venio, video, vinco. (I come, I see, I conquer)

[Mr.Obvious]

I'm not right because I "say so." Truth has a way of enduring time and temperament trials. Christians, like all people, can be delusional at times. They can be right at times. The task, as I see it, is to determine what is true and filter for it, so that one's brain becomes a garden of truth, pleasant and joyous to inhabit.

So;  genuinely wanting to know: by which methods do you filter for the truth: in order to eliminate your own bias?
Pray, do tell.

If, for example, as you've claimed in this thread that, and i quote, "Absolute certainty of a thing can be delivered to the soul by God."
How do you distuingish between what is absolute, divine truth shot straight into your soul, and between what is basically a misfortunate "false" thought?

[Unbeliever]

The only things I can be absolutely certain of is that I exist, and I perceive.

[the_antithesis]

Jesus said, Matt 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. God expects us to grow up and be like him. Hence God is an advanced version of ourselves.

Side note: My opinion of you has dropped considerably because you appear to prefer to use the King James translation of the bible, which is in an outdated version of the English language that no one ever speaks unless they're trying to sound all fruity when quoting the bible. Go on with your bad self. Just know that you sound fruity when you do it.

Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

This really doesn't tell us much. It certainly doesn't answer my question. Saying that god is perfect is like saying god is blue. Lots of things are blue. What blue thing is god? Blueberries? Blueberries are actually purple, so that would make you a liar.

Perfection is a problematic concept in the first place. I'm something of a perfectionist, which often leads to frustration. I've learned to temper that with the realization that perfection is neither attainable nor desirable. Perfection has no use. I perfect being would not create because, being perfect, would have no need to create. Creating indicates a lack and a perfect being would have no lack and therefore would not. Perfection is inert... dead.

I recommend moving forward you abandon such childish and logically fraught concepts because they do nothing but weaken your case.

God expects us to grow up and be like him. Hence God is an advanced version of ourselves.

You must be a mormon, then. The goal of everyone becoming perfect gods in their own right is a latter-days saints concept. If it turns out you are not a part of that sect, you might want to do some thinking on the matter.

But this gives us a bit more meat to the discussion because you imply god is just a human being that has achieved perfection, which as I have previously stated is a nonsense concept and should be discarded. Another way of putting it is god has gained some form of power over the rest of us... like Donald Fuckface Trump.

As you can see, this is not something limited to or unique to god, so it's not very helpful in understanding what it is you are even talking about.

[the_antithesis]

I'm waiting...

I'm waiting...

I'm waiting...

That which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
That which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
That which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
That which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

[Blackleaf]

Let me ask you a few questions.

1. Do you believe that God has all the omni qualities often attributed to them? Omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence?

2. Do you believe that believers go to Heaven and that unbelievers go to Hell?

3. Do you believe that God wants everyone to God to Heaven, or to know him?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

And while we're asking: Where did Noah's sons find wives? Are all the humans currently on the planet the offspring of two people, NOT Adam and Eve? (Well, yeah, A&E, but from the 7th Day until the Great Fraud Flood they managed to populate the planet. Took days and days for that to happen.)

Populating and then re-populating the planet, that's a lot of fucking.

[Unbeliever]

If God is omniscient, then it is not free. If God is free, then it is not omniscient.

[Hijiri Byakuren]

Jesus said, Matt 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. God expects us to grow up and be like him. Hence God is an advanced version of ourselves.

This is a non-answer. What is an advanced version of ourselves? Define your terms properly.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Hmm, no OP. I guess he showed us!

[Unbeliever]

Yeah, he won the "debate" by using an argument by assertion.

[Ecbarrowes]

Ecbarrowes may not yet have put forth a single complete claim that they want challenged.
But the moment they do, we have obviously lost.

Can you rephrase this? The syntax has me lost.

[Ecbarrowes]

You're a human and therefore not good at that.

True that we are all flawed, but we can choose to better ourselves or wallow or worsen ourselves.

[Ecbarrowes]

I don't believe God exists, and I don't believe that Jesus ever existed.

The cool thing about truth is that it is independent of our disposition towards it.

[Mr.Obvious]

Can you rephrase this? The syntax has me lost.

You say you welcome challenges, and your title of the thread implies you'll 'conquer' all of those.
 But without making your claims clear, without defining the supposed attributes of your deity; you can get no 'real' challenges.

The final sentence is tongue-in-cheek, because i pretend your reasoning so far, which seems circular to me for in as much as i have been able to see of it, is in fact so vastly superior that any argument against it would fail.

Yeesh, having to explain sarcasm just drains the fun right out of it.


In any case; how about you answering my question from that same post?
After all; i did answer yours, i think

[Ecbarrowes]

So;  genuinely wanting to know: by which methods do you filter for the truth: in order to eliminate your own bias?
Pray, do tell.

If, for example, as you've claimed in this thread that, and i quote, "Absolute certainty of a thing can be delivered to the soul by God."
How do you distuingish between what is absolute, divine truth shot straight into your soul, and between what is basically a misfortunate "false" thought?

The cool thing about truth is that it is independent of our disposition towards it.

So;  genuinely wanting to know: by which methods do you filter for the truth: in order to eliminate your own bias?
Pray, do tell.

If, for example, as you've claimed in this thread that, and i quote, "Absolute certainty of a thing can be delivered to the soul by God."
How do you distuingish between what is absolute, divine truth shot straight into your soul, and between what is basically a misfortunate "false" thought?

Your question is exactly apropos. Being objective about our own proclivities is a masterclass that we are all trying to graduate from. It is so seductive to believe that we are right about a thing. It is so convenient to realize that we just happen to be "right" about a thing (too convenient). Joseph Smith said, "by contrariness is the truth made known." In order to know if a thing is true, we must give it a fair trial, which includes giving all views their proper "day in court." If we only allow our favorite view its day in court, and deny opposing views the same privilege, it is a sign that we are blind.