I am a Christian now. Truth doesnt exist. Hail Hitler!

Author: Best.Korea

Posts

Total: 125
#31
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,881
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Best.Korea
It seems that Christians have made great arguments which have convinced me to become Christian.
Welcome to the moral majority.

Luke 15:7  
I tell you that in the same way, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance.


#32
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 3,317
3
2
5
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
5
A pedophile who looks down on Christians, and a troll who has never made a single honest post, is now going to lecture us about truth LOL.
Topic's author
#33
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 404
Posts: 12,563
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Sidewalker
I am glad you find me fun.
Topic's author
#34
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 404
Posts: 12,563
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Sidewalker
Nice profile photo.

I am glad you decided to embrace the true guidance from the great leader.
#35
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,881
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Best.Korea
I am glad you decided to embrace the true guidance from the great leader.
He was inspired by your earlier example.
Topic's author
#36
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 404
Posts: 12,563
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Shila
He was inspired by your earlier example.
That just proves how leading by example works.

#37
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,881
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Best.Korea
He was inspired by your earlier example.
That just proves how leading by example works
The real hero is Kim Jung Un.
Topic's author
#38
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 404
Posts: 12,563
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Shila
The real hero is Kim Jung Un.
Kim Jong Un, the infinite leader who disproved math.

"1 plus 1 isnt 2. One thing added to other does not result in two things, but one. One drop of water added to other drop of water results in one drop of water. When we add South Korea to North Korea, there will no longer be two Koreas, but one Korea."
#39
ranacat
ranacat's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 12
0
0
4
ranacat's avatar
ranacat
0
0
4
Seems to me, science and religion are not separate coins, and not even two sides of one coin, but, in my opinion, share the same side of one coin because there is Truth, capital 'T' that does not and will not change, worlds without end. That is, therefore, true of both science and religion, because both seek truth, and it  need only to be found. Science depends on empiric evidence, i.e, what we determine by our five senses: sight, sound, smell, taste, and touch. However, other animals have these, but also others: echo location, sense of magnetic north, etc. Humans do not express these, but I'm suspicious that is only because we do not know how to engage them. Therefore, I believe faith is another sense available to us to engage, and its form of communication is internal feeling, just as a a gurgling stomach is something we feel and hear. The response of faith is a swelling feeling starting from the heart and can encompass the entire body with a swell of palpable enlightenment when a Truth has been realized, or revealed to us by another person, or even by the Holy Spirit. This can engage because by the Spirit, we may know the truth of not just spiritual things, but physical things, therefore not just religion, but science. 
Topic's author
#40
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 404
Posts: 12,563
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ranacat
science and religion are not separate coins, and not even two sides of one coin, but, in my opinion, share the same side of one coin
Yes. They are both used to reach truth. I wished to learn how to play a piano, and God sent knowledge to me in my dream. I have no logical explanation for the dream I had because it wasnt from memory, as the knowledge given to me in a dream was something I didnt know before.
#41
ranacat
ranacat's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 12
0
0
4
ranacat's avatar
ranacat
0
0
4
-->
@Best.Korea
I believe communication comes to us in many forms. We are most familiar with human-to-human by voice, touch, facial expression, but also from animals by their voice and facial and body expressions, by the Earth herself - I believe nature  is a living entity - and from heavenly beings by voice [I've never experienced that], by mind-to-mind revelation, or by planting thoughts, or by physical appearance [never experienced that, either], and by dreams [I have experienced this, too, as you].
Simply said, I do not believe God - by whatever name by which a supreme being is known - has ceased speaking to man or woman [speaking being the relative term I apply to all sensations I've described above]. AS we learn how to communicate with God, these abilities increase.
#42
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,885
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
If I made a convincing argument for turnips, would that convince you to become a turnip.
Topic's author
#43
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 404
Posts: 12,563
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ranacat
What is some of your advice on how to increase communication with God? I would find it useful if I had more dreams which reveal knowledge to me. Otherwise, I dont learn anything when sleeping, which reduces my progress.
#44
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,881
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Best.Korea
The real hero is Kim Jung Un.
Kim Jong Un, the infinite leader who disproved math.

"1 plus 1 isnt 2. One thing added to other does not result in two things, but one. One drop of water added to other drop of water results in one drop of water. When we add South Korea to North Korea, there will no longer be two Koreas, but one Korea."
How did they get 2 Koreas from one Korea?
Topic's author
#45
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 404
Posts: 12,563
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Shila
How did they get 2 Koreas from one Korea?
Its proof that math is false. Great infinite leader was right.

#46
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,881
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Best.Korea
How did they get 2 Koreas from one Korea?
It’s proof that math is false. Great infinite leader was right.
How did you get a female and a male brain?
#47
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,885
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ranacat
All our experiences are internal.

Self contained.

Electrochemically powered.


#48
ranacat
ranacat's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 12
0
0
4
ranacat's avatar
ranacat
0
0
4
-->
@zedvictor4
All our experiences are internal.
If you mean the processing; yes, I agree. But the observation of experience [by our various senses] is focused mostly on the body exterior, or more than that, off-body completely, let alone rarely internal.
#49
ranacat
ranacat's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 12
0
0
4
ranacat's avatar
ranacat
0
0
4
-->
@Shila
"1 plus 1 isnt 2. One thing added to other does not result in two things, but one. 
That is only true with most things. There are, however, several things [maybe many?] that are singular objects, but only useful in tandem to accomplish the purpose of their innovation. Example: the composite of a drill and added extensions for drilling for oil is actually example of two objects, added to a third, an oil derrick, and, subsequently, added extensions beyond three separate devices unusable, or at least impractical, as each object, alone.
Not to mention that the water molecule example has a hitch relative to function and material condition: less than 6 molecule of H2O, the assembled molecules are not wet, even when linked together. Not a practical distinction, but it is fact.
#50
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,881
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@ranacat
If you mean the processing; yes, I agree. But the observation of experience [by our various senses] is focused mostly on the body exterior, or more than that, off-body completely, let alone rarely internal.
What do psychologists think about phobias?
Some psychologists believe humans are pre-programmed to fear certain things. For example, people might be 'prepared' to develop a fear of snakes (despite never encountering one) because they were a danger to our distant ancestors. Your direct experiences. The experiences you've had in life can contribute to a phobia.

#51
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,885
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ranacat
Observation is the result of an internal process.

So if we take sight for example, what we see is an internal image reconstructed from incoming light signals.

Which for all intent and purposes does seem to be direct observation.

Everything that we experience is actually a simulation reconstructed in the brain from sensory input.

We assume accurately simulated.
#52
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,881
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@zedvictor4
Everything that we experience is actually a simulation reconstructed in the brain from sensory input.

We assume accurately simulated.

It is more complicated than that.
What is stimuli processing?
Stimulus processing refers to the parallel processing of a set of stimuli with equal attentional weights, where attention is reallocated to a specific stimulus indicated by a bar marker. This process involves categorizing the stimuli based on their identity and storing them in visual short-term memory.

#53
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,885
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Shila
For sure the process seems amazing, but nonetheless is what it is.

Though everything you explained is just a more technical and expanded version of my explanation.

Whereby incoming "stimuli" are processed internally, and also stored to short term memory.

Presumably any information can also be stored as long term data.




#54
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,881
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@zedvictor4
Presumably any information can also be stored as long term data.
If it has more than just a glancing affect, it gets stored as long term data.
#55
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,500
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Best.Korea
It seems that Christians have made great arguments which have convinced me to become Christian.

Why should I believe in science, why should I believe in what I can observe, when I can believe in one of the thousands of Gods I randomly selected to believe in?

I used to hold opinion that person should believe in what he can see.

But no. You shouldnt believe in what you can see. You should believe in Christianity instead.

Truth and science are all flawed.

For example, truth requires a system for determining truth. However, a system for determining truth cannot determine itself as true, which makes it flawed.

This disproves all science.

Dont believe in what you can see. 

Believe in Jesus instead. 

Hail Hitler!

The only thing you believe is in you. You are your own god. God is made in your image. 

Christianity is the only truly rational religion. It says faith is not letting go of your reason. It tells us that science is God made. Christianity NEVER says - don't trust the Science. It does say embrace the truth and ALL Science that is based on the truth. 

We don't say truth or science is flawed. We say people are flawed - since they are sinful. We say humans make mistakes. Humans have prejudices. Humans are biased. 

Your comment about truth and a system are noted - but this is not unique to Christian thinking. It is a fundamental part of philosophy. Axioms.  Reason and Logic are axioms. But how does one prove the truth of reason or logic as an axiom without already presuming that the logic or reason is true? For one to attempt to use reason or logic to prove that logic or reason is an axiom requires the faith that such is true in the first place. IT is based on faith. An axiom is not just self-evident - but is circular reasoning. It can't be proved.  And for it to be proved by a means other than reason or logic, actually proves that the other means is more of an axiom than reason or logic.  We say it is self-evident, but that's a delusion. We can't conceive that another axiom exists - so we just shut the conversation down. It's self evident. Wake up - people are saying. Well, I agree. I think it is time for you to wake up.  Jesus and Hitler are at the polar ends of all things. 
#56
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,881
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Tradesecret
Jesus and Hitler are at the polar ends of all things.

Human sacrifice was not part of the commandments from God.
In Jeremiah 19:4-6, Gd tells us that human sacrifice is so horrible a concept to Him, that it did not even come into His mind to demand it from His creation.

It was not a known practice to allow someone to die for the sins of others.Even the disciples did not know why Jesus had to die.

Why was Jesus' death hidden from the disciples?
The disciples failed to comprehend Jesus' explicit and repeated predictions of his coming crucifixion and resurrection because, even while he was revealing it to them, it was being “hidden from them” by the Lord Himself. And only the Lord could remove that incomprehension — which is exactly what Luke says happened.

All SACRIFICED animals had to be slaughtered by a priest, at the Temple (and prior to that, at the sanctuary), and that animal was treated differently - parts were burnt, parts went to the priests and levites, and the rest was returned to whoever brought it.

The Bible tells us Jesus was crucified for blasphemy. He was put on trial for his own sins and found guilty. Jesus was not sacrificed in the temple. He was crucified in a public area. The crucifixion was not performed by priests. The Roman guards then crucified Jesus.

John 19:23 23 When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining. This garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom.

Is Jesus' death a human sacrifice?
In response, God didn't sacrifice Jesus. Rather, Jesus gave up his own life. No one forced Him. He laid down His life willingly, as He made clear speaking about His life: “No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. Jesus admits he took his own life even though he was crucified for blasphemy and sedition.

If Jesus claimed that only dead Jews could forgive sins using himself as an example. Then the Holocaust was totally justified. The world needed more Jews sacrificed for the growing population of Christian sinners.


Topic's author
#57
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 404
Posts: 12,563
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Tradesecret
Yeah, I guess, but I dont feel like I could be a good Christian.
#58
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,885
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Hi Trade.

Science is a naturally occurring faculty associated with thinking beings.

So therefore is the need to understand, theorise and explain.

So GOD the thinking being, was an obvious theoretical proposition for a thinking being to propose.

A sound enough proposition in terms of a theory of universal developmental hierarchy.

Though the associated ritual devotion that developed concurrently, brought very little if nothing to the scientific table.

Ritual devotion in the main, is an unnecessary but seemingly necessary offshoot that mortal beings developed as a coping strategy.

Sort of...Look guys, there might be a GOD, so might as well pray to it and perhaps not die...Failing that, you might die here, but will perhaps go to a magical place called Heaven.

For sure, invent a religion, build a church and write a book about it....But remember, we haven't actually substantiated the theory yet.

And so thinking man was burned at the stake for doubting GOD.

Clever stupid gene.


In my opinion.
#59
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,500
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Science is a naturally occurring faculty associated with thinking beings.

So therefore is the need to understand, theorise and explain.

So GOD the thinking being, was an obvious theoretical proposition for a thinking being to propose.

A sound enough proposition in terms of a theory of universal developmental hierarchy.

Though the associated ritual devotion that developed concurrently, brought very little if nothing to the scientific table.

Ritual devotion in the main, is an unnecessary but seemingly necessary offshoot that mortal beings developed as a coping strategy.

Sort of...Look guys, there might be a GOD, so might as well pray to it and perhaps not die...Failing that, you might die here, but will perhaps go to a magical place called Heaven.

For sure, invent a religion, build a church and write a book about it....But remember, we haven't actually substantiated the theory yet.

And so thinking man was burned at the stake for doubting GOD.

Clever stupid gene.

You make a fair point—God's existence isn't something we can prove in a laboratory. But not all truths fit into the scientific method. Love, beauty, and moral values, for example, aren't empirically measurable, yet we know they're real and shape how we live our lives. Similarly, belief in God often comes from evidence that isn’t scientific but is nonetheless compelling: changed lives, historical claims, and deeply personal encounters.
For Christians, the heart of faith isn't just about ritual or a theoretical proposition about God but a historical claim: that Jesus lived, died, and rose again. That event is what shaped the Christian faith, not just as a philosophical idea but as a lived reality. If Jesus truly rose from the dead, it changes everything about how we understand life, death, and eternity.
I wonder if we might sometimes dismiss religion without fully considering the claims at its core. Have you ever explored the historical evidence for Jesus’ resurrection or how it might impact the way we see the world today?


#60
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,885
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Well as I see it, what we have is historical hearsay, jotted down some time after the event and subsequently transcribed, translated and exaggerated to fit the developing religious ideology.

So there is no actual evidence that a biblical character referred to as Jesus, died and rose again. Though certainly it can be hypothesised such, and ideas developed.

Which isn't to say that the biblical Jesus wasn't based upon a real person. Person being the operative word.

As for the emotions and values that you describe...As I understand it, these are electro-chemical responses to sensory stimuli, and therefore detectable and presumably measurable to some degree.

And for sure, people respond in widely varying ways to sensory stimuli, associated internal data management and consequential ideological conclusions.


Hence you are happy to believe without proof.

And in the absence of concrete evidence, I remain sceptical.

Though currently based upon what we do know, theological hypotheses, to say the least, do seem somewhat fantastical.