Originally posted by headheart

I hope you don't mind me jumping on Shadowmaster's rollercoaster, but here is my 1p.

To me Jesus represents what it means to 'live truth'. I have found that there are only two kinds of people in this world, those who do and those who are in transition. Since I was a little boy, I have been driven to 'live truth' even when it hurt me, it led me to the one who is the truth, the life and the way.

I was once challenged to present an experiment to prove my experience of God, and I tried so hard to explain it to people. I am learning to say, if you want to find out what it is like, come and visit me and we can spend some time walking in the forest together. GOD is real to me, but to some GOD is no more than a fairy tale, a myth, an invisible pink unicorn, or some sort of spaghetti monster. Well, I think that when a person really really really wants to get to know God, God will go out of His way to help them to that place. It is the story Jesus told of the prodigal son.

Some people are wierd, they are like deep valleys, and no matter how much you fill them, they are never full. I tend to avoid them if I can.

Peace,
HH.

Re my bolding above: To use 'Silent Running’s' term, how do you know this is not just ‘self deception’? I think it is. I think you have a strong emotional attachment to an irrational, unsubstantiated belief. Just as I think Osama bin Laden has a strong emotional attachment to an irrational, unsubstantiated belief. He ‘just knows’ he is right...and so do you. I think you are both wrong and that such unverified 'certainties' are potentially very dangerous.

Originally posted by Silent Running

While I can see how you would come to such a conclusion based on my words here, please understand that this is the tip of the iceberg--there is more to the story in another thread. Yet that also begs the question--without a reliable witness, how do you know Jesus? No doubt your answer will be spiritual, and there is a measure of validity to that, but I have seen (far too often) how a spiritual answer may be good, or may be a product of self-deception.

The Shadowmaster is confused by your answer. Are you also technomage or are you saying that his presentation convinced you?

Anyhow, the Shadowmaster is not debating what you said, just attempting to brackett what you mean by your faith in "Jesus Christ". From what you have said, you mean faith in the NT Gospel accounts. If the NT biblical witness is not credible, then so also is what you have referred to as your faith in Jesus Christ. Is this not correct?

The Shadowmaster is trying to understand, not trying to trap you.

Originally posted by Tassman

Historically, the consequences of acting on that which is not scientifically verified, have been murderous battles over personal beliefs that cannot be proven to be true. And, what have the evolved consequences of people seeking to satisfy biological and psychological needs and avoid pain got to do with believing totally unsubstantiated speculative notions like ‘eternal souls’ or a ‘divine spark’ within?

I have read your mantra before....

The 'Tassman' Testimony: 'I am OK with being a meaningless spec in this vast universe, a single transient spark which extinguishes itself after a fleeting moment. Fantasy dreams of eternity are there for those who need them but for me reality is just fine as it is and life is good.'

To turn your back on meaning is dishonest, and ignores the fact that S.V. relies upon the foundation stone of reason. To have such an attitude does not make you a scientist but simply an unbeliever.
To guess at why after knowing how, is honest. We cannot stop at the door, we need to open it and try to discover what is beyond the door. If we do not, then all we are doing is extinguishing reason, as if somehow it were adequately satisfied with knowing how, when it longs to know why.
Sincerely,
HH.

Tassman,
You are a naughty 'Tass-man' for you are ignoring my primary point, which is about the driving force of my life. The mystical part is something that I know I cannot prove, but that does not mean that I have not laid down the gauntlet to unbelievers such as youself to come and break bread with me. So how about it ?
Sincerely,
HH

Originally posted by headheart

How can one have evidence of something that does not exist in the natural world ? One can only guess at what might or might not be there, unless one sends out some form of SOS to the Cosmic Whatzitallabout through that tuning devise you say is a 'pleasant fancy'.

Sincerely,
HH.

But, there is no evidence of anything other than the natural world, so guessing "what might or might not be there" is a pointless exercise and wide open to the risk of self-deception based on wish-fulfillment.

Originally posted by headheart

I have read your mantra before...The 'Tassman' Testimony: 'I am OK with being a meaningless spec in this vast universe, a single transient spark which extinguishes itself after a fleeting moment. Fantasy dreams of eternity are there for those who need them but for me reality is just fine as it is and life is good.' .

This is a perfectly reasonable testimony for a metaphysical naturalist such as I.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysical_naturalism

To turn your back on meaning is dishonest, and ignores the fact that S.V. relies upon the foundation stone of reason. To have such an attitude does not make you a scientist but simply an unbeliever.

What nonsense! I am not turning my back on “meaning”. I am (ahem) fearlessly and bravely facing up to the fact that there is no meaning. And you have ignored my questions: “What evidence do you have of a “next world” and what makes you think there is a “why”?? So far you have only come up with ‘warm fuzzies’.

To guess at why after knowing how, is honest. We cannot stop at the door, we need to open it and try to discover what is beyond the door. If we do not, then all we are doing is extinguishing reason, as if somehow it were adequately satisfied with knowing how, when it longs to know why.
Sincerely,
HH.

Well no, it is not being honest, it is being escapist. You are assuming that there IS a “why”, when there is no evidence for this and that there IS a “door to see beyond”?

Originally posted by Tassman

Historically, the consequences of acting on that which is not scientifically verified, have been murderous battles over personal beliefs that cannot be proven to be true. And, what have the evolved consequences of people seeking to satisfy biological and psychological needs and avoid pain got to do with believing totally unsubstantiated speculative notions like ‘eternal souls’ or a ‘divine spark’ within?

Tassy, you are one deceptive person.
Who are you trying to fool into thinking that you understand scientific issues?
Your knowlede of basic science would not fill a thimble.
And that is not to mention that science cannot, nor does it pretend to, address spiritutal matters at all.
By everyone's contention, science cannot talk about god.

But people can.

Wake up, go back to tending bar, and leave the thinkers alone.

Originally posted by headheart

Well, I think that when a person really really really wants to get to know God, God will go out of His way to help them to that place.

HH, that is precisely the situation I have found myself in with Wicca. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Wicca is right where Christianity is wrong--I'm saying both are wrong, but God still is willing to reveal Himself.

Originally posted by Tassman

Historically, the consequences of acting on that which is not scientifically verified, have been murderous battles over personal beliefs that cannot be proven to be true.

That is a consequence, but certainly not the only one. Other historical consequences include the justification of the African slave trade, and the abolitionist movement: the Crusades, and the Renaissance (the ideals of Renaissance humanism, after all, are also not scientifically verifiable): indeed, if you eliminate what cannot be scientifically verified, you also eliminate secular humanism.

If you are going to argue from history, you must remember that non-scientific ideas have both good and bad.

Originally posted by shadowmaster

The Shadowmaster is confused by your answer. Are you also technomage or are you saying that his presentation convinced you?

I used to post as technomage.

Originally posted by Silent Running

I used to post as technomage.

Thanks.

Let me absorb that.

Originally posted by Silent Running

I used to post as technomage.

The Shadowmaster extracts the following:

At one time in my life, I was a Christian. Now, I don't mean I was "Oh, I go to Church, so I'm a Christian" or "Oh, I believe in God, so I'm a Christian," or anything like that. Once I believed as the Christians do. I too thought that faith in Jesus Christ was required to make a person "right with God." I saw my "sins" as an insurmountable barrier between myself and God, and saw Jesus' sacrifice as the only possible payment for those sins. I asked Him to come into my heart and wash my sins away...and I honestly believed that He did.

The remainder seems to be the transistion away from that position.
Is that correct?

Originally posted by Silent Running

HH, that is precisely the situation I have found myself in with Wicca. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Wicca is right where Christianity is wrong--I'm saying both are wrong, but God still is willing to reveal Himself.

I really appreciate your honesty.

mmm_________ I have always believed that their is an existing pathway between GOD and our inner-being and what as children we accesss quite freely.
Rather than 'beat about the bush' it should be clearly stated that history bares out the testimony, that all attempts at grouping to re-light the light eventually collapse and splinter.
I do however believe that small groups thrive and time spent alone doing this, is by far one of the most satisfying and invigorating parts to my life.
Though I am often accused of being anti-intellectual, such a thought is simply a rejection of the possibility of higher reason, intution, or GOD. To say that I do not think, would be the same as saying I do not believe in GOD, for I do both.

Thank-you again, I am dumb struck! It seems we shall both be burned on the same stake - 'Abraxas to Jesus'

HH.

I do however believe that small groups thrive and time spent alone doing this, is by far one of the most satisfying and invigorating parts to my life.

Precisely. If a religion, or a religious movement, is focussed on God, it has far less problems than if it is focussed on other things. Christianity has had various problems in its history, but it has also had many glorious moments--it is my contention that the glorious moments are when the Church concentrated on serving God and serving man, rather than grabbing for power or self-glory.

Right now, a large part of Wicca is grabbing for power--and (in agreement with my contention above), Wicca is going through a rather problematic time. I'd like to change that, and I do what I can within the Wiccan community, but it's a slow process, and I am but one voice in the throng.

Originally posted by Tassman

Historically, the consequences of acting on that which is not scientifically verified, have been murderous battles over personal beliefs that cannot be proven to be true. And, what have the evolved consequences of people seeking to satisfy biological and psychological needs and avoid pain got to do with believing totally unsubstantiated speculative notions like ‘eternal souls’ or a ‘divine spark’ within?

Way to completely ignore the entirety of my post. Next time, I'll remember that when I respond to something you say.

The remainder seems to be the transistion away from that position.
Is that correct?

Shadowmaster, it's very difficult to translate what I was going through at that time into words. In as much as I can vocalize my experiences, yes, that's an accurate summation.