Dra_Mucd_Uha Posted March 27, 2006 Author Share Posted March 27, 2006 If you don't mind me being ignorant once more, I must ask... How do you explain some thing like this? A couple of weeks ago, Father was urging me to join a church here. He told me the name of the church was "New Life". Well, I couldn't find a listing for it anyplace and I assumed it was the church on the 60 south of me. I kept putting it off (I am a very shy person and don't like going into crowds) until today. I made up my mind yesterday that I was going to do it. So I got dressed and went down the street. I pulled up to the church and realized that it's name wasn't New Life, but New Testament Church. So, I pulled back out north onto the highway and said, "Lord, where is it then?" Nothing. I drove for a couple of minutes and then I felt I just needed to take a right on the intersection of the 86. I'd never been down that way before. And immediately on the left I saw the "New Life Church" sign. That sign was not visible to the main road I always took. The only sign you see from the main road is the Church of Christ next to it. It took me a while and a little bit of driving to find out how to get there, but I went. WONDERFUL service!! They ROCK!! Teaching from the Bible, praising God throughout the service. Small enough for me, too, without being too small. At the end of the service, I felt Him pushing me to join the church. I told Him I wanted to wait until I found out more about what they believed. He wouldn't take no for an answer, so I went forward. Afterwards I found out it was a Pentecostal church. I've heard a lot about Pentecostal churchs -- enough to make this staid, old Southern Baptist-raised woman scared to go to one. But this one wasn't at all what I expected. Only once did I hear someone speaking in tongues and it was the song leader. When he started doing it, I just knew it was Hebrew (even though I've never heard Hebrew spoken) and it just seemed natural. The service seemed more like the old time tent revivals I remember as a child. Praise the Father for He is good!! I'm curious for your opinion on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandora Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 Marketing for Christians. Tageting those vulnerable "seekers".... We get that stuff all the time around here, on a personal level both here and in real life.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGJ@ReligionisBullshit Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 From your reply, I can only conclude that you also are an agnostic of some sorts, believe it or not. Because the agnostic doesn't say "you can't believe" or "you can't have an opinion", but the agnostics say "you can't know for sure". And that's all there is. That's why I couldn't agree with your earlier statement that agnostics are just chicken out of making a decision. Most of the time agnostics have made up their minds of what they "believe" or not, but they also know they can't really know for sure. Btw, an Agnostic/Atheist (like me) could also be called a "weak" atheist (compared to the "strong" atheist who is certain, without a doubt, that there is no god, whatsoever). And there's nothing wrong to be either, nor is it wrong to be an agnostic/deist, or even agnostic/christian (virtually impossible to comprehend how it can be combined like that though. ) *edit* I think the problem is that people have changed the definition of what an agnostic is. Today it's meant "someone that doesn't take a standpoint", which is not the original meaning of it. To quote Wikipedia: ...Agnosticism, focusing on what can be known, is an epistemological position (dealing with the nature and limits of human knowledge); while atheism and theism are ontological positions ... You could say Agnosticism is just philosophical skepticism applied to the question of the existence of a god. Meaning, you can still take a standpoint, but you can't prove you're the one that have the only absolute truth (whichever way you may have your (non)faith). I consider myself to be an Implicit Athiest. If Jeebus comes down on his flaming chariot, I will believe it. If I die and stand before God for judgement, I'm going to believe it. If not, I probably never will. But I won't say there is no way of knowing until all methods, even ones we don't know of yet, have been tested. I guess we would have to agree on the definition of an Agnostic and an Atheist in order for a discussion to be meaningful. I prefer the Oxford Dictionary definition of an Agnostic. Unfortunately people establish varying degrees of both so unless all degrees are understood and established, we would probably not get anywhere with conversation. It's like everyone counting to 10 but everyone has a different idea of what #5 means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 If you don't mind me being ignorant once more, I must ask... How do you explain some thing like this? A couple of weeks ago, Father was urging me to join a church here. He told me the name of the church was "New Life". Well, I couldn't find a listing for it anyplace and I assumed it was the church on the 60 south of me. I kept putting it off (I am a very shy person and don't like going into crowds) until today. I made up my mind yesterday that I was going to do it. So I got dressed and went down the street. I pulled up to the church and realized that it's name wasn't New Life, but New Testament Church. So, I pulled back out north onto the highway and said, "Lord, where is it then?" Nothing. I drove for a couple of minutes and then I felt I just needed to take a right on the intersection of the 86. I'd never been down that way before. And immediately on the left I saw the "New Life Church" sign. That sign was not visible to the main road I always took. The only sign you see from the main road is the Church of Christ next to it. It took me a while and a little bit of driving to find out how to get there, but I went. WONDERFUL service!! They ROCK!! Teaching from the Bible, praising God throughout the service. Small enough for me, too, without being too small. At the end of the service, I felt Him pushing me to join the church. I told Him I wanted to wait until I found out more about what they believed. He wouldn't take no for an answer, so I went forward. Afterwards I found out it was a Pentecostal church. I've heard a lot about Pentecostal churchs -- enough to make this staid, old Southern Baptist-raised woman scared to go to one. But this one wasn't at all what I expected. Only once did I hear someone speaking in tongues and it was the song leader. When he started doing it, I just knew it was Hebrew (even though I've never heard Hebrew spoken) and it just seemed natural. The service seemed more like the old time tent revivals I remember as a child. Praise the Father for He is good!! I'm curious for your opinion on this one. my reaction is, the person didn't talk about where was God when he/she drove to the "wrong" church in the first place. Some stuff in life turns out the way we want, and if we're praying all the time, then SOME of the time, what we want will happen after the prayer. But Christians tend not to tell testimonies about all the times they pray and nothing happens. Using answered prayer as evidence of God is really hopeless. My second thought - where's God when all these churches are proliferating with different doctrines? There shouldn't even be competing churches if God is really running the show. As to alleged claims of speaking in tongues in actual languages that the speakers could not have known, usually they are just like this one - unverifiable. This person says it was Hebrew but admits to never having heard Hebrew spoken?!! Puh-leeze. Chill, bro, and again, welcome to this site, Randall! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spamandham Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 I did give the verses pertaining to the prophecy of Israel in my previous post, as well as my opinion. You're turn to spank me then! I suppose I should do more than skim through prior posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dra_Mucd_Uha Posted March 27, 2006 Author Share Posted March 27, 2006 I did give the verses pertaining to the prophecy of Israel in my previous post, as well as my opinion. You're turn to spank me then! I suppose I should do more than skim through prior posts. It's alright Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 If you don't mind me being ignorant once more, I must ask... How do you explain some thing like this? I'm curious as to what you think my opinion on this should be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dra_Mucd_Uha Posted March 27, 2006 Author Share Posted March 27, 2006 I'm curious as to what you think my opinion on this should be? I assume it will be something showing that it was not something that happened of God, since you specifically are Atheist. I can't say much for the details of your opinion, since I'm obviously not you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 I'm curious as to what you think my opinion on this should be? I assume it will be something showing that it was not something that happened of God, since you specifically are Atheist. I can't say much for the details of your opinion, since I'm obviously not you. How does this event strike you as evidence for God, though? Why should I give it more merit than any other coincidental event? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 I guess we would have to agree on the definition of an Agnostic and an Atheist in order for a discussion to be meaningful. I prefer the Oxford Dictionary definition of an Agnostic. Unfortunately people establish varying degrees of both so unless all degrees are understood and established, we would probably not get anywhere with conversation. It's like everyone counting to 10 but everyone has a different idea of what #5 means. Mambo #5 of course... Anyway, I know that Agnostic most of the time is meant to use for people that won't make up their minds about God, or basically taking the standpoint between. But in reality they tend to be atheists anyway, since they can't believe in any of the gods that have been described in any religion, and they don't subscribe to any religion, so by default they're atheists. But unfortunately many times the word Agnostic is also used for someone that is doubting, that they're having a faith but aren't completely sure about it. I rather use the word in its simplest form that it means we can't prove either way. I guess I interpret the word more the way Russel did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dra_Mucd_Uha Posted March 27, 2006 Author Share Posted March 27, 2006 How does this event strike you as evidence for God, though? She claimed that God spoke to her. Got her to go to that church. My question to you would be, how does it not strike as evidence of God, after she claimed God spoke to her? Why should I give it more merit than any other coincidental event? Do you consider it a coincidental event? This is the nature of my question, this is what I am asking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 How does this event strike you as evidence for God, though? She claimed that God spoke to her. Got her to go to that church. My question to you would be, how does it not strike as evidence of God, after she claimed God spoke to her? Because people will believe anything because they want it to be true or fear it to be true. Do you consider it a coincidental event? This is the nature of my question, this is what I am asking. I consider her finding the church to be a coincidental event, and I consider her babbling about the church afterwards to be nonsensical religious bullshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dra_Mucd_Uha Posted March 28, 2006 Author Share Posted March 28, 2006 Thanks Isaac (Everytime I see your name, can't help but to think of the author). That's exactly what I wanted: You're opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandora Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 How does this event strike you as evidence for God, though? She claimed that God spoke to her. Got her to go to that church. My question to you would be, how does it not strike as evidence of God, after she claimed God spoke to her? Why should I give it more merit than any other coincidental event? Do you consider it a coincidental event? This is the nature of my question, this is what I am asking. Yes, it is coincidental. The psychology of religion has a lot to say as to how she may have come to those conclusions, not to mention psychology in general... (delusional thinking, hallucination). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 Thanks Isaac (Everytime I see your name, can't help but to think of the author). That's exactly what I wanted: You're opinion. The entire circumstances on the events rely entirely on her memory and interpretation of the event. That is my conclusion regarding it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkepticOfBible Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 Thought you might like these links Persuasion & Brainwashing Techniques Being Used On The Public Today The Problem with Testimonies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts