In Reply to: Re: God exists posted by Peace on January 21, 2010 at 23:37:44:
Peace:
Here's the context in which I am trying to communicate with you (--the blank post was a matter of hitting "Enter" at the wrong time--oops!):
I'm at work, and I try to get to emails and posts just after lunch, when my Special Ed students at the elementary school at which I work are napping.
So, the writing comes in fits and starts sometimes. Sometime I have to interrupt posting for something more immediately important here.
Your statement "...and yet, as you concede, it is a matter of belief..." still merely continues to beg the question for your position without proof; Peace.
Then, in your retort, you say, "I like the "more later" part. And will also venture to say that we will not agree because this discussion carries two different things, logic and faith, that will, at one point or another, clash. We will not agree either for another reason, because we are different, and insist on going deeper into the unseen, meaning things of the spirit, which cannot be understood by the natural man, meaning logic."
What I am saying is that I have discovered that the two major anti-Christian belief paradigms existing in the world today WITHOUT sensible linear logic to support them, that is rationalist/materialist atheism (and its weakly grouped corollary hypotheses pretending to have already proven evolution, contrary to all laws of physics and chemistry, even the simplest proofs of entropy and "delta G"--found in ANY reaction), and the ex-hippie Gnosticism, BOTH assume there philophical and truly sceintific proof are establishsed, when they are NOT; decidedly.
In other words, we ALL operate in BOTH "carnal" and "revelation" knowledge. Berg just downplayed anyone thinking for themself in ANY way. That's a hard habit to break, post-cult, and the bids for people to belive in both atheism, and/or "god is all/all is one gnsticism, are two varieties of that that are out there. Neither is solid thinking;either scientifically/logically or revelatorily.
And "seducing spirits and doctrines which are taught by demons are a Scriptural reality of which mankind is repeatedly warned.
Therefore, I CAN state that all TRUE science DOES point TOWARDS God, and not away from Him, even in the sense that "true" paradigms even exist which make this not so. They do not. Even if one calls this false knowledge, detached from ANY logic, "the logic of God".
Agustin predicted that Catholicism would fill the earth and subdue it completely, and THAT was the major thesis of "The City of God". He borrowed heavily from the Greeks, as well as the Muslims, in every area of thought. His book was entirely full of false premises, and no-one can go anywhere logically with those.
You cannot arrive AT revelation knowledge with MERE logic; true enough. "Flesh and blood" did not reveal Jesus' Messiahship to Peter; the Spirit of God DID.
Go to go! :-)
More later!
OT2