Meaning of John 6:43-44

Furion said:
In scripture for one. Look up Melchizedek or the midianites, and others. In fact the Lord may say to some here what He told Jonah:


The Lord is as acquainted with you as much as me.

He is acquainted and concerned with every single human. He doesn't need me to get to you.

Christianity is the world's description of what it doesn't understand.

There is the church of God, and there are those not in the church of God.

The Lord didn't direct the Roman Catholics to create the Holy Roman Empire, tell Calvin to take over Geneva, or any number of things throughout history.

You can even prove this for yourself. Examine the scriptures, like a noble Berean, and tell me what you claim the church of God should be doing, according to God.
Click to expand...
I would have to get over the hump of not believing that the Bible is a revelation of God for me to do that effectively. I would ask God to help me over that hump, but that introduces the poison of confirmation bias pretty much right away. Familiarity with the scriptures alone, and the environment that funneled them to me, led me away. More exposure to it via studying for these conversations has verified that direction for me more-so. I suppose I need a Damascus experience. Why isn't that route available to me? Why must I hit my head against scriptural irrationality alone in this struggle?
 
Last edited:
Caroljeen said:
I finished watching your conversation. I hate to call it a debate because it was so respectful on both sides. It was a pleasure to watch it.
After watching it, I reaffirm my assertion that a Christian cannot give the evidence that would convert you. Only Christ can do that.
Click to expand...
I think you mean that you have to have a personal experience with Jesus. The problem with that is, though, that it's all in your head (I mean that in the neutral, objective way, as well as being a criticism). A person has no way to tell if the experience in their head was actually Jesus.

Caroljeen said:
Do you think science can explain every thing?
Click to expand...
Allow me to answer that question in a slightly re-formatted version: for all the things we can or would be able to explain about the real world, I'm not aware of any process or method that works - that produces reliable results - other than those used by science. If you think something like that exists outside of science, I'd love to hear about it.
 
5wize said:
I would have to get over the hump of not believing that the Bible is a revelation of God for me to do that effectively. I would ask God to help me over that hump, but that introduces the poison of confirmation bias pretty much right away.
Click to expand...
One single encounter with God will accomplish that.
5wize said:
Familiarity with the scriptures alone, and the environment that funneled them to me, led me away. More exposure to it via studying for these conversations has verified that direction for me more-so. I suppose I need a Damascus experience. Why isn't that route available to me? Why must I hit my head against scriptural irrationality alone in this struggle?
Click to expand...
I have no reason to think that unavailable to you.

In fact I've heard of similar (personal) happening among islamists.

I would only say to question yourself (yes, the very first thing a human should do) to make sure you are not trying to test God. Will you put God to the test?

I don't pretend to know that answer, but I know we are an open book to God, we can't hide anything in motivation or intention.
 
Furion said:
One single encounter with God will accomplish that.

I have no reason to think that unavailable to you.

In fact I've heard of similar (personal) happening among islamists.

I would only say to question yourself (yes, the very first thing a human should do) to make sure you are not trying to test God. Will you put God to the test?

I don't pretend to know that answer, but I know we are an open book to God, we can't hide anything in motivation or intention.
Click to expand...
When I honestly interrogate my internal landscape for what I am up to with regards to human spirituality, its relationship Christian thought, and my 50+ years exposure to it all, I would have to say that I am challenging the exclusivity offered by the authors of Christianity and concluding that God has already answered that question regarding exclusive spiritual truth given there are so many other revelatory options that He seems inclined not to oppose in the hearts of men, including atheism.
 
5wize said:
When I honestly interrogate my internal landscape for what I am up to with regards to human spirituality, its relationship Christian thought, and my 50+ years exposure to it all, I would have to say that I am challenging the exclusivity offered by the authors of Christianity and concluding that God has already answered that question regarding exclusive spiritual truth given there are so many other revelatory options that He seems inclined not to oppose in the hearts of men, including atheism.
Click to expand...
Ok, it's your choice to think God doesn't oppose what you say or think
 
Furion said:
Ok, it's your choice to think God doesn't oppose what you say or think
Click to expand...
Cool... and it is your choice to think that your revelation of God isn't credibly countered by other external, and internal, experiences of either the divine, nothing, or something else altogether - even though the entire world expresses a revelation that is not Christian in nature.
 
Gus Bovona said:
I think you mean that you have to have a personal experience with Jesus.
Click to expand...
Yes, or at the least for starters, something supernatural which you cannot explain by natural means to at least open your mind to believe that God exists.
Gus Bovona said:
The problem with that is, though, that it's all in your head (I mean that in the neutral, objective way, as well as being a criticism). A person has no way to tell if the experience in their head was actually Jesus.
Click to expand...
It can also be outside of your head or external. No every experience I've had of the presence of God in internal only. You presupposed that it is all internal when it isn't.
Gus Bovona said:
Allow me to answer that question in a slightly re-formatted version: for all the things we can or would be able to explain about the real world, I'm not aware of any process or method that works - that produces reliable results - other than those used by science. If you think something like that exists outside of science, I'd love to hear about it.
Click to expand...
I think you are too quick to disallow the type of knowledge which you use everyday without having it proven as Hutchinson argued. I agreed with him.
 
5wize said:
I would have to get over the hump of not believing that the Bible is a revelation of God for me to do that effectively. I would ask God to help me over that hump, but that introduces the poison of confirmation bias pretty much right away. Familiarity with the scriptures alone, and the environment that funneled them to me, led me away. More exposure to it via studying for these conversations has verified that direction for me more-so. I suppose I need a Damascus experience. Why isn't that route available to me? Why must I hit my head against scriptural irrationality alone in this struggle?
Click to expand...
You neither need the Bible nor a supernatural experience to be a good person. Both are highly overrated. A person can emulate a Good God without even believing in one. Nevertheless, there is no greater flattery than to copy someone else if you know what I mean.

I know it sounds counter to prevailing opinion, but I think we sometimes get too focused on names, terms, symbols of religion when the practical necessity is to
”love ones neighbor.” Love your neighbor and you love God by default. Is that not what Jesus said? If you have fed your neighbor, then you have fed me.

”Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’​
​
And the King will answer them, Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’​
 
Last edited:
Caroljeen said:
Yes, or at the least for starters, something supernatural which you cannot explain by natural means to at least open your mind to believe that God exists.

It can also be outside of your head or external. No every experience I've had of the presence of God in internal only. You presupposed that it is all internal when it isn't.
Click to expand...
Can you describe am example of that evidence both internal and external?
Caroljeen said:
I think you are too quick to disallow the type of knowledge which you use everyday without having it proven as Hutchinson argued. I agreed with him.
Click to expand...
Can you give me an example of that which is disallow? I anticipate that it will be scientific even if in an informal sense.
 
Gus Bovona said:
I think you mean that you have to have a personal experience with Jesus. The problem with that is, though, that it's all in your head (I mean that in the neutral, objective way, as well as being a criticism). A person has no way to tell if the experience in their head was actually Jesus.


Allow me to answer that question in a slightly re-formatted version: for all the things we can or would be able to explain about the real world, I'm not aware of any process or method that works - that produces reliable results - other than those used by science. If you think something like that exists outside of science, I'd love to hear about it.
Click to expand...
I watched your debate as well. Very interesting. And I thought Gus was your real name. ;)Dr. Hutchinson could have used some stronger arguments against your view. Such as your use of Occams razor and other science methodologies which have not been confirmed and tested by science, they are just assumptions.
 
El Cid said:
I watched your debate as well. Very interesting. And I thought Gus was your real name. ;)Dr. Hutchinson could have used some stronger arguments against your view. Such as your use of Occams razor and other science methodologies which have not been confirmed and tested by science, they are just assumptions.
Click to expand...
Occam’s razor is a logical principle. It’s a way of winnowing out competing hypotheses. Here’s the logic: if we didn’t use Occam’s razor, we couldn’t decide between hypotheses that keeping on adding unnecessary elements.
 
Gus Bovona said:
Occam’s razor is a logical principle. It’s a way of winnowing out competing hypotheses. Here’s the logic: if we didn’t use Occam’s razor, we couldn’t decide between hypotheses that keeping on adding unnecessary elements.
Click to expand...
It consigns all supernatural possibilities the trash can of unnecessary elements.
 
Gus Bovona said:
Occam’s razor is a logical principle. It’s a way of winnowing out competing hypotheses. Here’s the logic: if we didn’t use Occam’s razor, we couldn’t decide between hypotheses that keeping on adding unnecessary elements.
Click to expand...
Yes, but logical principles have not been confirmed by science, they are assumptions that scientists use to conduct science. Therefore, that proves you believe in something not based on science.
 
Gus Bovona said:
How so? Why can't the supernatural survive Occam's razor? All Occam's razor eliminates is *unnecessary, superfluous* elements of an explanation.
Click to expand...
Because science cannot measure/ explain subjective supernatural experiences.

I don't recall you responding to Hutchinson's assertion that there are other things that science cannot explain, like; justice. How can you use science to measure abstract concepts?

I know you started to elaborate on how one could decide if a certain Jazz performer was a genius (I really can't remember the exact word used to describe his skills.). I would disagree with you in this respect also. To me it would be a subjective determination. It can't be determined as specifically as the natural science in which Hutchinson works.

How does Occam's razor help in these matter? As a scientism advocate don't you use Occam's razor to rule out the supernatural?
 
5wize said:
Cool... and it is your choice to think that your revelation of God isn't credibly countered by other external, and internal, experiences of either the divine, nothing, or something else altogether - even though the entire world expresses a revelation that is not Christian in nature.
Click to expand...
It's not my revelation silly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top