Question regarding Faith...(adamah)

by tec 210 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  tec

  Yes... I could sacrifice MY life to save others. (that is not the law of love that my Lord taught and still teaches... no greater lover has this, that one lay down one's own life for others)

  No... I could not kill another person. (this IS against what my Lord has taught and still teaches; and so knowing Him, I know He would not ask that of me)

  There is no flip-flop. You are the one who seems unable to remember what you asked, and how you had to change your question in order for me to be able to play along with the 'what if' and say, yes. Whether anyone else is keeping up, or even cares, I have no idea. But the only one muddying the waters is you. In fact, if you want to ask more questions on this 'what if' scenario, why don't you ask on the thread where the entire conversation is laid out. Then there would be less chance of confusion due to 'muddy waters'.

  Peace,

  tammy
• 

  tec

  But concrete is made up of cement and sand. I guess all those buildings including your home made of sand must be wrong or stupid engineering wise.

  That was kinda funny, mP.

  So why dont you hold dangerous snakes and drink poison like he said in Mat (i thnk it was mat)?

  It was Mark. Two points: A) different people receive different gifts of the spirit, not as THEY choose, but as their LORD chooses. B) you might also want to consider whether Christ was speaking of the 'serpents' (literal snakes) that crawl along the ground, and/or that sort of poison/venom. Or that He was speaking of serpents as in the context of this, speaking to the pharisess and such: You serpents, you brood of vipers... You brood of vipers, how can you, who are evil, say anything good... This great dragon...the ancient serpent called the devil, or satan, the one deceiving the whole world ... Consider those also when he told his disciples that they had the power to trample on serpents and scorpions. (and the poison that comes from them being like the yeast that comes from the pharisees, that Christ warned his disciples to be on the lookout FOR) Peace to you, tammy
• 

  Mr Fool

  Commenting my own post......"no human thinking".....does the Organization of Wisdom mean an absence of the intellect?

  That faith can only be built through Heart, not the intellect?

  If so.....how to use "logical thinking" without thinking??
• 

  tec

  Logical thinking and common sense is therefore something totally different that human thinking. That was a surprise for me.

  Yeah, this is not very clear to me either, mr fool. How do you separate logical thinking and common sense from human thinking... if it is the humans doing the logical thinking and/or common sense (which really is NOT so common, lol).

  Maybe its just a way for them to say, listen to OUR reasoning and logical thinking... and do not rely on your own human thinking?

  Peace,

  tammy
• 

  jgnat

  The only thinking we are typically aware of is the self-dialogue using language. We talk to ourselves. Behind that, we are receiving all sorts of information (a lot to do with our three-dimensional environment in time) that is not processed using language. Catching a falling pitcher, for instance. A whole lot of decisions are made "without thought" and actions executed with stunning precision and speed. We also have parts of our brain assigned to assess threats, for instance. This is inarticulate to begin with.

  

  Logic is a structure closely tied to language. I'd say all our "logical thinking" is through self-dialogue.

  I'd go so far to say that our inarticulate mind directs us at times, and our thinking mind makes up excuses for our behavior afterwards.
• 

  jgnat

  If we were to review the WTS's twisted view of things, Wisdom is "the bible says so" with the addendum, "as we have interpreted". So it has sadly left off women's rights, freedom of religion, end to slavery, freedom of expression and other developments of thought in the past two thousand years. It's a complicated list of do's and dont's that encourages the faithful to ignore their native instincts (to love their children through thick and thin, for instance).

  The WTS pretends that anything human as natively flawed, or bad. So "human thinking" is supposedly bad. Doesn't this set the poor person up to mistrust their own thinking, and to substitute instead the WTS's list? No wonder they need a "Question from Readers" section! Any new situation needs new rules!

  ____

  tec's faith is highly personal, though she will protest it is for all, her clarion call to look to Christ. We can't get a rule book from her, as her faith is highly singular and personal. But we are to accept that if we look to Christ we also will also receive a personal revelation and all will become clear as to what is loving, kind, and right. Tec will expect, I suppose, that all who heed her call will think like her.

  So those of us who haven't come to her conclusion must have somehow failed to look to Christ as determinedly as she has done. This is a logical conclusion, of course, not of the heart. So tec may protest that this is not what she meant at all.

  After all, all who look to Christ will be unfailingly loving, kind, good, and right. Not a mean bone in their body.
• 

  adamah

  Mr Fool said:

  Hopefully no one will be mad at me when I double post this "faith - evidence" article:

  Not an intrusion at all, Mr Fool, and completely on-topic.

  And yes, the WT article is gob-smackingly stoopid (sic) nonsensical gibberish, talking in circles which only succeeds by baffling some with its BS. The WT thinks they can simply redefine Hebrews 11 definition of faith, and engage in wholesale eisegesis by defining faith to make it fit into THEIR theology and against what the Bible says, turning faith into whatever suits their purposes, knowing the gullible reader is going to unquestioningly swallow it whole.

  I figured it out. When they say this:

  "Jehovah wants our faith to based on evidence and sound reasoning, not on human thinking and religious traditions."

  My first reaction was to ask, "what other kind of reasoning do humans HAVE to rely upon, besides 'human thinking'? Are they referring to say, canine or repitilian logic?!?"

  Then I remembered that JWs actually believe the WTBTS GB is spirit-directed by Jehovah, so accepting God's reasoning (via what the GB says it is) IS defined as "sound reasoning", and the "evidence" of course is the accounts contained in the Bible and in the JW pubs.

  So more self-referential "evidence", AKA confirmation bias.

  They actually sum up FAITH quite well though, here, with the example of believing in the existence of God:

  "To have strong faith in God, we must first be CONVINCED that Jehovah exists."

  That's EXACTLY what faith implies, but the concept is flawed, since the same principle applies to believing in ANY imaginary being you WANT to believe in the existence of, whether it exists or not, eg:

  "To have strong faith in fairies, we must first be CONVINCED that fairies exist."

  Faith DEMANDS accepting a belief in something without having ANY supportive perceivable evidence on which to justify that belief. Of course, belief in a TANGIBLE object is supported by VISIBLE evidence, but that's not needed with faith.

  In fact, the concept of 'FAITH' itself is supposed to serve as evidence of God-given "sound reasoning", since GB says the concept comes from God Hisself.

  Faithless simpletons like Mr Fool and I are just getting tripped up by relying on our supposedly-INFERIOR mortal logic, so that's what WE'RE doing wrong! We both need to go to the KH meetings for 'joycamp' sessions to have our flawed human logic re-aligned to Jehovah's 'right-think'!

  Adam

  EDIT: i see jgnat beat me to it, with the 'sound reasoning' bit!
• 

  adamah

  TEC said-

  Yes... I could sacrifice MY life to save others. (that is not the law of love that my Lord taught and still teaches... no greater lover has this, that one lay down one's own life for others)

  No... I could not kill another person. (this IS against what my Lord has taught and still teaches; and so knowing Him, I know He would not ask that of me)

  Got it: you don't have the heavy-duty industrial-strength of faith of say Abraham, Joshua, Saul, Abner, Deborah, etc or any of the OTHER military commanders and troops mentioned in the OT (i.e. you're not willing to KILL others when commanded by God to do so: you didn't sign on for THAT kind of thing!), but only the weaker faith needed to DIE for God. That's some comfort to hear.

  There is no flip-flop. You are the one who seems unable to remember what you asked, and how you had to change your question in order for me to be able to play along with the 'what if' and say, yes. Whether anyone else is keeping up, or even cares, I have no idea. But the only one muddying the waters is you. In fact, if you want to ask more questions on this 'what if' scenario, why don't you ask on the thread where the entire conversation is laid out. Then there would be less chance of confusion due to 'muddy waters'.

  No thanks, as this topic has pretty much run it's course, I'd say, i.e. anyone who's willing to read thru it can see the dangers of unlimited or unconditional "true" faith, AKA deciding what you're willing to believe in and what you'd do, BEFORE having ANY evidence or information on which to make a moral decision.

  PS mP, I suspect TEC wouldn't NEED to handle snakes in order to demonstrate her faith, as she's demonstrating the mental slipperiness and agility of an eel right now.... Let's hope she's as slippery if she hears her voice tell her to KILL.

  Adam
• 

  tec

  (edited out because unlike some... my desire to be right does not outweigh my concern for others)

  Now that is not going to work on me, because THAT is the voice of a stranger. The voice of someone who does not know my Lord. The voice of someone who does not understand that God PROVIDED the sacrifice in the account of Abraham, and does not need sacrifice from US.

  Not even animal sacrifices, as HE said here:

  "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire - but my ears you have opened - burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not require. Then I said, "here I am, I have come - it is written about me in the scroll. I desire to do your will, O my God; your law is within my heart." Psalms 40: 6-8

  But you won't hear that. Just as you won't hear that it is Christ who shows us God... not the OT, not any writing, not religion, not man.

  We are told... TOLD... to test the inspired expressions, to be sure that they come from God. Because not every spirit IS from God, and so not every 'voice' (internal or otherwise) IS from God. Well, if those inspired expressions speak against anything Christ taught... then they are against God... and so are not from God. If those inspired expressions are not from love, as Christ shows love (Him being the Truth)... then they are not from God. Do not listen. Whether that is an internal voice, an external voice, or a man/woman/religion claiming to represent Christ and God.

  Test against Christ... test against love... test against what is written, but always looking to Christ first and foremost to understand the truth of what is written. (even if for now, that is just looking at what HE is written to have said and done)

  After all, all who look to Christ will be unfailingly loving, kind, good, and right. Not a mean bone in their body.

  Not once have I ever stated anything like this.

  Peace,

  tammy
• 

  jgnat

  You live it, tec.

  Any time anything is brought out that might challenge your image of Christ as all-loving, you declare it as not of Christ.

  Any time you are challenged that your comments have an insulting side, you say you did not mean that.