Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Spirituality
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 106 of 141 (519502)
08-14-2009 9:29 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by jaywill
08-13-2009 8:30 PM


Re: We're talking about spirituality
jaywill writes:
Personally, I feel if this does not involve the human spirit and the Holy Spirit, this is borrowing a concept to place great importance to it. So you get the "spirituality" of the Atheist which he claims is just as legitimate a "spirituality" of the believer in Christ's "spirituality".
Yes, I agree that this is exactly what we have.
What I am saying is that your "feeling" that the atheist spirituality is somehow lesser than the "believer in Christ's sprituality's" spirituality, has no impact on reality.
It is my "feeling" that these two are equivalent. Where does that leave us?
If you are going to claim that one is better, you are going to have to describe how you think it is better.
So far, you keep saying things like:
Christ is unique. I am not a relativist. The experience of Christ is unique.
...
as man withdraws from God he wants to replace God.
...
That beneficial aspect is simply Christ Himself. But He is indeed available to everyone who believes into Him.
I don't think humanistic magnimousness is as open and fair as the invitation to believe in Christ for salvation. I don't think humanism can improve on the all encompassing love of Christ or replace His wide open invitation with a philosophical system which is more fair.
But I don't think you understand that you simply saying so doesn't make any of this true.
I can just as easily say:
Christ is not unique.
I do not withdraw from God or want to replace God.
Christ is not a beneficial aspect.
Humanistic magnimousness is open and fair.
The love of Christ is not as open or fair as humanism.
You see? Saying things doesn't do anything. Your continued bare statements do not actually constitute any valid reasoning to accept that they are actually true about reality.
But if the person you are trying to show has no spiritual discernment, that complicates the matter.
This is a very true statement.
Of course, me saying that you have no spiritual discernment is just as valid as you saying I have none. Without you showing a difference between yourself and myself, this is still just your imagination. If you cannot show a difference between you and I, then we cannot determine which of us "has no spiritual discernment," or even if such a disability exists.
Our rhetoric has boild down to this:
"Christian spirituality is better than atheist spirituality."
"No, I don't think it is, I think the two are equal."
"You're wrong, Christian spirituality is unique and superior."
"Oh? Is that so? Can you show me how?"
"No. I won't show you how. You wouldn't understand."
Really??
This sounds like a bully Grade 8 kid trying to pull one over on a gullible kindergartner.
Is this really what you think is a valid method of convincing other people?
The bottom line is if you are unable to show the difference between Christian spirituality and atheist spirituality, all rational observers are forced to conclude that you do not actually know of any difference. You're just talking about your imagination.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by jaywill, posted 08-13-2009 8:30 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by jaywill, posted 08-14-2009 11:26 AM Stile has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 107 of 141 (519511)
08-14-2009 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by Stile
08-14-2009 9:29 AM


Re: We're talking about spirituality
Yes, I agree that this is exactly what we have.
What I am saying is that your "feeling" that the atheist spirituality is somehow lesser than the "believer in Christ's sprituality's" spirituality, has no impact on reality.
It is my "feeling" that these two are equivalent. Where does that leave us?
If you are going to claim that one is better, you are going to have to describe how you think it is better.
I don't think I said that one was "better". It is more annoying than that. I said one was real spirituality and the other was not.
I mean the concept of "I do not believe in God. But I am very spiritual", IMO, is not true. And I am not sure even why an Atheist would want to talk that way.
Most of the ones I talk with don't maintain that they are just as spiritual. They maintain that they are "rational," and more so than any Theist could be.
At least that is what I am more accustomed to hearing.
Now, a little caveat. If a person is begrudging of organized religion or has some resented wound in his life because of some mistreatment from the hands of religion, and if he counteracts this by saying "I am an Atheist" but actually means he hates relgion, well maybe that person can have some spirituality.
But I have heard one Atheist say that if you are an atheist only because you are mad with religion you are not a true atheist. An atheist believes that there is no God, rather than he is mad with orgnized religion.
I think a person disgusted with Christianity as an organized religion could have spiritual experience.
So far, you keep saying things like:
Christ is unique. I am not a relativist. The experience of Christ is unique.
I guess I keep saying things like that because I perceive (rightly or wrongly) that what you are saying, in essence is:
"C'mon admit it. There is nothing unique about the Christian experience of Jesus."
I guess I am reacting by writing things like "No. I don't share your attitude in that way."
Or maybe I hear you saying "Embrace Relativism". And I am reacting by saying, "No. I don't think I will."
But I don't think you understand that you simply saying so doesn't make any of this true.
Yes. I think I understand that. Just I could say so and be wrong. I could be deceiced. I could be purposely lying. I could be deluded.
I could be partially correct but not absolutely so. That as why in the intricacies of this discussion I decided to submit that I could be wrong in some regards.
I can just as easily say:
Christ is not unique.
That's right.
I do not withdraw from God or want to replace God.
Christ is not a beneficial aspect.
Humanistic magnimousness is open and fair.
The love of Christ is not as open or fair as humanism.
I think that between the human philosophy of Humanism and the life and death of Jesus, there is not an equal comparison.
I think the opportunity for a man to have a fresh and new start as a redeemed and forgiven believer in Christ's death for his sins, is unparalleled.
A man believes into Christ. God looks upon him as if he had never sinned at all. His crimes have been judged. If the man were to remind God of His sins, God might respond that He does not remember or know what he is talking about.
His slate is as clean as Jesus Himself. He has a completely new start. Humanism is really good. But it is not that good, IMO.
You see? Saying things doesn't do anything. Your continued bare statements do not actually constitute any valid reasoning to accept that they are actually true about reality.
In the spiritual realm saying things means a great deal. The spiritual enemy of the child of God does not care about our arguing theology. He cares about us proclaiming the facts.
" ... they overcame him (the devil) by the word of their testimony"
In the spiritual warfare, proclaiming the facts is extremely powerful. The power of Satan consists in his lies. His lies are coountered by the Christian warrior proclaiming the facts in this universe - "It is written ..."
You put a very low premium on just "saying" things. But the Bible and our experience puts a very high premium on stating the divine facts.
Let me make it practical. Let me make it down to earth.
If you were to declare tonight "Lord Jesus I receive you as the Lord and Savior. And I accept, regardless of my feelings, that YOU have washed away all of my sins in your precious blood. I receive this forgiveness and I accept the gift of eternal life. I receive this not based on how I feel or on any sensation. I receive this on faith in what you have said."
If you were to declare that sincerely, I think you would undergo a fundamental change in your being.
Now it is funny that some people scoff at me for saying that. But when they come right up to the possibility of saying it, their hands get sweaty, their breath quickens, they feel rather agitated. It is as if they realize that they know they will change.
I have noticed that there is an event horizon close to the receiving of Christ / spirituality / Spirit of God, at which instinctively man knows that he is about to embark on something real and powerful.
But if the person you are trying to show has no spiritual discernment, that complicates the matter.
This is a very true statement.
Of course, me saying that you have no spiritual discernment is just as valid as you saying I have none. Without you showing a difference between yourself and myself, this is still just your imagination. If you cannot show a difference between you and I, then we cannot determine which of us "has no spiritual discernment," or even if such a disability exists.
Our rhetoric has boild down to this:
"Christian spirituality is better than atheist spirituality."
"No, I don't think it is, I think the two are equal."
"You're wrong, Christian spirituality is unique and superior."
"Oh? Is that so? Can you show me how?"
"No. I won't show you how. You wouldn't understand."
Really??
I didn't say that you necessarily would not understand. I implied that there are situations in which a person would not understand because of no ability to discern the spiritual.
Whether you are of that catagory or not, only God knows. I am limited.
This sounds like a bully Grade 8 kid trying to pull one over on a gullible kindergartner.
Is this really what you think is a valid method of convincing other people?
To me it could sound like a 10th grader being told by a 3rd grader something true, but the 10th grader is so steeped in the attitude that he knows just about everything better. So he thinks he is being lied to or tricked by the 3rd grader.
But analogies are limited.
Back to the subject here - I think that "spiritual" involves the spirit of man. That spirit of man is comatose until Christ causes the spirit of man to be reborn, born anew, regenerated.
Having said that I would add that maybe I would concede that a dealing with the human conscience might be something spiritual.
Ie. A true story. A very disgruntled employee was so enraged that he had been fired that he placed a homemade bomb in his boss's mailbox. The child of the boss opened that mailbox. The explosion went off. The child was seriously disfigured for life as a result of the injuries.
The disgruntled employee was so distraught at what he had done that he commited suicide. This actually happened.
Now, the conviction of the man's conscience of the guilt of his action, I might say was a spiritual experience. Don't misunderstand me here. I do not say it was right or good that he commited suicide in response to the guilt of his conscience. That is not the point. The point I make is that I might call the genuine conviction of the conscience of real guilt for a real transgression, a spiritual experience.
At least this is probably consistent with my belief that the only part of the human spirit which is not totally unfunctioning is the conscience of man. I think the conscience is in the spirit of man.
You may not know, or care, that when some of us use the term "the spirit of man" we have done so by analyzing all the hundreds and hundreds of instances in the Bible of the use of the term "spirit" and noticed that the conscience is always related to the spirit of man.
Jessie Penn Lewis is the woman who did a lot of this kind of research. And we owe a lot to her for her definition of the biblcal usages of terms like:
spirit
soul
heart
The bottom line is if you are unable to show the difference between Christian spirituality and atheist spirituality, all rational observers are forced to conclude that you do not actually know of any difference. You're just talking about your imagination.
Hold on here. That's a leap. You don't know that I am talking only about my imagination. You may have a case that I cannot prove with mathematical certainty my belief about spirituality. But to deduce from that that what I believe is therefore all just in my imagination, could just as well all be in your imagination.
That what I am saying has no reality to it, could be all your imagination.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Stile, posted 08-14-2009 9:29 AM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Stile, posted 08-14-2009 11:56 AM jaywill has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 108 of 141 (519517)
08-14-2009 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by jaywill
08-14-2009 11:26 AM


On to something
jaywill writes:
Stile writes:
The bottom line is if you are unable to show the difference between Christian spirituality and atheist spirituality, all rational observers are forced to conclude that you do not actually know of any difference. You're just talking about your imagination.
Hold on here. That's a leap. You don't know that I am talking only about my imagination. You may have a case that I cannot prove with mathematical certainty my belief about spirituality. But to deduce from that that what I believe is therefore all just in my imagination, could just as well all be in your imagination.
That what I am saying has no reality to it, could be all your imagination.
This is exactly the point I'm trying to discuss.
We can't tell if what you're saying is imagination or not.
Maybe you're incorrect and it's just your imagination.
Maybe you're correct and saying your incorrect is just my imagination.
We can't tell.
We can't tell because you have yet to describe a difference between what you're claiming to be true and what could quite possibly be nothing more than your imagination.
That's why:
You put a very low premium on just "saying" things.
Because we cannot tell the difference between just saying things, and pure imagination.
But the Bible and our experience puts a very high premium on stating the divine facts.
Exactly.
And, to put a very high premium on something as important as "divine facts" and then simply state them such that there is no method to differentiate them from pure imagination seems rather irresponsible. Don't you think?
If these divine statements are so important, why is there no way to differentiate them from pure imagination?
If these divine statements are so ingrained within reality, why is there no area of reality that reflects these divine statments? Why must they simply "just say so?"
It may very well be true. But, just as easily, it may very well all be pure imagination.
If there is a way to differentiate between the two, please inform me. That is what I've been asking for over the last 50 messages.
Many, many people certainly agree and believe you. We'll call them "Christians." It is a fact that you are claiming these Christians are somehow blessed with an aspect of humanity (spirituality) that non-Christians are incapable of.
However, all verifiable observations throughout human history on such a concept have been unable to discover even the tiniest difference between Christian spirituality and non-Christian spirituality.
So, I'll ask again, why do you expect me to take your word for it that there is a difference, when I can look for myself and obviously see that one does not exist? Can you explain to me what this difference is that I may be missing? Can you show it to me? Can you show what I'm missing that is blocking my ability to understand whatever difference it is that you haven't mentioned yet?
You have so far recounted many, many different scenarios including Christian spirituality. However, not a single one of them includes some aspect of human nature that is unavailable to an atheist. Perhaps you could pick your best or favourite scenario which you think clearly shows an ability that Christian spirituality includes that atheist spirituality does not?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by jaywill, posted 08-14-2009 11:26 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by jaywill, posted 08-14-2009 12:02 PM Stile has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 109 of 141 (519519)
08-14-2009 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by Stile
08-14-2009 11:56 AM


Re: On to something
That is probably all the time I have today.
But the POINT that you WERE just speaking to is summed up here:
"You're just talking about your imagination."
That was the point you made. Had you said "You COULD be just talking about your imagination" I probably would have agreed that that was possible.
Then I would have again submitted as before "Time will tell. Won't it?"
Latter. Got to do stuff.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Stile, posted 08-14-2009 11:56 AM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by Stile, posted 08-14-2009 12:20 PM jaywill has not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 110 of 141 (519522)
08-14-2009 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by jaywill
08-14-2009 12:02 PM


Take your time
jaywill writes:
That is probably all the time I have today.
No problem. The good thing about message boards is that the messages don't disappear. It'll be there tomorrow, and the next week or month. Reply whenever you have time.
But the POINT that you WERE just speaking to is summed up here:
"You're just talking about your imagination."
That was the point you made. Had you said "You COULD be just talking about your imagination" I probably would have agreed that that was possible.
Oh. You mean like what I actually did say? As quoted:
Stile writes:
Maybe you're incorrect and it's just your imagination.
Maybe you're correct and saying your incorrect is just my imagination.
We can't tell.
jaywill writes:
Then I would have again submitted as before "Time will tell. Won't it?"
Well, since I did, in fact, say such a thing. I'll take this answer as your reply.
In which case, we don't have to wait for time to tell. It's already told us what we need to know:
Stile writes:
I don't think anyone is asking for "mathematical certainty" about the reality of the spiritual realm.
However, I don't think we need to wait for time to tell. I believe that time has already told. ...or telled. wait... son-of-a... I believe that we can already see the results
If we look at history, we can see plenty of people who are Christians and God-fearing folk who were very spiritual in their lives. They had a moral fibre that very few would disagree with. They always seemed calm and thoughtful. They didn't seem afraid of the unknown. They always had a smile and beneficial feeling about them, it was as if they were immune to ever being overwhelmed by life's negative aspects.
But, of course, if we look at history we also see plenty of atheists and those of other non-Christian-God religions that equally shared all these qualities. In fact, there doesn't exist one certain sect of people that has a monopoly on such spiritual matters. There doesn't exist a select group that seems granted with any spiritual aspects that are unavailable to all others.
(From Message 96)
If you're saying that we'll have to wait for new information in order to decide if your baseless statments, which contradict all known observations, are reality or imagination... then I know what I'm going to think in the meantime.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by jaywill, posted 08-14-2009 12:02 PM jaywill has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4930 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 111 of 141 (519585)
08-15-2009 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by jaywill
08-13-2009 1:28 PM


Re: Dichotomies
jaywill writes:
There is no argument from me concerning 1 Cor. 15:21-22. I don't see how this changes Job's strong belief that even if his body were destroyed and he were to be totally without flesh, still his soul would see God.
but Job didnt say he would be separated from his body, he said he would go into the grave and await for the time when God would remember him.
If souls went off to be in heaven with God, why does Job speak of waiting for God to remember him? What is God waiting for, and why would God need to remember people/souls if they were with him?
jaywill writes:
Secondly, the resurrection of the body in the NT is NOT to be "outside my flesh". For the saints of God it is to receive a glorified body.
Ok. The saints get a glorified body which i agree with.
But we arnt all saints, So what about the rest of us? What sort of body do we get when we die?
jaywill writes:
I am not using Job 19:25-27 as an in depth analysis of all things pertaining to God's salvation in the future. I am only using it to demonstrate the patriarch's strong feeling that in God's creation, even without a body, he has an existence and can see God.
well if you read his words carefully, you'll see that he isnt saying that HE will see God, but rather GOD will remember him. Job14:13'O that in Sheol [the grave] you would conceal me, that you would keep me secret until your anger turns back, that you would set a time limit for me and remember me!'
jaywill writes:
Physical death is a separation of the soul from the body. The evidence for the soul not being made non-existent is strong.
i agree to a point.
I've already stated it in this thread that the soul and body are the same thing according to the Hebrew word Nephesh, which is translated 'soul'
so, its only a separation in that the life the once existed in the body is now gone. Once we are dead, our life is in Gods hands and because he purposes to 'resurrect' all those who have died, then they can be said to be alive and awaiting a resurrection from the dead.
Recall Jesus words at Matt 22:31 about the long deceased patriarchs
quote:
As regards the resurrection of the dead, did YOU not read what was spoken to YOU by God, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob’?
He is the God, not of the dead, but of the living. On hearing [that], the crowds were astounded at his teaching.
Life only ends when God chooses not to repair it. Not because it magically lives on as a separate entity from the body.
If it was trully the case that we live on, then we'd all be killing ourselves to get to a better place.
jaywill writes:
So this objection, to me, is not effective to disprove that the soul can temporarily be separated from the body without being non-existent.
the greatest and strongest proof that it cannot, is what the original word for soul meant...it meant the living person. It didnt mean a separate entity to the living person.
The soul that is sinningit itself will die. Ezekiel 18:4, 20
The apostle Peter at Acts 3.23 said "Indeed, any soul that does not listen to that Prophet will be completely destroyed from among the people.
There are dozens of scriptures that show that the soul can die or be killed. Even of Jesus Christ the Bible says: He poured out his soul to the very death.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by jaywill, posted 08-13-2009 1:28 PM jaywill has not replied

  
Shane20
Junior Member (Idle past 5185 days)
Posts: 14
Joined: 01-15-2010


Message 112 of 141 (543232)
01-16-2010 12:36 PM


The spirituality of life is not a mere religious view nor some physical happening. To shed light on to it in some way would be to call it a bestowed enlightenment. But its almost like a progression after you have realized it. The spirit is much more then a belief its a part of you able to tap unto a different realm of existence. There are many mysterious attributes to this there is no expert, cause you cant study it in your physical view but you can feel it some say it can be achieved through meditation but that makes it a journey to this point. I'm not sure what is involved in the bestowal of this gift but when it happens it is a fulfillment of being, being enlightened is not enough its almost knowing that your life you must trust.
To detail this realm is up to the beholder there is no limit, only of what you can control. So the of argument of creation versus evolution it is one in the same. Please share some thoughts on what others think of spirituality.

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Larni, posted 01-16-2010 1:30 PM Shane20 has replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 113 of 141 (543234)
01-16-2010 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Shane20
01-16-2010 12:36 PM


Hi Shane, welcome to EvC!
My take on spirituality has always been that it is a meaningless word. As it stands it is just another form of woo that is an excuse for woolly minded people to spice up their world.
When you can demonstrate a spiritual side to reality then we can talk.
Edited by Larni, : Welcome

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Shane20, posted 01-16-2010 12:36 PM Shane20 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Shane20, posted 01-16-2010 1:44 PM Larni has replied

  
Shane20
Junior Member (Idle past 5185 days)
Posts: 14
Joined: 01-15-2010


Message 114 of 141 (543235)
01-16-2010 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Larni
01-16-2010 1:30 PM


Great point i understand there is no magical happening in front of us, but to understand that it is two different things is what one needs to know. Lets put it this way in a realistic stand point, there is no way to prove that we have a separate entity then our physical being. We can prove that we have a variety of different beliefs in society all leaning towards the belief of another realm or existence. So going on that there is a spirit and we control it completely depending on the individual of course...
im interested in your thoughts on this matter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Larni, posted 01-16-2010 1:30 PM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Larni, posted 01-16-2010 2:26 PM Shane20 has replied
 Message 117 by bluescat48, posted 01-16-2010 4:50 PM Shane20 has replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 115 of 141 (543238)
01-16-2010 2:26 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Shane20
01-16-2010 1:44 PM


We can prove that we have a variety of different beliefs in society all leaning towards the belief of another realm or existence.
B'ah. There was me spoiling for a fight and you have to go and be all reasonable about it.
Humans do have a tendency to explain part of their experience in terms of the non physical, don't they?
Gives me the right ump!
My take on it is that humans have a predisposition to infer intent in objects or occurrence. So, when a door stubs our toe we think 'bastard door!' or if it rains we think 'the weather hates me!'. (Even that sentence implies intent on behalf of the door).
As a kid I used to imbue my teddy bears with personality (I even talked for them as well as to them). I found it very easy to view them as a personality.
I forget where I read it but and experiment I recall from my undergrad days where kids where shown a cartoon of two circles bouncing around at random on a screen, one circle was larger than the other and the kids concluded that the bigger circle was 'bullying' the smaller one.
I conclude from this that they were ascribing a intent to the circle.
As we grow up we are logically aware that objects don't have personalities but we find it hard to shake the notion and this comes out in our belief in a non material component of the world.
As an aside when people start using 'energy' as in the context of spirituality I die a little inside.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Shane20, posted 01-16-2010 1:44 PM Shane20 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Shane20, posted 01-16-2010 3:22 PM Larni has not replied

  
Shane20
Junior Member (Idle past 5185 days)
Posts: 14
Joined: 01-15-2010


Message 116 of 141 (543241)
01-16-2010 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Larni
01-16-2010 2:26 PM


Haha yes I hear when you say you die a little bit when you hear people refer to the spirit as energy. As for the imagination its quite sad to hear people say that its humbug to think of fairy tales and such. When this is another joyful gift we all share. I do believe that people confuse imagination with spirituality all the time. Do we Imagine our daily life no its there and hardy at times. But we do picture the great questions of our being and strive for the answers. It is my goal to show people the difference between this for the enlightened few. Sadly enough alot of folk associate Imagination with the spirit and that leads them to have questions of it. sighhhh...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Larni, posted 01-16-2010 2:26 PM Larni has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 117 of 141 (543247)
01-16-2010 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Shane20
01-16-2010 1:44 PM


Lets put it this way in a realistic stand point, there is no way to prove that we have a separate entity then our physical being.
true
We can prove that we have a variety of different beliefs in society all leaning towards the belief of another realm or existence.
true
So going on that there is a spirit and we control it completely depending on the individual of course...
No, going on that only shows that many believe that there is a spirit but in no way shows that there is.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Shane20, posted 01-16-2010 1:44 PM Shane20 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Shane20, posted 01-16-2010 5:15 PM bluescat48 has replied

  
Shane20
Junior Member (Idle past 5185 days)
Posts: 14
Joined: 01-15-2010


Message 118 of 141 (543248)
01-16-2010 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by bluescat48
01-16-2010 4:50 PM


so millions of people have this false sense with in them? Its a matter of making it real like us humans have made everything we have real. When most speak of it they are dismissed as irrational. These are social problems not spiritual ones.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by bluescat48, posted 01-16-2010 4:50 PM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by bluescat48, posted 01-16-2010 5:31 PM Shane20 has not replied
 Message 121 by Shane20, posted 01-16-2010 5:52 PM Shane20 has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 119 of 141 (543250)
01-16-2010 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Shane20
01-16-2010 5:15 PM


so millions of people have this false sense with in them?
No, What I mean is that just because a number of people believe that there is a spirit in them, in no way neither proves or disproves that there is. It is a belief, not a fact.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Shane20, posted 01-16-2010 5:15 PM Shane20 has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 120 of 141 (543252)
01-16-2010 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Blue Jay
07-24-2009 3:50 PM


Re: Spiritual = Rational + Emotional = "Mind"?
Bluejay writes:
Hi, Perdition.
Perdition writes:
I guess in that context, I would say spiritual is the sum of mental and emotional. Or maybe, the rational and emotional.
That's what I would think.
If that be the case, animals are spriitual, having mental and emotional properties.
As per the dictionary definition which Granny cited........
1. Of, relating to, consisting of, or having the nature of spirit; not tangible or material. See Synonyms at immaterial.
2. Of, concerned with, or affecting the soul.
3. Of, from, or relating to God; deific.
4. Of or belonging to a church or religion; sacred.
5. Relating to or having the nature of spirits or a spirit; supernatural.
........there are several ways to define spiritual.
1. An entity that has a spirit nature, i.e. predominantly spirit in nature, regardless of any particular spirit.
2. All aspects of the soul, i.e. inner being
3. Pertaining the the spirit of God, i.e. New Testament being born from above by God's spirit indwelling the mind/body of the recipient as per John 3 etc.
4. Ecclesiastical church related
5. Any intelligent entity, regardless of origin having no visible physical body.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Blue Jay, posted 07-24-2009 3:50 PM Blue Jay has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024