
30 October 2014 14:35
 
jb8989 - 30 October 2014 01:19 PM
bbearren - 29 October 2014 06:26 PM

I have not always been a believer.  For the first 40 or so years of my life, I was agnostic/atheistic.  I have used every argument against belief in God as I’ve read in these forums, as well as some others that I haven’t seen here.  But that was changed.  I have had revelations.  A couple I am unable to adequately describe, as they were neither visual nor audible.  A number have been visual, and a couple audible.  However, I will offer neither descriptions nor explanations, as I know such would be fruitless.

I am a believer.  I believe in God.  I believe God.  I believe in Christ.  I believe Christ.  My faith, however, is not like the faith of EN; I haven’t tossed the Old Testament, nor picked only my favorites from the New Testament.  My faith is not like the faith of Mario.  I’m not Catholic, I don’t hold the Pope or Mary in any holy regard, and there is no scriptural foundation for a so-called “doctrine of the trinity”.  I don’t subscribe to any theology, and have as little use for theology as I have for philosophy.

I have no intention of trying to convince/convert anyone.  I have no concern regarding whether or not my faith should be viewed as some alternative possible truth.  It does not matter.  Dismiss it as you will, I shall offer no counterpoint, no historical context, no proof.  Feel free to be as vehemently denigrative as you wish; it is meaningless.

I do not hold that God is “supernatural”.  It is my understanding that God is “nature”, to nature’s fullest extent.  My faith is nonapologetic, nor does it require acceptance.  It is mine; it does not meld fully with any denomination of which I am aware.  I do not consider myself a “christian” in the denoted sense of that word in today’s culture.  The earliest believers in Christ were known as followers of The Way; to that, I could ascribe.

And, as always, I’m easy to ignore.

This seems like another thread about you, but it’s in the Christianity section, yet you claim the your faith doesn’t mend well with any denomination. You can’t live with supernatural beliefs and pretend to want no part of the supernatural.

Nhoj, if this thread is inappropriately placed, I would appreciate it if you would move it as you see fit. Thanks.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17892
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
30 October 2014 14:36
 
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:26 PM
GAD - 30 October 2014 11:56 AM

So basically you don’t follow anything your gods holy books say.

Only one God, not gods. And I dare say I don’t read it as you might. I’m not obligated to your rules, or those of anyone else, for that matter.

I understand. But what you don’t understand is that when you pull a god out of your ass that God is the Butt Fairy.

 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6436
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
30 October 2014 14:39
 
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:35 PM
jb8989 - 30 October 2014 01:19 PM
bbearren - 29 October 2014 06:26 PM

I have not always been a believer.  For the first 40 or so years of my life, I was agnostic/atheistic.  I have used every argument against belief in God as I’ve read in these forums, as well as some others that I haven’t seen here.  But that was changed.  I have had revelations.  A couple I am unable to adequately describe, as they were neither visual nor audible.  A number have been visual, and a couple audible.  However, I will offer neither descriptions nor explanations, as I know such would be fruitless.

I am a believer.  I believe in God.  I believe God.  I believe in Christ.  I believe Christ.  My faith, however, is not like the faith of EN; I haven’t tossed the Old Testament, nor picked only my favorites from the New Testament.  My faith is not like the faith of Mario.  I’m not Catholic, I don’t hold the Pope or Mary in any holy regard, and there is no scriptural foundation for a so-called “doctrine of the trinity”.  I don’t subscribe to any theology, and have as little use for theology as I have for philosophy.

I have no intention of trying to convince/convert anyone.  I have no concern regarding whether or not my faith should be viewed as some alternative possible truth.  It does not matter.  Dismiss it as you will, I shall offer no counterpoint, no historical context, no proof.  Feel free to be as vehemently denigrative as you wish; it is meaningless.

I do not hold that God is “supernatural”.  It is my understanding that God is “nature”, to nature’s fullest extent.  My faith is nonapologetic, nor does it require acceptance.  It is mine; it does not meld fully with any denomination of which I am aware.  I do not consider myself a “christian” in the denoted sense of that word in today’s culture.  The earliest believers in Christ were known as followers of The Way; to that, I could ascribe.

And, as always, I’m easy to ignore.

This seems like another thread about you, but it’s in the Christianity section, yet you claim the your faith doesn’t mend well with any denomination. You can’t live with supernatural beliefs and pretend to want no part of the supernatural.

Nhoj, if this thread is inappropriately placed, I would appreciate it if you would move it as you see fit. Thanks.

Maybe it would be more appropriate for the introduction section as it will continue on for pages by BB and about BB. Mark my words. Notice all the I’s.

[ Edited: 30 October 2014 14:43 by Jb8989]
 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6436
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
30 October 2014 14:42
 
GAD - 30 October 2014 01:36 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:26 PM
GAD - 30 October 2014 11:56 AM

So basically you don’t follow anything your gods holy books say.

Only one God, not gods. And I dare say I don’t read it as you might. I’m not obligated to your rules, or those of anyone else, for that matter.

I understand. But what you don’t understand is that when you pull a god out of your ass that God is the Butt Fairy.

How I’ve missed the Butt Fairy! Did you know that he too is nature, at its greatest extent?

 
 
bbearren
 
Avatar
 
 
bbearren
Total Posts:  3864
Joined  20-11-2013
 
 
 
30 October 2014 14:51
 
jb8989 - 30 October 2014 01:30 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:26 PM

I’m not obligated to your rules, or those of anyone else, for that matter.[/size]

You’re obligated by the rules of nature, are you not? And if God is nature as you have claimed, aren’t you therefore obligated by god’s rules? Are god’s rules different from the rules of nature? If not, what makes nature god?

Read the edited post.

 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6436
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
30 October 2014 15:09
 
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:51 PM
jb8989 - 30 October 2014 01:30 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:26 PM

I’m not obligated to your rules, or those of anyone else, for that matter.[/size]

You’re obligated by the rules of nature, are you not? And if God is nature as you have claimed, aren’t you therefore obligated by god’s rules? Are god’s rules different from the rules of nature? If not, what makes nature god?

Read the edited post.

Are you defining “god” in a way that “god” wouldn’t be categorized as an “anyone?” Is god a thing to you? What type of entity/being is god to you? Is it a living god? How is nature at its fullest extent alive and to what extent?

 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6436
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
30 October 2014 15:13
 
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:51 PM
jb8989 - 30 October 2014 01:30 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:26 PM

I’m not obligated to your rules, or those of anyone else, for that matter.[/size]

You’re obligated by the rules of nature, are you not? And if God is nature as you have claimed, aren’t you therefore obligated by god’s rules? Are god’s rules different from the rules of nature? If not, what makes nature god?

Read the edited post.

also this:

People have always tried to conceptualize their beliefs in god within and around the magnitude of what can be considered “nature.” It’s a form of cognitive dissonance that results when theists attempt to make the god delusion comprehensible from a naturally adaptive standpoint. Also, in my opinion BB your post seems to me to be worded defensively, in a seeming attempt to close it off from opinion and rebuttal; Am I correct with this statement? 

I imagine your “understanding that god is nature” isn’t an interpretation, correct? Because you’ve already made it decidedly clear that you in no way interpret; remember? Wouldn’t it then follow that your understanding of god is different from that of Mario’s, EN’s and other’s in regard to the fact that you have made no interpretation of what god is? While they have admittedly interpreted text, scripture, science, their environment, culture findings and paradigm shifts etc. in formulating their understandings of who, what, when, and how god is, how did you come to “YOUR UNDERSTANDING” that god is nature without subscribing to a different definition and therefore a subjective interpretation of god and nature? Because scientifically and definitively nature and god are not the same. And because you made the claim that you have “little use for theology and philosophy,” I’m wondering with what form of discourse - if not science, philosophy, or theology - you’re using to define god and nature, as well as their oneness?

 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6436
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
30 October 2014 15:16
 
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:51 PM
jb8989 - 30 October 2014 01:30 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:26 PM

I’m not obligated to your rules, or those of anyone else, for that matter.[/size]

You’re obligated by the rules of nature, are you not? And if God is nature as you have claimed, aren’t you therefore obligated by god’s rules? Are god’s rules different from the rules of nature? If not, what makes nature god?

Read the edited post.

Does believing that god is nature involve an interpretation of god and nature? If not, what definitions are you using?

 
 
bbearren
 
Avatar
 
 
bbearren
Total Posts:  3864
Joined  20-11-2013
 
 
 
30 October 2014 15:31
 
GAD - 30 October 2014 01:36 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:26 PM
GAD - 30 October 2014 11:56 AM

So basically you don’t follow anything your gods holy books say.

Only one God, not gods. And I dare say I don’t read it as you might. I’m not obligated to your rules, or those of anyone else, for that matter.

I understand. But what you don’t understand is that when you pull a god out of your ass that God is the Butt Fairy.

OP paragraph 3.

 
 
bbearren
 
Avatar
 
 
bbearren
Total Posts:  3864
Joined  20-11-2013
 
 
 
30 October 2014 15:35
 
jb8989 - 30 October 2014 02:09 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:51 PM
jb8989 - 30 October 2014 01:30 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:26 PM

I’m not obligated to your rules, or those of anyone else, for that matter.[/size]

You’re obligated by the rules of nature, are you not? And if God is nature as you have claimed, aren’t you therefore obligated by god’s rules? Are god’s rules different from the rules of nature? If not, what makes nature god?

Read the edited post.

Are you defining “god” in a way that “god” wouldn’t be categorized as an “anyone?” Is god a thing to you? What type of entity/being is god to you? Is it a living god? How is nature at its fullest extent alive and to what extent?

OP paragraph 4.

 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6436
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
30 October 2014 15:35
 
bbearren - 30 October 2014 02:31 PM
GAD - 30 October 2014 01:36 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:26 PM
GAD - 30 October 2014 11:56 AM

So basically you don’t follow anything your gods holy books say.

Only one God, not gods. And I dare say I don’t read it as you might. I’m not obligated to your rules, or those of anyone else, for that matter.

I understand. But what you don’t understand is that when you pull a god out of your ass that God is the Butt Fairy.

OP paragraph 3.

What was your intent for starting another thread about yourself? To confess, like you said above?

 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6436
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
30 October 2014 15:39
 
bbearren - 30 October 2014 02:35 PM
jb8989 - 30 October 2014 02:09 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:51 PM
jb8989 - 30 October 2014 01:30 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:26 PM

I’m not obligated to your rules, or those of anyone else, for that matter.[/size]

You’re obligated by the rules of nature, are you not? And if God is nature as you have claimed, aren’t you therefore obligated by god’s rules? Are god’s rules different from the rules of nature? If not, what makes nature god?

Read the edited post.

Are you defining “god” in a way that “god” wouldn’t be categorized as an “anyone?” Is god a thing to you? What type of entity/being is god to you? Is it a living god? How is nature at its fullest extent alive and to what extent?

OP paragraph 4.

 

From OP para 4:

“I do not hold that God is “supernatural”.  It is my understanding that God is “nature”, to nature’s fullest extent.”

How did you come to this understanding without interpretation? With what form of discourse are you defining the language you used without necessitating an interpretation of GOD and NATURE? Are you dictionary shopping, you sly dog? Or are you interpreting the definitions of GOD and NATURE to be one?

 
 
bbearren
 
Avatar
 
 
bbearren
Total Posts:  3864
Joined  20-11-2013
 
 
 
30 October 2014 16:21
 
jb8989 - 30 October 2014 02:39 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 02:35 PM
jb8989 - 30 October 2014 02:09 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:51 PM
jb8989 - 30 October 2014 01:30 PM
bbearren - 30 October 2014 01:26 PM

I’m not obligated to your rules, or those of anyone else, for that matter.[/size]

You’re obligated by the rules of nature, are you not? And if God is nature as you have claimed, aren’t you therefore obligated by god’s rules? Are god’s rules different from the rules of nature? If not, what makes nature god?

Read the edited post.

Are you defining “god” in a way that “god” wouldn’t be categorized as an “anyone?” Is god a thing to you? What type of entity/being is god to you? Is it a living god? How is nature at its fullest extent alive and to what extent?

OP paragraph 4.

 

From OP para 4:

“I do not hold that God is “supernatural”.  It is my understanding that God is “nature”, to nature’s fullest extent.”

How did you come to this understanding without interpretation? With what form of discourse are you defining the language you used without necessitating an interpretation of GOD and NATURE? Are you dictionary shopping, you sly dog? Or are you interpreting the definitions of GOD and NATURE to be one?

OP paragraph 1.

 
 
 < 1 2 3 4 5 >  Last ›