Evidence

[Key]

4 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

Further, there is your continued insistence that I believe in nothing.  No.  I don't have your beliefs.  That is not believing in nothing.  Your inability to understand even this, is telling.  No.  You don't understand my perspective.  Clearly, you don't understand any point of view -- about anything --which is not yours.

 

 

 

In truth, that's how he always seems to come across to me, as well.

Sorry, Dan, but it's true.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

10 minutes ago, Key said:

I kinda disagree there, Dan. I often view your responses as a twist of your own perspective relating to their's but not really embracing their definitions of what they believe. It's always antagonistic towards your beliefs, by your responses.

Also, I kind of beg to differ on another response of yours. You said God doesn't have to prove himself to man, (maybe), but man must prove himself to God. (Not really.)

If God already knows what's in our hearts, as stated in Scripture, then there is no need to prove anything. 

As others have pointed out, there are many details that seem to either contradict or seem to be overly schematic. That may be one of them.

 

 

Yes.     

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

14 minutes ago, Key said:

In truth, that's how he always seems to come across to me, as well.

Sorry, Dan, but it's true.

 

 

I want to be clear about my message.  Dan is not stupid.  His mind is very, very rigid, but this is not stupidity.  It is a limitation.  I don't expect someone with sever arthritis, to engage in gymnastics.  I don't expect Dan, to understand Atheism.  Or Atheists.  I have been slow in understanding this.  I used to think that Dan was playing evil mind games.  No.  I was mistaken.  He has limits.

 

I don't know who said it.  "Never try to teach a pig to sing.  The attempt is doomed to fail -- and it annoys the pig."  

 

 

 

 

[Key]

3 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

I want to be clear about my message.  Dan is not stupid.  His mind is very, very rigid, but this is not stupidity.  It is a limitation.  I don't expect someone with sever arthritis, to engage in gymnastics.  I don't expect Dan, to understand Atheism.  Or Atheists.  I have been slow in understanding this.  I used to think that Dan was playing evil mind games.  No.  I was mistaken.  He has limits.

 

I don't know who said it.  "Never try to teach a pig to sing.  The attempt is doomed to fail -- and it annoys the pig."  

 

 

 

 

No, he is clearly not stupid. I have neither seen you imply that, nor think I have ever done so.

I don't think he would play mind games, either. Never got that impression.

He is just stubbornly persistent with his own interpretations of what others believe, despite being told otherwise by those very people.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

2 hours ago, Key said:

No, he is clearly not stupid. I have neither seen you imply that, nor think I have ever done so.

I don't think he would play mind games, either. Never got that impression.

He is just stubbornly persistent with his own interpretations of what others believe, despite being told otherwise by those very people.

 

 

 

This is not complicated.  Every idea that I put forth, gets filtered through Dan's belief system.  What emerges is not recognizable.   

 

It was never my intention to turn Dan into an Atheist.  Or an Agnostic.  I did try -- very hard -- to get Dan to understand, what those words mean.  It was a vain attempt.  It was also my conceit.  I used to think that I could explain anything, that I understood -- to anybody.  I was mistaken.  No matter.  I have learned a valuable lesson.  Life goes on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 26, 2019 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

Back to a look at evidence.

 

No matter how often faith and prayer fail.......          

 

 

 

[Dan56]

15 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

I was responding to your insistence, that there is no downside to faith.  I listed three downsides.  You responded.  Alright.  Your responses.

 

Is there a downside?  Several.

• It means NOT living an authentic life.  Why would I live a life, predicated on someone else's beliefs? Living what you believe to be true is as authentic as it gets.
• It's time consuming.  Life is short.  Too short to spend all that time in Bible study; worship services; prayer; etc. If you cherish something, you don't consider it a waste of time.
• It means being a coward.  If existence in Heaven is the carrot --- then the Lake of Fire is the stick.  I refuse to be afraid.  I refuse to be intimidated.  No matter how we play with words, this is a terrorist threat.  At that, rather a childish threat. There's no stick (Lake of Fire) to believers, so no downside. Believers believe Christ was right, so following him is doing the right thing, and there's nothing cowardly about doing that which is right.

1.   Living what you believe to be true is as authentic as it gets.

 

I am living my truth.  You are insisting that I live your truth.  No.  You don't understand my perspective.

 

2.  If you cherish something, you don't consider it a waste of time.

 

I am still responding to your insistence, that there is no downside -- for me -- to take up your faith.  The downside is that I take my short life -- and waste much of it -- living your life style.  That is one big honking downside.  No.  You don't understand my perspective.

 

3.  Believers believe Christ was right, so following him is doing the right thing, and there's nothing cowardly about doing that which is right.

 

I am still responding to your insistence, that there is no downside -- for me -- to take up your faith.  My doing so -- out of concern for the Lake of Fire -- comes close to defining cowardice.  I am not afraid.  I will not allow you to make me fearful.  You have tried.  For this, I cite your telling me, that Christ returning will be "unpleasant" for me.  Again, you don't understand my perspective.  

 

Further, there is your continued insistence that I believe in nothing.  No.  I don't have your beliefs.  That is not believing in nothing.  Your inability to understand even this, is telling.  No.  You don't understand my perspective.  Clearly, you don't understand any point of view -- about anything --which is not yours.

 

 

I wasn't suggesting that you live my truth, I was responding to your negative "downside" list of my faith (not authentic, time consuming, being a coward, & feeling threatened).. And also your negative "upside" list of my faith (no hope, no evidence, no inner peace). So I was defending my perspective, not denigrating yours.. And when I say that you believe in nothing, I'm specifically referring to anything divine or spiritual.

 

15 hours ago, Key said:

I kinda disagree there, Dan. I often view your responses as a twist of your own perspective relating to their's but not really embracing their definitions of what they believe. It's always antagonistic towards your beliefs, by your responses.

Also, I kind of beg to differ on another response of yours. You said God doesn't have to prove himself to man, (maybe), but man must prove himself to God. (Not really.)

If God already knows what's in our hearts, as stated in Scripture, then there is no need to prove anything. 

As others have pointed out, there are many details that seem to either contradict or seem to be overly schematic. That may be one of them.

 

Yes, I often compare my own perspective to that of others, but isn't that what Jonathan was doing when he disparaged my faith by pointing out his downside perspective of what I believe? Not to mention his list of "no upside" to believing in God? I don't embrace those definitions because I don't agree with them. 

 

God definitely test the hearts of men, it started in the Garden of Eden.. And I don't believe God knows every decision we will make, what we do and say reveals the heart. As I've pointed out before, God did not know whether Abraham would sacrifice Issac until he was about to do it, and then God said, "Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God" (Genesis 22:12). So I believe we are here to demonstrate our faith, "Whosoever Believeth" (John 3:16) is a call to believe,  its not foreknown who will be moved to accept the invitation.

[Dan56]

15 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

Dan is not stupid.

 

12 hours ago, Key said:

No, he is clearly not stupid.

 

You guys have obviously over-estimated my intellect ... I reckon that's about as close to a compliment as I'll get here

[Dan56]

9 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

Back to a look at evidence.

No matter how often faith and prayer fail.......          

 

That's not evidence, that's some nut who thinks he can control the weather... It rains on the just & unjust alike, if this wasn't true, the bible belt wouldn't get hit with so many tornado's.

[RevBogovac]

It takes (a lot) of courage for a man to admit he does not have all the answers and probably will never have them... and still continue to live his live as best as he can (only accepting evidence for the best answer possible at that moment in time).

 

Who was it that said: "the more I know the more I realise how little I know"...?

 

So I want to add another downside to living a lie: you do not only lose a lot of your valuable time, but you actually lose time that you could have spend on things that are scientifically proven to give live purpose, meaning and over-all well-being: spending time on a passion that you want to develop further (preferably in a team effort) and spending time enriching other peoples lives (giving mutual benefits)....

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

6 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

I wasn't suggesting that you live my truth, I was responding to your negative "downside" list of my faith (not authentic, time consuming, being a coward, & feeling threatened).. And also your negative "upside" list of my faith (no hope, no evidence, no inner peace). So I was defending my perspective, not denigrating yours.. And when I say that you believe in nothing, I'm specifically referring to anything divine or spiritual.

 

 

Yes, I often compare my own perspective to that of others, but isn't that what Jonathan was doing when he disparaged my faith by pointing out his downside perspective of what I believe? Not to mention his list of "no upside" to believing in God? I don't embrace those definitions because I don't agree with them. 

 

God definitely test the hearts of men, it started in the Garden of Eden.. And I don't believe God knows every decision we will make, what we do and say reveals the heart. As I've pointed out before, God did not know whether Abraham would sacrifice Issac until he was about to do it, and then God said, "Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God" (Genesis 22:12). So I believe we are here to demonstrate our faith, "Whosoever Believeth" (John 3:16) is a call to believe,  its not foreknown who will be moved to accept the invitation.

 

 

Dan, you made a flat declarative statement, that there were no downsides to becoming Christian.  I named three.  You call this disparaging?   "disparaged my faith"

 

When you insist on calling on Atheists to take up your faith.  When you further declare that doing so, has no downside.  Atheists are going to point out the downsides.  This is not disparaging.  This is refusing to take your crap.  The time for Atheists to roll over and just take it, is past.

 

 

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

3 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

It takes (a lot) of courage for a man to admit he does not have all the answers and probably will never have them... and still continue to live his live as best as he can (only accepting evidence for the best answer possible at that moment in time).

 

Who was it that said: "the more I know the more I realise how little I know"...?

 

So I want to add another downside to living a lie: you do not only lose a lot of your valuable time, but you actually lose time that you could have spend on things that are scientifically proven to give live purpose, meaning and over-all well-being: spending time on a passion that you want to develop further (preferably in a team effort) and spending time enriching other peoples lives (giving mutual benefits)....

 

 

Yes.     

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

7 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

I wasn't suggesting that you live my truth, I was responding to your negative "downside" list of my faith (not authentic, time consuming, being a coward, & feeling threatened).. And also your negative "upside" list of my faith (no hope, no evidence, no inner peace). So I was defending my perspective, not denigrating yours.. And when I say that you believe in nothing, I'm specifically referring to anything divine or spiritual.

 

 

Yes, I often compare my own perspective to that of others, but isn't that what Jonathan was doing when he disparaged my faith by pointing out his downside perspective of what I believe? Not to mention his list of "no upside" to believing in God? I don't embrace those definitions because I don't agree with them. 

 

God definitely test the hearts of men, it started in the Garden of Eden.. And I don't believe God knows every decision we will make, what we do and say reveals the heart. As I've pointed out before, God did not know whether Abraham would sacrifice Issac until he was about to do it, and then God said, "Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God" (Genesis 22:12). So I believe we are here to demonstrate our faith, "Whosoever Believeth" (John 3:16) is a call to believe,  its not foreknown who will be moved to accept the invitation.

 

 

So much for God being all knowing.  This is heretical at the most basic level.

 

 

 

 

[Dan56]

5 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

So I want to add another downside to living a lie: you do not only lose a lot of your valuable time, but you actually lose time that you could have spend on things that are scientifically proven to give live purpose, meaning and over-all well-being: spending time on a passion that you want to develop further (preferably in a team effort) and spending time enriching other peoples lives (giving mutual benefits)....

 

 

Its presumptuous to conclude that someone is living a lie without any evidence to support it. Just because God cannot be scientifically proven does not equate to a lie, it just demonstrates the limitations of science. The upside to God being real, is that time becomes an unimportant thing to live for, because time ends with the return of Christ. Life has no purpose beyond the grave without faith. For me, what little science can prove gives life little meaning.

 

2 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

Dan, you made a flat declarative statement, that there were no downsides to becoming Christian.  I named three.  You call this disparaging?   "disparaged my faith"

 

When you insist on calling on Atheists to take up your faith.  When you further declare that doing so, has no downside.  Atheists are going to point out the downsides.  This is not disparaging.  This is refusing to take your crap.  The time for Atheists to roll over and just take it, is past.

 

 

Pointing out the benefits of believing is not necessarily a call to anything. And if what I believe is true, there is no downside. If I said Atheism offers no hope, no inner peace, is a waste of time, is the cowards choice, and leads to no where, you would probably consider my perspective of atheism to be disparaging. Christians are going to point out the downsides. This is not disparaging. This is refusing to take your crap. See how the ball rolls both ways? 

 

1 hour ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

So much for God being all knowing.  This is heretical at the most basic level.

 

 

We were created in the image of God, we are independent spirits with free will, and our choices can be altered by what we experience. Yes God knows the heart (omniscient), and yes, God can also change the heart (omnipotent). I'm living proof of that. Whereby, nobodies destiny is written in stone until the fat lady sings, which is after the Great White Throne Judgement. 

[Key]

1 hour ago, Dan56 said:

 

Its presumptuous to conclude that someone is living a lie without any evidence to support it. Just because God cannot be scientifically proven does not equate to a lie, it just demonstrates the limitations of science. The upside to God being real, is that time becomes an unimportant thing to live for, because time ends with the return of Christ. Life has no purpose beyond the grave without faith. For me, what little science can prove gives life little meaning.

 

 

Pointing out the benefits of believing is not necessarily a call to anything. And if what I believe is true, there is no downside. If I said Atheism offers no hope, no inner peace, is a waste of time, is the cowards choice, and leads to no where, you would probably consider my perspective of atheism to be disparaging. Christians are going to point out the downsides. This is not disparaging. This is refusing to take your crap. See how the ball rolls both ways? 

 

 

We were created in the image of God, we are independent spirits with free will, and our choices can be altered by what we experience. Yes God knows the heart (omniscient), and yes, God can also change the heart (omnipotent). I'm living proof of that. Whereby, nobodies destiny is written in stone until the fat lady sings, which is after the Great White Throne Judgement. 

One showing only one side of a coin, someone is bound to want to see the other side of it, eventually. Basically, this is what you proffered when stating there are "no downsides". Someone is bound to counter that proclamation. Which is also expected when shared in a forum of open discussion.

[Key]

11 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

 

You guys have obviously over-estimated my intellect ... I reckon that's about as close to a compliment as I'll get here

Stupid can not debate analytically, or would clumsily do so in the attempt. I've not seen that of either of you. So, not an over-estimate, in my humble opinion.

[Key]

3 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

So much for God being all knowing.  This is heretical at the most basic level.

 

 

 

 

Was about to point that out, too. Guess I'm too slow for this race. 😉 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

51 minutes ago, Key said:

Was about to point that out, too. Guess I'm too slow for this race. 😉 

 

 

It's part of a larger pattern. 

• This doctrine that God is not all knowing -- that God can be surprised.   
• Dan also keeps insisting that Noah's Flood was a local event.  (All the animal "kinds" of the world, had to be saved from extinction.  Over a local disaster.)  
• That the Lake of Fire results in permanent extinction.  Not the eternal torment that Christianity has preached for 2,000 years.   

Dan is not preaching standard doctrine.  I don't know if he's making this crap up as he goes.  It looks like it.  To me, it looks like heresy.  Not the standard Evangelical teachings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

•  

Edited December 27, 2019 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

2 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

Its presumptuous to conclude that someone is living a lie without any evidence to support it. Just because God cannot be scientifically proven does not equate to a lie, it just demonstrates the limitations of science. The upside to God being real, is that time becomes an unimportant thing to live for, because time ends with the return of Christ. Life has no purpose beyond the grave without faith. For me, what little science can prove gives life little meaning.

 

 

Pointing out the benefits of believing is not necessarily a call to anything. And if what I believe is true, there is no downside. If I said Atheism offers no hope, no inner peace, is a waste of time, is the cowards choice, and leads to no where, you would probably consider my perspective of atheism to be disparaging. Christians are going to point out the downsides. This is not disparaging. This is refusing to take your crap. See how the ball rolls both ways? 

 

 

We were created in the image of God, we are independent spirits with free will, and our choices can be altered by what we experience. Yes God knows the heart (omniscient), and yes, God can also change the heart (omnipotent). I'm living proof of that. Whereby, nobodies destiny is written in stone until the fat lady sings, which is after the Great White Throne Judgement. 

 

If I said Atheism offers no hope, no inner peace, is a waste of time, is the cowards choice, and leads to no where, you would probably consider my perspective of atheism to be disparaging.

 

See how the ball rolls both ways? 

 

 

Cut the crap.  That has always been your opinion, and you have not been shy about stating it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

12 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

 

You guys have obviously over-estimated my intellect ... I reckon that's about as close to a compliment as I'll get here

 

 

I never said that you were stupid.  I said that your mind is very, very rigid.