Total Posts:49|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Belief in Oneself

s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2014 8:30:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

I am the voice of the Lord and have been testifying to God's knowledge ever since I started in this forum. There are many antichrists who reject His voice. However, there a few believers, although skeptical about some of His knowledge, who are listening to His voice.

Are you an antichrist or skeptical believer of the gospel I preach?
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 8:30:19 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

I am the voice of the Lord and have been testifying to God's knowledge ever since I started in this forum. There are many antichrists who reject His voice. However, there a few believers, although skeptical about some of His knowledge, who are listening to His voice.

Are you an antichrist or skeptical believer of the gospel I preach?

I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever. I am a christ and a son of perdition.
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2014 9:39:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:30:19 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

I am the voice of the Lord and have been testifying to God's knowledge ever since I started in this forum. There are many antichrists who reject His voice. However, there a few believers, although skeptical about some of His knowledge, who are listening to His voice.

Are you an antichrist or skeptical believer of the gospel I preach?

I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever. I am a christ and a son of perdition.

You will listen to My voice if you're a believer. If you don't listen, you don't know Me.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2014 9:51:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 9:39:30 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:30:19 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

I am the voice of the Lord and have been testifying to God's knowledge ever since I started in this forum. There are many antichrists who reject His voice. However, there a few believers, although skeptical about some of His knowledge, who are listening to His voice.

Are you an antichrist or skeptical believer of the gospel I preach?

I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever. I am a christ and a son of perdition.

You will listen to My voice if you're a believer. If you don't listen, you don't know Me.

I do hear the voice of wisdom and her sister, folly. I have known one by the utterances of the other.
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2014 9:57:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 9:51:51 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:39:30 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:30:19 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

I am the voice of the Lord and have been testifying to God's knowledge ever since I started in this forum. There are many antichrists who reject His voice. However, there a few believers, although skeptical about some of His knowledge, who are listening to His voice.

Are you an antichrist or skeptical believer of the gospel I preach?

I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever. I am a christ and a son of perdition.

You will listen to My voice if you're a believer. If you don't listen, you don't know Me.

I do hear the voice of wisdom and her sister, folly. I have known one by the utterances of the other.

You do not know Me. Your skepticism keeps you in twisted confusion because you do not listen to My voice or obey My commandments. Those who don't listen to My voice will remain cursed by what they observe.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,208
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2014 10:02:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 9:57:05 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:51:51 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:39:30 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:30:19 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

I am the voice of the Lord and have been testifying to God's knowledge ever since I started in this forum. There are many antichrists who reject His voice. However, there a few believers, although skeptical about some of His knowledge, who are listening to His voice.

Are you an antichrist or skeptical believer of the gospel I preach?

I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever. I am a christ and a son of perdition.

You will listen to My voice if you're a believer. If you don't listen, you don't know Me.

I do hear the voice of wisdom and her sister, folly. I have known one by the utterances of the other.

You do not know Me. Your skepticism keeps you in twisted confusion because you do not listen to My voice or obey My commandments. Those who don't listen to My voice will remain cursed by what they observe.

So you think you are the only person whom has been 'sainted'? Cause it seems your conversationmate here seems to have your script.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2014 10:05:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

The skeptic doesn't claim to know either.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2014 10:06:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever.

So what exactly is it that you believe while not believing?
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2014 10:11:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 10:02:43 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:57:05 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:51:51 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:39:30 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:30:19 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

I am the voice of the Lord and have been testifying to God's knowledge ever since I started in this forum. There are many antichrists who reject His voice. However, there a few believers, although skeptical about some of His knowledge, who are listening to His voice.

Are you an antichrist or skeptical believer of the gospel I preach?

I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever. I am a christ and a son of perdition.

You will listen to My voice if you're a believer. If you don't listen, you don't know Me.

I do hear the voice of wisdom and her sister, folly. I have known one by the utterances of the other.

You do not know Me. Your skepticism keeps you in twisted confusion because you do not listen to My voice or obey My commandments. Those who don't listen to My voice will remain cursed by what they observe.

So you think you are the only person whom has been 'sainted'? Cause it seems your conversationmate here seems to have your script.

I'm the last of God's saints to testify to the Word of God where we all exist. The last saint was killed by the Roman government before the Roman Emperor Constantine announced that Christianity was the main religion of the Roman Empire. This stopped the first of the two witnesses. The second witness is happening right now.

Revelation 11
3: And I will grant my two witnesses power to prophesy for one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth."
4: These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands which stand before the Lord of the earth.
5: And if any one would harm them, fire pours out from their mouth and consumes their foes; if any one would harm them, thus he is doomed to be killed.
6: They have power to shut the sky, that no rain may fall during the days of their prophesying, and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood, and to smite the earth with every plague, as often as they desire.
7: And when they have finished their testimony, the beast that ascends from the bottomless pit will make war upon them and conquer them and kill them,

Check out the severe drought in Campbell, CA. where I've been witnessing to God's chosen believers for the past 40 months.

http://ca.gov...
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,208
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2014 10:16:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 10:11:01 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 10:02:43 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:57:05 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:51:51 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:39:30 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:30:19 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

I am the voice of the Lord and have been testifying to God's knowledge ever since I started in this forum. There are many antichrists who reject His voice. However, there a few believers, although skeptical about some of His knowledge, who are listening to His voice.

Are you an antichrist or skeptical believer of the gospel I preach?

I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever. I am a christ and a son of perdition.

You will listen to My voice if you're a believer. If you don't listen, you don't know Me.

I do hear the voice of wisdom and her sister, folly. I have known one by the utterances of the other.

You do not know Me. Your skepticism keeps you in twisted confusion because you do not listen to My voice or obey My commandments. Those who don't listen to My voice will remain cursed by what they observe.

So you think you are the only person whom has been 'sainted'? Cause it seems your conversationmate here seems to have your script.

I'm the last of God's saints to testify to the Word of God where we all exist. The last saint was killed by the Roman government before the Roman Emperor Constantine announced that Christianity was the main religion of the Roman Empire. This stopped the first of the two witnesses. The second witness is happening right now.

Revelation 11
3: And I will grant my two witnesses power to prophesy for one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth."
4: These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands which stand before the Lord of the earth.
5: And if any one would harm them, fire pours out from their mouth and consumes their foes; if any one would harm them, thus he is doomed to be killed.
6: They have power to shut the sky, that no rain may fall during the days of their prophesying, and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood, and to smite the earth with every plague, as often as they desire.
7: And when they have finished their testimony, the beast that ascends from the bottomless pit will make war upon them and conquer them and kill them,

Check out the severe drought in Campbell, CA. where I've been witnessing to God's chosen believers for the past 40 months.

http://ca.gov...

I would have thought you have been in Australia, they are going on 4 years almost.

Or parts of Africa.
Or Central America.

Course then again it just sounds like you are being a d!ck, but thats just me. Considering this power you poses, why not get REAL creative with the power, head over to Michigan, turn the great lakes to blood and command an audience?

In B4 God asked you to remain in Cali.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 7:54:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
The skeptic doesn't claim to know either.

I beg to differ. Anytime a skeptic attacks a believer's sense of integrity or claims a believer is delusional, he, or she, is making it clear he, or she, believes to know that which is occurring in the believer's heart. This happens all the time with skeptics and believers. Both parties are guilty of doing it.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 7:56:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 10:06:29 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever.

So what exactly is it that you believe while not believing?

Everything.
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 8:18:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 10:16:21 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 11/11/2014 10:11:01 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 10:02:43 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:57:05 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:51:51 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:39:30 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:30:19 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

I am the voice of the Lord and have been testifying to God's knowledge ever since I started in this forum. There are many antichrists who reject His voice. However, there a few believers, although skeptical about some of His knowledge, who are listening to His voice.

Are you an antichrist or skeptical believer of the gospel I preach?

I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever. I am a christ and a son of perdition.

You will listen to My voice if you're a believer. If you don't listen, you don't know Me.

I do hear the voice of wisdom and her sister, folly. I have known one by the utterances of the other.

You do not know Me. Your skepticism keeps you in twisted confusion because you do not listen to My voice or obey My commandments. Those who don't listen to My voice will remain cursed by what they observe.

So you think you are the only person whom has been 'sainted'? Cause it seems your conversationmate here seems to have your script.

I'm the last of God's saints to testify to the Word of God where we all exist. The last saint was killed by the Roman government before the Roman Emperor Constantine announced that Christianity was the main religion of the Roman Empire. This stopped the first of the two witnesses. The second witness is happening right now.

Revelation 11
3: And I will grant my two witnesses power to prophesy for one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth."
4: These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands which stand before the Lord of the earth.
5: And if any one would harm them, fire pours out from their mouth and consumes their foes; if any one would harm them, thus he is doomed to be killed.
6: They have power to shut the sky, that no rain may fall during the days of their prophesying, and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood, and to smite the earth with every plague, as often as they desire.
7: And when they have finished their testimony, the beast that ascends from the bottomless pit will make war upon them and conquer them and kill them,

Check out the severe drought in Campbell, CA. where I've been witnessing to God's chosen believers for the past 40 months.

http://ca.gov...

I would have thought you have been in Australia, they are going on 4 years almost.

Or parts of Africa.
Or Central America.

Course then again it just sounds like you are being a d!ck, but thats just me. Considering this power you poses, why not get REAL creative with the power, head over to Michigan, turn the great lakes to blood and command an audience?

In B4 God asked you to remain in Cali.

Antichrists like you will reject any knowledge of God that's presented by one of His saints. You would rather listen to your own interpretations of the prophecies like the rest of My people.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 8:40:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 7:54:35 AM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic doesn't claim to know either.

I beg to differ. Anytime a skeptic attacks a believer's sense of integrity or claims a believer is delusional, he, or she, is making it clear he, or she, believes to know that which is occurring in the believer's heart.

Now you're changing your language.

If the skeptic claims that the believer is delusional, then he is in fact making a statement about what is going in in the believers "heart". But that's not what you said. You said that anytime a doubter questions the believer...

There is a big difference. A skeptic is someone who questions. And questioning the truth of someone else's proposition is in no way a statement about the individual making the claim. Skeptics can make claims or reach conclusions about the individual but making claims is not skepticism.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 8:42:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 7:56:21 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 10:06:29 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever.

So what exactly is it that you believe while not believing?

Everything.

You do realize that you are logically contradicting yourself right?
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 9:19:46 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 8:42:12 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/12/2014 7:56:21 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 10:06:29 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever.

So what exactly is it that you believe while not believing?

Everything.

You do realize that you are logically contradicting yourself right?

Yes. I was hoping you did, too.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,208
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 9:21:02 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

I am the voice of the Lord and have been testifying to God's knowledge ever since I started in this forum. There are many antichrists who reject His voice. However, there a few believers, although skeptical about some of His knowledge, who are listening to His voice.

Are you an antichrist or skeptical believer of the gospel I preach?

I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever. I am a christ and a son of perdition.

You will listen to My voice if you're a believer. If you don't listen, you don't know Me.

I do hear the voice of wisdom and her sister, folly. I have known one by the utterances of the other.

You do not know Me. Your skepticism keeps you in twisted confusion because you do not listen to My voice or obey My commandments. Those who don't listen to My voice will remain cursed by what they observe.

So you think you are the only person whom has been 'sainted'? Cause it seems your conversationmate here seems to have your script.

I'm the last of God's saints to testify to the Word of God where we all exist. The last saint was killed by the Roman government before the Roman Emperor Constantine announced that Christianity was the main religion of the Roman Empire. This stopped the first of the two witnesses. The second witness is happening right now.

Revelation 11
3: And I will grant my two witnesses power to prophesy for one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth."
4: These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands which stand before the Lord of the earth.
5: And if any one would harm them, fire pours out from their mouth and consumes their foes; if any one would harm them, thus he is doomed to be killed.
6: They have power to shut the sky, that no rain may fall during the days of their prophesying, and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood, and to smite the earth with every plague, as often as they desire.
7: And when they have finished their testimony, the beast that ascends from the bottomless pit will make war upon them and conquer them and kill them,

Check out the severe drought in Campbell, CA. where I've been witnessing to God's chosen believers for the past 40 months.

http://ca.gov...

I would have thought you have been in Australia, they are going on 4 years almost.

Or parts of Africa.
Or Central America.

Course then again it just sounds like you are being a d!ck, but thats just me. Considering this power you poses, why not get REAL creative with the power, head over to Michigan, turn the great lakes to blood and command an audience?

In B4 God asked you to remain in Cali.

Antichrists like you will reject any knowledge of God that's presented by one of His saints. You would rather listen to your own interpretations of the prophecies like the rest of My people.

I don't deem my self to be a person of significant influence enough to be an antiChrist. But, I know that if I was witnessing to some of God's chosen (by your words, not mine), I probably wouldn't force a drought upon them, and if I was really supposed to spread the world of God, and could change water into blood at a whim, by the time I got done with the Great Lakes, there would be no question if God existed, or if I could smite people with plagues as I saw fit, I would be on the first plane to Baghdad, and stopping that sillyness with ISIS over there by smacking them with the words of the TRUE God, saving countless lives, winning countless converts, and not causing a population in California to suffer a drought even though they already believe what you say.

But, you know. He moves in mysterious ways, and all that crap.

Or you are straight up living in a fantasy land. That could be just (if not more) reasonable, too.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 9:22:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 9:19:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:42:12 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/12/2014 7:56:21 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 10:06:29 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever.

So what exactly is it that you believe while not believing?

Everything.

You do realize that you are logically contradicting yourself right?

Yes. I was hoping you did, too.

You were hoping that I would realize that you were contradicting yourself? Strange goal, but ok.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 9:29:46 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Now you're changing your language.

If the skeptic claims that the believer is delusional, then he is in fact making a statement about what is going in in the believers "heart". But that's not what you said. You said that anytime a doubter questions the believer...

There is a big difference. A skeptic is someone who questions. And questioning the truth of someone else's proposition is in no way a statement about the individual making the claim. Skeptics can make claims or reach conclusions about the individual but making claims is not skepticism.

Sorry, but that's, exactly, that which I said. If I didn't, this thread would not exist. Please read the OP before making comments.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 9:33:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 9:22:07 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/12/2014 9:19:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:42:12 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/12/2014 7:56:21 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 10:06:29 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever.

So what exactly is it that you believe while not believing?

Everything.

You do realize that you are logically contradicting yourself right?

Yes. I was hoping you did, too.

You were hoping that I would realize that you were contradicting yourself? Strange goal, but ok.

And, I was also hoping you realized you contradict yourself, also.
ThinkFirst
Posts: 1,391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 9:40:02 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

The "look within" philosophy may sound profound, but there is far too much that cannot be found in one's "inner self" for this axiomatic claim to be anything more than problematic. A personal experience is exactly that: personal. Since the experience, the feeling, and the thoughts produced cannot be "shared," in any real sense, they cannot be offered as "evidence," on the word of the individual doing the experiencing. The aggressive stance that the experiencing individual is being called a "liar," if the details of the experience are not accepted is meaningless. Real to the individual, or not, no one outside of the individual can be expected to accept the "experience" as "evidence." While credible testimony may be acceptable in a court of law, it is completely meaningless, in the court of realistic science. Nothing intangible or immeasurable can or even should be presented as "evidence." Ever.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

Whether honesty is questioned, or delusion is believed is not the issue. Attempting to vilify the skeptic by becoming indignant does nothing to VERIFY the truth. Whining about having one's integrity or cognitive faculties questioned is not evidence, either. It is an attempt at shaming people into accepting non-evidential expressions in the same context as objective, tangible evidence. The two are not (and CANNOT be) on the same level of falsifiable evidence. Claiming that one has been insulted does nothing to relieve this condition. While the OP states that integrity/faculties are questioned, it is left hanging in the air as though it's a bad thing. Nothing is offered in support of why this would be wrong. Nothing is offered as to how this is, in any way, a dismissal of valid evidence. Experience is not valid evidence, when discussing existence/non-existence. If the individual experiencing decides to accept it, that is up to the individual. That does not, in any way, obligate any other to accept it on the same level, morally or otherwise.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

No, the skeptic is not operating out of ignorance. The skeptic is operating out of a lack of VALID evidence. It is correct that there is no way for the skeptic to know that the individual is lying. There is equally little way of knowing that the experience was, in any way, meaningful. This still does nothing to validate the experience, in the mind of the skeptic. That's why the skeptic IS A SKEPTIC. You are, in effect, demanding that any experience be immediately and unconditionally be stamped with the validity that it has not merited. While the person experiencing may very well, indeed, be convinced of the meaning and the nature of the experience, stamping one's feet and demanding that it be accepted under penalty of being "unfair." This is not justification for the validity of "experience" as "evidence." This is whining that one's experience is not believed on the merit of the interpretation of the one experiencing. Whining is no more evidence than experience.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

While this (again) may sound "profound," it does nothing to validate "experience." The only person to whom an "experience" is valuable is the one experiencing. Demanding that another accept that experience and believe is simply being childish. That is, in effect, demanding that one's word be good enough to cause others to believe. That is not a valid demand.
"Never attribute to villainy that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
-----
"Men rarely if ever dream up a god superior to themselves. Most gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child. "

-- Robert A Heinlein
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 9:47:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

Good point
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 10:06:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 9:29:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
Now you're changing your language.

If the skeptic claims that the believer is delusional, then he is in fact making a statement about what is going in in the believers "heart". But that's not what you said. You said that anytime a doubter questions the believer...

There is a big difference. A skeptic is someone who questions. And questioning the truth of someone else's proposition is in no way a statement about the individual making the claim. Skeptics can make claims or reach conclusions about the individual but making claims is not skepticism.

Sorry, but that's, exactly, that which I said. If I didn't, this thread would not exist. Please read the OP before making comments.

I read your OP. Did you? That's not what you just said. This was the main point of your OP:

"However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes..."

Notice the bold, which are the parts I was objecting to. You are putting words in the skeptics mouths then attacking the words you just put in there. A skeptic is someone who critically examines (questions) propositions he or she is presented with before accepting them. The reason why he or she questions them is not only irrelevant to the fact that they are being skeptical but there are many potential reasons why they are questioning them so your explanation does not necessarily follow.

The second bold where you talk about what the skeptic believes is also irrelevant. Skepticism is not a belief regarding the proposition or the individual presenting it, so you are refuting ones skepticism by criticizing something that is not skepticism.

And if you agree with what I just said then take your own advice and read your OP.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 10:08:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 9:33:29 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/12/2014 9:22:07 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/12/2014 9:19:46 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:42:12 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/12/2014 7:56:21 AM, s-anthony wrote:
At 11/11/2014 10:06:29 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/11/2014 9:27:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever.

So what exactly is it that you believe while not believing?

Everything.

You do realize that you are logically contradicting yourself right?

Yes. I was hoping you did, too.

You were hoping that I would realize that you were contradicting yourself? Strange goal, but ok.

And, I was also hoping you realized you contradict yourself, also.

You do realize that my first response was sarcastic right?
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 10:43:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 9:21:02 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

I am the voice of the Lord and have been testifying to God's knowledge ever since I started in this forum. There are many antichrists who reject His voice. However, there a few believers, although skeptical about some of His knowledge, who are listening to His voice.

Are you an antichrist or skeptical believer of the gospel I preach?

I am both. I am a believer and an unbeliever. I am a christ and a son of perdition.

You will listen to My voice if you're a believer. If you don't listen, you don't know Me.

I do hear the voice of wisdom and her sister, folly. I have known one by the utterances of the other.

You do not know Me. Your skepticism keeps you in twisted confusion because you do not listen to My voice or obey My commandments. Those who don't listen to My voice will remain cursed by what they observe.

So you think you are the only person whom has been 'sainted'? Cause it seems your conversationmate here seems to have your script.

I'm the last of God's saints to testify to the Word of God where we all exist. The last saint was killed by the Roman government before the Roman Emperor Constantine announced that Christianity was the main religion of the Roman Empire. This stopped the first of the two witnesses. The second witness is happening right now.

Revelation 11
3: And I will grant my two witnesses power to prophesy for one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth."
4: These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands which stand before the Lord of the earth.
5: And if any one would harm them, fire pours out from their mouth and consumes their foes; if any one would harm them, thus he is doomed to be killed.
6: They have power to shut the sky, that no rain may fall during the days of their prophesying, and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood, and to smite the earth with every plague, as often as they desire.
7: And when they have finished their testimony, the beast that ascends from the bottomless pit will make war upon them and conquer them and kill them,

Check out the severe drought in Campbell, CA. where I've been witnessing to God's chosen believers for the past 40 months.

http://ca.gov...

I would have thought you have been in Australia, they are going on 4 years almost.

Or parts of Africa.
Or Central America.

Course then again it just sounds like you are being a d!ck, but thats just me. Considering this power you poses, why not get REAL creative with the power, head over to Michigan, turn the great lakes to blood and command an audience?

In B4 God asked you to remain in Cali.

Antichrists like you will reject any knowledge of God that's presented by one of His saints. You would rather listen to your own interpretations of the prophecies like the rest of My people.

I don't deem my self to be a person of significant influence enough to be an antiChrist. But, I know that if I was witnessing to some of God's chosen (by your words, not mine), I probably wouldn't force a drought upon them, and if I was really supposed to spread the world of God, and could change water into blood at a whim, by the time I got done with the Great Lakes, there would be no question if God existed, or if I could smite people with plagues as I saw fit, I would be on the first plane to Baghdad, and stopping that sillyness with ISIS over there by smacking them with the words of the TRUE God, saving countless lives, winning countless converts, and not causing a population in California to suffer a drought even though they already believe what you say.

But, you know. He moves in mysterious ways, and all that crap.

Or you are straight up living in a fantasy land. That could be just (if not more) reasonable, too.

Like I said, antichrists reject any knowledge that us saints speak or write for our invisible Creator.

What's interesting is how they believe words written in a book called a Bible, but only selected scriptures that they use to protect their lies.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 11:05:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 10:43:10 AM, bornofgod wrote:
Like I said, antichrists reject any knowledge that us saints speak or write for our invisible Creator.

What's interesting is how they believe words written in a book called a Bible, but only selected scriptures that they use to protect their lies.

Unlike you we believe words because they have been demonstrated to be true, not because they were written in some book. So the fact that some words that happen to be true made its way into your book is not at all interesting.
mortsdor
Posts: 1,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 11:36:02 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

Or the skeptic can believe that a person's not purposefully deceptive... but rather, unpurposefully, somewhat self-deceptive..

I'm not usually one to psycho-analyze people... but there certainly may be reasons people cling to unreasonable beliefs which don't have to do with critical consideration/analysis.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 11:51:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

The "look within" philosophy may sound profound, but there is far too much that cannot be found in one's "inner self" for this axiomatic claim to be anything more than problematic. A personal experience is exactly that: personal. Since the experience, the feeling, and the thoughts produced cannot be "shared," in any real sense, they cannot be offered as "evidence," on the word of the individual doing the experiencing. The aggressive stance that the experiencing individual is being called a "liar," if the details of the experience are not accepted is meaningless. Real to the individual, or not, no one outside of the individual can be expected to accept the "experience" as "evidence." While credible testimony may be acceptable in a court of law, it is completely meaningless, in the court of realistic science. Nothing intangible or immeasurable can or even should be presented as "evidence." Ever.

That which you call personal is not only the property of the individual but, also, the society in which one lives. The individual not only belongs to himself, or herself, but, also, the collective. To say a personal experience is unique is to dismiss the fact the individual not only is a product of himself, or herself, but, also, the collective. The individual's experience does not only exist alone but, also, as part of a group.

All thing are tangible and intangible. All things are measurable and immeasurable. To say otherwise is to say you have a perfect grasp or an impartial judgement of things.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

Whether honesty is questioned, or delusion is believed is not the issue. Attempting to vilify the skeptic by becoming indignant does nothing to VERIFY the truth. Whining about having one's integrity or cognitive faculties questioned is not evidence, either. It is an attempt at shaming people into accepting non-evidential expressions in the same context as objective, tangible evidence. The two are not (and CANNOT be) on the same level of falsifiable evidence. Claiming that one has been insulted does nothing to relieve this condition. While the OP states that integrity/faculties are questioned, it is left hanging in the air as though it's a bad thing. Nothing is offered in support of why this would be wrong. Nothing is offered as to how this is, in any way, a dismissal of valid evidence. Experience is not valid evidence, when discussing existence/non-existence. If the individual experiencing decides to accept it, that is up to the individual. That does not, in any way, obligate any other to accept it on the same level, morally or otherwise.

At no time did I say this obligates the skeptic to accept the veracity of any claim he, or she, holds in doubt. Doing such would be untrue to himself, or herself.

However, saying experience is not evidence, what is it? If you don't experience the evidence you say supports your claims, how would you even know the evidence existed? It is because of your experience and the experience of the collective, or group, with whom you choose to associate, not in spite of it, can you even begin to make such claims.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

No, the skeptic is not operating out of ignorance. The skeptic is operating out of a lack of VALID evidence. It is correct that there is no way for the skeptic to know that the individual is lying. There is equally little way of knowing that the experience was, in any way, meaningful. This still does nothing to validate the experience, in the mind of the skeptic. That's why the skeptic IS A SKEPTIC. You are, in effect, demanding that any experience be immediately and unconditionally be stamped with the validity that it has not merited. While the person experiencing may very well, indeed, be convinced of the meaning and the nature of the experience, stamping one's feet and demanding that it be accepted under penalty of being "unfair." This is not justification for the validity of "experience" as "evidence." This is whining that one's experience is not believed on the merit of the interpretation of the one experiencing. Whining is no more evidence than experience.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

While this (again) may sound "profound," it does nothing to validate "experience." The only person to whom an "experience" is valuable is the one experiencing. Demanding that another accept that experience and believe is simply being childish. That is, in effect, demanding that one's word be good enough to cause others to believe. That is not a valid demand.

You've missed the entire point of this thread. No one is demanding belief from anyone else. However, I believe it's the height of hypocrisy for an unbeliever to accuse the believer of being untruthful or deluded and demanding he, or she, must accept that which he, or she, doesn't believe.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 11:56:20 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 9:47:48 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 11/11/2014 8:18:08 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The skeptic looks for evidence as it stares him, or her, in the face. The evidence sufficient for any truth is one's self. In other words, a person believes in something because of his, or her, experience; it is an experience that is real to the individual or the individual could not honestly believe in it.

However, the doubter questions another's beliefs because he, or she, has not experienced that which the believer has experienced. The skeptic either believes the believer is being dishonest or suffers from delusion. In questioning the believer's honesty, the skeptic is questioning the believer's moral integrity; in concluding the believer is delusional, the skeptic calls into question the integrity of the believer's faculties.

In both instances, the skeptic is operating out of ignorance; for, there is no possible way the skeptic could know the person is lying unless the person admits to it and there is no possible way the skeptic could know the believer is deluded.

A believer who is not true to his, or her, own experience has betrayed his, or her, own self.

Good point

Thank you. I knew there was something on which we could agree if we looked hard enough.