BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Waco, here is our exchange from the other thread. I think this exchange is pretty clear you answered yes to the question of whether you believe that Jesus is a physical person or entity alive at this moment.

Me:

"Can you please provide a "yes" or "no" response to these 2 questions?


1. Do you mean the Jesus of the bible, a deity who took human form, is actually alive at this moment?

2.In other words, an actual physical person or entity is alive?

Thanks."

You:

"Yes and yes."

---

My apologies. Thank you for tracking it down I misunderstood your questions.
1. Do you mean the Jesus of thbible, a deity who took human form, is actually alive at this moment?
A. Yes, Jesus is alive at this moment spiritually
2. In other words, an actual physical person or entity is alive?
B. I thought you were talking about humans in general not Jesus in particular. I totally misread "entity."
An entity to me in the moment I read it was Jesus is an entity' as in any particular form such as spirit.
Again my apologies. It was a misreading of your question.
Jesus is spirit and as spirit is alive today.

---

Thanks for the clarification. So you believe a "spirit" exists. By spirit, do you mean an actual thinking and feeling being that simply does not have a tangible physical form? If so, how do you reconcile that belief with the laws of nature? Do you have any scientific evidence a spirit exists?

Wouldn't the existence of a "spirit" be supernatural in nature?

---

My understanding of his belief is that the supernatural realm does exist, i.e. the spirit, and that is the only realm in which God has power or influence. He doesn't believe God is "supernatural" in the sense that He doesn't have power to influence the physical universe. Of course, that would make the other beliefs in his theology contradictory or nonsensical (let alone egregiously non-biblical, which he remedies with egregiously bad exegesis and eisegesis).

---

Indeed, a very odd and contradictory set of beliefs. So, there is a spirit world where God exists that isn't supernatural - like another dimension or something? And in that world, God has certain powers, but they're not supernatural?

Very very odd. There is no logic to it at all.

Mothra said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

John 20: 19 When it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and the doors were locked where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you." 20 After he said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord.

I try to think deeply about these texts. What is John saying in the text.
So with that idea in mind note "The doors were locked...Jesus came and stood among them." John says clearly Jesus in spiritual and the disciples experience him that way.

"After this Jesus showed them his hands and side."

Jesus is the same guy to the disciples as spiritual and physical" which says to me Jesus is the same guy to me as he is to the disciples. Jesus is not bound by history or walls.

Then:
29 Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe."

So I have not seen (the physical wounds) yet I believe.
The text needs to be studied not in a simply literal way but a deeply searching spiritual way to understand its message for us.

I do not believe the text is to used out of context and apart from its profound meaning for us.
You can use it that way but I am not sure it helps your faith journey.

---

In these texts, John is providing an account of what transpired. No, John is not providing an account. He is declaring the good news of Jesus Christ. That is first and foremost task as a gospel writer. He shapes the stories to fit his narrative of the good news.

He has given a pretty detailed account based on what he actually witnessed first-hand, as he was in that room when Jesus suddenly appeared.
No, he did not witness it. The author is anonymous and the name "John" was attached in the 2nd century.

The only logical explanation is that Jesus, as God, has the ability to move between walls. Whether he appeared in spirit or in a tangible physical form, the text is crystal clear that he was visible to the disciples, as they recognized him. It is also clear that they were able to touch his wounds.
You missed the whole point. Your interpretation is literal. John writes with a specific theology and themes (glory, signs, light and dark, I am..., etc) He is not literal. John is telling us the guy present here and now and don't worry seeing and touching. Jesus say, don't worry about it.



Regardless of whether you believe Christ appeared in bodily form or spiritually, the issue with your belief system is that neither account can be explained under the laws of nature and physics.
Of course they are not about laws of physics and science and I never, never made that claim. Don't put words in my mouth about my belief system. John is good news, not a simple report of "the life and times of Jesus." That "actual eye witness account"robs the story of its power about the Guy.
'
Men cannot move through walls, just as they cannot exist in a "spirit" form under the laws of nature and physics.
I Never drew those conclusions.

I am not sure why it's so difficult for you to acknowledge this, if of course this is what you believe.
It is difficult to acknowledge "this" because you are not responding to MY comment but what you think I said. Start over. Read me carefully, starting h the authorship of John and intent of "John" the writer.

---

Mothra said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Waco, here is our exchange from the other thread. I think this exchange is pretty clear you answered yes to the question of whether you believe that Jesus is a physical person or entity alive at this moment.

Me:

"Can you please provide a "yes" or "no" response to these 2 questions?


1. Do you mean the Jesus of the bible, a deity who took human form, is actually alive at this moment?

2.In other words, an actual physical person or entity is alive?

Thanks."

You:

"Yes and yes."

---

My apologies. Thank you for tracking it down I misunderstood your questions.
1. Do you mean the Jesus of thbible, a deity who took human form, is actually alive at this moment?
A. Yes, Jesus is alive at this moment spiritually
2. In other words, an actual physical person or entity is alive?
B. I thought you were talking about humans in general not Jesus in particular. I totally misread "entity."
An entity to me in the moment I read it was Jesus is an entity' as in any particular form such as spirit.
Again my apologies. It was a misreading of your question.
Jesus is spirit and as spirit is alive today.

---

Thanks for the clarification. So you believe a "spirit" exists. By spirit, do you mean an actual thinking and feeling being that simply does not have a tangible physical form? If so, how do you reconcile that belief with the laws of nature? Do you have any scientific evidence a spirit exists?

Wouldn't the existence of a "spirit" be supernatural in nature?

---

My understanding of his belief is that the supernatural realm does exist, i.e. the spirit, and that is the only realm in which God has power or influence. He doesn't believe God is "supernatural" in the sense that He doesn't have power to influence the physical universe. Of course, that would make the other beliefs in his theology contradictory or nonsensical (let alone egregiously non-biblical, which he remedies with egregiously bad exegesis and eisegesis).

---

Indeed, a very odd and contradictory set of beliefs. So, there is a spirit world where God exists that isn't supernatural - like another dimension or something? And in that world, God has certain powers, but they're not supernatural?

Very very odd. There is no logic to it at all.

---

Don't put words in my mouth. God is spirit and transcendent in love, justice for the poor, grace which does not mean supernatural. Your love for your wife or SO is not supernatural but real and transcends time and distance just like God

So it seems Waco's God is a Hallmark card written by Beto O'Rourke.

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

John 20: 19 When it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and the doors were locked where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you." 20 After he said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord.

I try to think deeply about these texts. What is John saying in the text.
So with that idea in mind note "The doors were locked...Jesus came and stood among them." John says clearly Jesus in spiritual and the disciples experience him that way.

"After this Jesus showed them his hands and side."

Jesus is the same guy to the disciples as spiritual and physical" which says to me Jesus is the same guy to me as he is to the disciples. Jesus is not bound by history or walls.

Then:
29 Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe."

So I have not seen (the physical wounds) yet I believe.
The text needs to be studied not in a simply literal way but a deeply searching spiritual way to understand its message for us.

I do not believe the text is to used out of context and apart from its profound meaning for us.
You can use it that way but I am not sure it helps your faith journey.

---

In these texts, John is providing an account of what transpired. No, John is not providing an account. He is declaring the good news of Jesus Christ. That is first and foremost task as a gospel writer. He shapes the stories to fit his narrative of the good news.

He has given a pretty detailed account based on what he actually witnessed first-hand, as he was in that room when Jesus suddenly appeared.
No, he did not witness it. The author is anonymous and the name "John" was attached in the 2nd century.

The only logical explanation is that Jesus, as God, has the ability to move between walls. Whether he appeared in spirit or in a tangible physical form, the text is crystal clear that he was visible to the disciples, as they recognized him. It is also clear that they were able to touch his wounds.
You missed the whole point. Your interpretation is literal. John writes with a specific theology and themes (glory, signs, light and dark, I am..., etc) He is not literal. John is telling us the guy present here and now and don't worry seeing and touching. Jesus say, don't worry about it.



Regardless of whether you believe Christ appeared in bodily form or spiritually, the issue with your belief system is that neither account can be explained under the laws of nature and physics.
Of course they are not about laws of physics and science and I never, never made that claim. Don't put words in my mouth about my belief system. John is good news, not a simple report of "the life and times of Jesus." That "actual eye witness account"robs the story of its power about the Guy.
'
Men cannot move through walls, just as they cannot exist in a "spirit" form under the laws of nature and physics.
I Never drew those conclusions.

I am not sure why it's so difficult for you to acknowledge this, if of course this is what you believe.
It is difficult to acknowledge "this" because you are not responding to MY comment but what you think I said. Start over. Read me carefully, starting h the authorship of John and intent of "John" the writer.

---

---

I did as you requested. I went back and read every one of your posts on this thread and on the other thread I quoted earlier. And with all due respect, and I do mean that, your positions - while purposely vague - are not supported by either the text, nor are they logical. As a poster said above, unfortunately they are nonsensical.

While I agree that the purpose of John is meant to spread the message of the good news of Jesus, John has described his book as a firsthand account of what he witnessed transpire. We see this throughout the book in his description of himself as the disciple who Jesus loved, and he inserts himself into a number of the accounts. This is generally accepted by many biblical scholars. Your error, and it is a significant error, is your odd belief that both can't be true at the same time. John's book can be both a narrative meant to convey the good news of Jesus and a firsthand account of what he witnessed. Those two positions are not contradictory. John himself said Jesus was the word who became flesh. That simply doesn't comport with your position

And with all due respect, it's your position that robs John or it's message. To be blunt, your position is essentially that John completely made up a story to convey a message. In short, you would believe the entire account is a mere fairytale. If that is what you truly believe, then why would anyone want to believe in a fake story of a made up man named Jesus? Because it gives us the warm and fuzzies? Because it inspires us? If that is what you believe, that position is contradictory to the good news of Jesus Christ. You've completely missed that message it appears.

It is your position that robs the story of its message my friend. In short, the Bible is nothing more than literature meant to inspire us. I suspected that is what you believed for some time - that you didn't truly believe there was really a god-man named Jesus because no reasonable person could read the gospel accounts and describe Christ and the Father as anything other than supernatural. The only way to reach your conclusions is to believe it's a mere fairytale used to convey a message - a good message you agree with, but still a fairytale nonetheless. I'm sure you will deny that, and claim I'm misquoting you, but it's the only logical conclusion based on your post. There isn't really a deity named Jesus. There's a story meant to inspire us and nothing more.

Thanks for engaging.

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Waco, here is our exchange from the other thread. I think this exchange is pretty clear you answered yes to the question of whether you believe that Jesus is a physical person or entity alive at this moment.

Me:

"Can you please provide a "yes" or "no" response to these 2 questions?


1. Do you mean the Jesus of the bible, a deity who took human form, is actually alive at this moment?

2.In other words, an actual physical person or entity is alive?

Thanks."

You:

"Yes and yes."

---

My apologies. Thank you for tracking it down I misunderstood your questions.
1. Do you mean the Jesus of thbible, a deity who took human form, is actually alive at this moment?
A. Yes, Jesus is alive at this moment spiritually
2. In other words, an actual physical person or entity is alive?
B. I thought you were talking about humans in general not Jesus in particular. I totally misread "entity."
An entity to me in the moment I read it was Jesus is an entity' as in any particular form such as spirit.
Again my apologies. It was a misreading of your question.
Jesus is spirit and as spirit is alive today.

---

Thanks for the clarification. So you believe a "spirit" exists. By spirit, do you mean an actual thinking and feeling being that simply does not have a tangible physical form? If so, how do you reconcile that belief with the laws of nature? Do you have any scientific evidence a spirit exists?

Wouldn't the existence of a "spirit" be supernatural in nature?

---

My understanding of his belief is that the supernatural realm does exist, i.e. the spirit, and that is the only realm in which God has power or influence. He doesn't believe God is "supernatural" in the sense that He doesn't have power to influence the physical universe. Of course, that would make the other beliefs in his theology contradictory or nonsensical (let alone egregiously non-biblical, which he remedies with egregiously bad exegesis and eisegesis).

---

Indeed, a very odd and contradictory set of beliefs. So, there is a spirit world where God exists that isn't supernatural - like another dimension or something? And in that world, God has certain powers, but they're not supernatural?

Very very odd. There is no logic to it at all.

---

Don't put words in my mouth. God is spirit and transcendent in love, justice for the poor, grace which does not mean supernatural. Your love for your wife or SO is not supernatural but real and transcends time and distance just like God

---

For you, God is nothing more than a mere emotion or feeling that originates in your brain. For you, the Bible is nothing more than a fairytale meant to inspire us. Your use of the word "God" is synonymous with an emotion. You simply couch it those terms to deceive people into believing you actually believe the gospel account.

RMF5630 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

RMF "hat is where we disagree. The how and the why all fit together. God is not just a philosophical exercise in morals. The spark, the initiator or the design all matter. Those answers are part of the divine question."

That is my point - there is no verifiably scientific way to prove your orthodox formulation of God because you rely on science. The "spark, the initiator or the design all matter" is not a term that science understands; yet you are using it as science to prove a theological point. That is not logical.

For me, I am not using science for my philosophical or theological points. My only scientifical point is that I exist. My existence is easily provable. My existential being as a human means I am a personal of worth. I must be of worth; because, I know I exist( unlike my dog who is simply "now") my existence but I know me not only "now" but yesterday and tomorrow. Finally, it is in God that I live, move and have my being. ( Act 17:28)and that within that God I love, do justice for the poor, serve others and offer grace.

---

Ok, that is very Aquinas. Thomist, believe one of the proofs of God is existence.


I like what John Paul II said, when he said [of evolution] that "truth cannot contradict truth." The Vatican Observatory Head Scientist believes, "If you think you already know everything about the world, you are not a good scientist, and if you think you know all there is to know about God, then your religious faith is at fault."

I agree with him. We study science because of God and truth is revealed. But, I am Catholic. Not sure that is a view the Protestants would agree with!

---

if, after 36 years of marriage, there are still mysteries with my wife and things still remain that I need to learn about her then it is not farfetched that mysteries remain about God.

As for mysteries in science, new, daily discoveries speak for themselves.

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Waco, here is our exchange from the other thread. I think this exchange is pretty clear you answered yes to the question of whether you believe that Jesus is a physical person or entity alive at this moment.

Me:

"Can you please provide a "yes" or "no" response to these 2 questions?


1. Do you mean the Jesus of the bible, a deity who took human form, is actually alive at this moment?

2.In other words, an actual physical person or entity is alive?

Thanks."

You:

"Yes and yes."

---

My apologies. Thank you for tracking it down I misunderstood your questions.
1. Do you mean the Jesus of thbible, a deity who took human form, is actually alive at this moment?
A. Yes, Jesus is alive at this moment spiritually
2. In other words, an actual physical person or entity is alive?
B. I thought you were talking about humans in general not Jesus in particular. I totally misread "entity."
An entity to me in the moment I read it was Jesus is an entity' as in any particular form such as spirit.
Again my apologies. It was a misreading of your question.
Jesus is spirit and as spirit is alive today.

---

Thanks for the clarification. So you believe a "spirit" exists. By spirit, do you mean an actual thinking and feeling being that simply does not have a tangible physical form? If so, how do you reconcile that belief with the laws of nature? Do you have any scientific evidence a spirit exists?

Wouldn't the existence of a "spirit" be supernatural in nature?

---

My understanding of his belief is that the supernatural realm does exist, i.e. the spirit, and that is the only realm in which God has power or influence. He doesn't believe God is "supernatural" in the sense that He doesn't have power to influence the physical universe. Of course, that would make the other beliefs in his theology contradictory or nonsensical (let alone egregiously non-biblical, which he remedies with egregiously bad exegesis and eisegesis).

---

Indeed, a very odd and contradictory set of beliefs. So, there is a spirit world where God exists that isn't supernatural - like another dimension or something? And in that world, God has certain powers, but they're not supernatural?

Very very odd. There is no logic to it at all.

---

Don't put words in my mouth. God is spirit and transcendent in love, justice for the poor, grace which does not mean supernatural. Your love for your wife or SO is not supernatural but real and transcends time and distance just like God

---

Warmth can be measured,

Fuzzy is a description of texture: reporting on an observation

Therefore: 47's Warm and Fuzzy theology is science. 47 has scientifically proven his god.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

RMF "hat is where we disagree. The how and the why all fit together. God is not just a philosophical exercise in morals. The spark, the initiator or the design all matter. Those answers are part of the divine question."

That is my point - there is no verifiably scientific way to prove your orthodox formulation of God because you rely on science. The "spark, the initiator or the design all matter" is not a term that science understands; yet you are using it as science to prove a theological point. That is not logical.

For me, I am not using science for my philosophical or theological points. My only scientifical point is that I exist. My existence is easily provable. My existential being as a human means I am a personal of worth. I must be of worth; because, I know I exist( unlike my dog who is simply "now") my existence but I know me not only "now" but yesterday and tomorrow. Finally, it is in God that I live, move and have my being. ( Act 17:28)and that within that God I love, do justice for the poor, serve others and offer grace.

---

Ok, that is very Aquinas. Thomist, believe one of the proofs of God is existence.


I like what John Paul II said, when he said [of evolution] that "truth cannot contradict truth." The Vatican Observatory Head Scientist believes, "If you think you already know everything about the world, you are not a good scientist, and if you think you know all there is to know about God, then your religious faith is at fault."

I agree with him. We study science because of God and truth is revealed. But, I am Catholic. Not sure that is a view the Protestants would agree with!

---

if, after 36 years of marriage, there are still mysteries with my wife and things still remain that I need to learn about her then it is not farfetched that mysteries remain about God.

As for mysteries in science, new, daily discoveries speak for themselves.

---

I do not disagree with that. I also believe that there is a "God" or intelligent design/order/entity that set this whole thing going and maintains these laws. I do not believe that it is all random.

I do believe that worship/spirituality is important and necessary to humans, I believe that most of our problems (drugs, violence, promiscuousness, and depression) can be directly attributed to not believing and not having some form of worship in our lives. Now, I do not believe there is one path or one discipline, like the Lutherans (Married one, so I know what I am talking about). Different people come to the same place in different ways. For example, Judaism, Islam, or even the non-monotheistic religions. There are too many commonalities in behavior and what is considered how to live a good life for their to be random. (I know some are really out there, but I use the 80/20 rule.)

Anyway, I am Catholic. Within the Catholic religion I tend to be more on the Jesuit form. My Dad is a Franciscan through and through, old school pre-Vatican 2. 90% of what we believe we agree. I have Moslem and Jewish friends, 80% of what we believe we agree.

I think we argue over is trivial in the greater scheme. It is becoming more and more trivial as people get further away from some sort of God. I find it funny, those that do believe fight over differences when there are so many greater differences with those that don't believe!

Beauty of this post is that it is MY PERSONAL BELIEVE, no one can tell me how wrong and stupid I am. But they will...

Your putting false words in my mouth

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

I said
Premise God is spirit and transcendent in love,
justice for the poor, grace which does not mean supernatural.
Premise Your love for spouse is not supernatural yet real and transcends time and distance
Conclusion God is real but not supernatural
So which premise is wrong

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

If they aren't real events, then why would any of it matter? If it's all mythology, then you might just as well worship Aphrodite, who after all is the Goddess of Love.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole, such as walking on water, calming the storm, fisher of man, even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

I dont expect many at Baylor to agree! Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians. My Brother in Law told me to become Lutheran and be a Christian (as I said Lutherans think they are only ones in heaven)..

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole ......even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians.

---

Since you don't believe in Jesus' resurrection, you definitely aren't a Christian. You might not even be Catholic.

Without the miracle of the resurrection, our faith is dead. As Paul said in I Corinthians 15:17 - "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins."

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole, such as walking on water, calming the storm, fisher of man, even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

I dont expect many at Baylor to agree! Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians. My Brother in Law told me to become Lutheran and be a Christian (as I said Lutherans think they are only ones in heaven)..

---

Sorry but I see Scripture as proof. It's not that I 'require' miracles, but when Christ's disciples report miracles, I believe them just as I believe their report about Christ's teachings. You cannot treat Scripture as a buffet, where you take what you want and leave the rest. That demotes God to a waiter.

I also think the 'many Baptists traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christian' is a cheap shot which twists the reasons for the Reformation. Speaking for myself, I am friends with Catholics, Buddhists, agnostics, even a couple Pagans, in addition to my Protestant friends. Religion sometimes comes up but while on the one hand I am always happy to witness to what I know and have experienced, I also understand that it is the Holy Spirit who moves hearts to repent, and I serve the Lord: I do not hold HIs authority under my own name, or dare to speak of my own volition. That way lies calamity.

But as for the 'message', the Gospel is not an early version of Mister Rogers' lessons, nor some cosmic version of self-help. God reaches down to each of us in spite of our evil character and sin - is that not miracle?

We are offered - each of us - a new direction, a new identity, returning not only to what we were meant to be able to accomplish, but with the guidance of Christ Himself we may move past anything we encounter - is that not miracle?

You mock miracles as if they are just for show. But History is full of them. You should take the time to look.
.
You might find God looking back at you.

Jack and DP said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

BaylorJacket said:

---

I am curious to see if there are any other bears out there who have deconstructed in the past or are currently in the process of deconstructing from their religion.

I personally grew up as a fundamental, evangelical Christian, and over the past year or so have had the time to actually reflect on what I believe. After going through a process of deconstruction and then reconstruction, my faith looks very different from a few years ago, but I am more rooted in my love & respect for Christ than ever before.

Here is just a high level view of some of the things that were challenging for me, and curious to hear if anyone also struggles with the same topics:

• Evolution - coming to the acceptance that Genesis is not a historical textbook on the formation of the universe, and that to not accept the overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution by the majority of Christian churches is head scratching
• Hell - I struggled (and still do) on the concept of hell. How a normal human being deserves to be tortured for infinite time for simply not believing in X, Y, Z
• Salvation - Similar to hell, but do un-reached people really deserve to be separated from God forever for simply being born to a particular geographic location?
• Historical Jesus - Scholars and theologians who have dedicated their lives to studying Jesus now are quite certain that Jesus believed and taught Apocalypticism, and did not even consider himself to be God. This obviously does not mesh well with fundamental Christian teaching.
• The Bible being inerrant - There are more variations in the original manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament.

---

I agree with all of what you wrote. We have a similar journey, and after looking deeply into all of the points you made I came to the same conclusion. Further, from a purely scientific perspective, the existence of the Judeo/Christian/Islamic god, or the god of any other religion for that matter, is highly improbable. I first began to question Christianity from what I learned while taking religion classes at Baylor. Science took me further down a path that follows the evidence of reality. Science doesn't support religious claims. There is nothing about this universe that requires a supernatural being to explain anything. And, the concept of Yahweh/Jesus being an all loving, all powerful god is inconsistent with the god described in the OT and NT. An all loving, all powerful god wouldn't have created mankind (innocent men, women, and children) and other life on this planet to suffer, nor would he sentence mankind to an afterlife in eternal damnation due to error of birth, or for failure to believe in what is unbelievable - an intangible, hidden god. An all powerful, and all loving god would not allow what is taking place in Ukraine.

---

"There's nothing about this universe that requires a supernatural being to explain anything…"

Watch a hummingbird this morning and get back to us on that.

---

That argument is so glib and unmeaningful.

Nature is every bit as wonderful when you realize there is no supernatural.

God did create perfection, in the Garden of Eden, and with only one rule. Don't eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Adam and Eve couldn't obey that one simple rule. Would you rather be a robot? God gave mankind "Choice" to do good or bad. He wants us to Choose Him through His Son. Most people won't. To believe that no Creator exists takes more Faith than believing God the Creator does exist. Blaming God for things is so trite. It is what people do when they either feel helpless or don't want to take responsibility for their decisions.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole ......even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians.

---

Since you don't believe in Jesus' resurrection, you definitely aren't a Christian. You might not even be Catholic.

Without the miracle of the resurrection, our faith is dead. As Paul said in I Corinthians 15:17 - "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins."

---

I said I believe it was not necessary to be historic. I will find out the truth someday, until that day I go to church, practice the sacraments and believe in the path the Christ set forward. Live as good a life as I can. Was it historic? Beats the **** out of me.

You are right about one thing, I would not make a good Baptist or Protestant. To questioning...

Oldbear83 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole, such as walking on water, calming the storm, fisher of man, even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

I dont expect many at Baylor to agree! Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians. My Brother in Law told me to become Lutheran and be a Christian (as I said Lutherans think they are only ones in heaven)..

---

Sorry but I see Scripture as proof. It's not that I 'require' miracles, but when Christ's disciples report miracles, I believe them just as I believe their report about Christ's teachings. You cannot treat Scripture as a buffet, where you take what you want and leave the rest. That demotes God to a waiter.

I also think the 'many Baptists traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christian' is a cheap shot which twists the reasons for the Reformation. Speaking for myself, I am friends with Catholics, Buddhists, agnostics, even a couple Pagans, in addition to my Protestant friends. Religion sometimes comes up but while on the one hand I am always happy to witness to what I know and have experienced, I also understand that it is the Holy Spirit who moves hearts to repent, and I serve the Lord: I do not hold HIs authority under my own name, or dare to speak of my own volition. That way lies calamity.

But as for the 'message', the Gospel is not an early version of Mister Rogers' lessons, nor some cosmic version of self-help. God reaches down to each of us in spite of our evil character and sin - is that not miracle?

We are offered - each of us - a new direction, a new identity, returning not only to what we were meant to be able to accomplish, but with the guidance of Christ Himself we may move past anything we encounter - is that not miracle?

You mock miracles as if they are just for show. But History is full of them. You should take the time to look.
.
You might find God looking back at you.

---

Mock miracles? How is not requiring believe in them mocking? Do they happen? Well, I do know some stuff I can't explain has supposedly happened. On a jump at Ft Bragg we were told a guy suffered a malfunction and survived against odds. Chute did not fully open and landed damn hard. Miracle? I don't know, but unprobeable. I have seen several accounts I cannot explain or chalk up to luck. So, I do not know if there are miracles. In terms of my spiritual life, I do not need miracles to believe. Remember, my opinion. Not putting on anyone else. As I said, whether there is a miracle or not does not change the message. Just my obviously controversial opinion, as usual. You can tell I went to Baylor because of location after getting out of the Army and not believes. I find myself not on the same page with most on this board pretty consistently. Maybe UT would have been better fit.

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole ......even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians.

---

Since you don't believe in Jesus' resurrection, you definitely aren't a Christian. You might not even be Catholic.

Without the miracle of the resurrection, our faith is dead. As Paul said in I Corinthians 15:17 - "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins."

---

I said I believe it was not necessary to be historic. I will find out the truth someday, until that day I go to church, practice the sacraments and believe in the path the Christ set forward. Live as good a life as I can. Was it historic? Beats the **** out of me.

You are right about one thing, I would not make a good Baptist or Protestant. To questioning...

---

It is absolutely necessary for it to be historic. The Christian faith is BASED on the historic resurrection of Jesus, not on a moral code or example set by him.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole ......even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians.

---

Since you don't believe in Jesus' resurrection, you definitely aren't a Christian. You might not even be Catholic.

Without the miracle of the resurrection, our faith is dead. As Paul said in I Corinthians 15:17 - "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins."

---

I said I believe it was not necessary to be historic. I will find out the truth someday, until that day I go to church, practice the sacraments and believe in the path the Christ set forward. Live as good a life as I can. Was it historic? Beats the **** out of me.

You are right about one thing, I would not make a good Baptist or Protestant. To questioning...

---

It is absolutely necessary for it to be historic. The Christian faith is BASED on the historic resurrection of Jesus, not on a moral code or example set by him.

---

All I said was whether it is a historic fact or a parable to illustrate a point does not change my believe.

If that differs for you, more power to you. Whatever works for you. I do not force my understanding or believes on others. You may be right. I do not know and there is no way for me to confirm. So, it does not effect my believes.

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole ......even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians.

---

Since you don't believe in Jesus' resurrection, you definitely aren't a Christian. You might not even be Catholic.

Without the miracle of the resurrection, our faith is dead. As Paul said in I Corinthians 15:17 - "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins."

---

I said I believe it was not necessary to be historic. I will find out the truth someday, until that day I go to church, practice the sacraments and believe in the path the Christ set forward. Live as good a life as I can. Was it historic? Beats the **** out of me.

You are right about one thing, I would not make a good Baptist or Protestant. To questioning...

---

It is absolutely necessary for it to be historic. The Christian faith is BASED on the historic resurrection of Jesus, not on a moral code or example set by him.

---

All I said was whether it is a historic fact or a parable to illustrate a point does not change my believe.

---

And I'm saying that if it doesn't change what you believe, then you don't.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole ......even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians.

---

Since you don't believe in Jesus' resurrection, you definitely aren't a Christian. You might not even be Catholic.

Without the miracle of the resurrection, our faith is dead. As Paul said in I Corinthians 15:17 - "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins."

---

I said I believe it was not necessary to be historic. I will find out the truth someday, until that day I go to church, practice the sacraments and believe in the path the Christ set forward. Live as good a life as I can. Was it historic? Beats the **** out of me.

You are right about one thing, I would not make a good Baptist or Protestant. To questioning...

---

It is absolutely necessary for it to be historic. The Christian faith is BASED on the historic resurrection of Jesus, not on a moral code or example set by him.

---

All I said was whether it is a historic fact or a parable to illustrate a point does not change my believe.

---

And I'm saying that if it doesn't change what you believe, then you don't.

---

And I am saying that if you have to have miracles to believe, believe is pretty weak...

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole ......even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians.

---

Since you don't believe in Jesus' resurrection, you definitely aren't a Christian. You might not even be Catholic.

Without the miracle of the resurrection, our faith is dead. As Paul said in I Corinthians 15:17 - "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins."

---

I said I believe it was not necessary to be historic. I will find out the truth someday, until that day I go to church, practice the sacraments and believe in the path the Christ set forward. Live as good a life as I can. Was it historic? Beats the **** out of me.

You are right about one thing, I would not make a good Baptist or Protestant. To questioning...

---

It is absolutely necessary for it to be historic. The Christian faith is BASED on the historic resurrection of Jesus, not on a moral code or example set by him.

---

All I said was whether it is a historic fact or a parable to illustrate a point does not change my believe.

---

And I'm saying that if it doesn't change what you believe, then you don't.

---

And I am saying that if you have to have miracles to believe, believe is pretty weak...

---

And I am saying the miracle of resurrection IS the belief. It doesn't make it weak, it is nonexistent without it.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole ......even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians.

---

Since you don't believe in Jesus' resurrection, you definitely aren't a Christian. You might not even be Catholic.

Without the miracle of the resurrection, our faith is dead. As Paul said in I Corinthians 15:17 - "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins."

---

I said I believe it was not necessary to be historic. I will find out the truth someday, until that day I go to church, practice the sacraments and believe in the path the Christ set forward. Live as good a life as I can. Was it historic? Beats the **** out of me.

You are right about one thing, I would not make a good Baptist or Protestant. To questioning...

---

It is absolutely necessary for it to be historic. The Christian faith is BASED on the historic resurrection of Jesus, not on a moral code or example set by him.

---

All I said was whether it is a historic fact or a parable to illustrate a point does not change my believe.

---

And I'm saying that if it doesn't change what you believe, then you don't.

---

And I am saying that if you have to have miracles to believe, believe is pretty weak...

---

And I am saying the miracle of resurrection IS the belief. It doesn't make it weak, it is nonexistent without it.

---

Geez, I qualified several times to avoid this crap, personal opinion. Not saying Church or anyone has to agree. Not saying I am right. Saying that if it was not historic, it does not change my beliefs. I do not not need a literal miracle to validate my belief. Did it happen? I do not know. All I know is that Jesus did exist, he was crucified and his impact changed the world. I follow the Catholic teachings, but am honest enough with my self to question the historIcal accuracy of the Bible. At that point, needed to make a decision. Either I believe in the message or I don't.

Therefore, EVEN if all the miracles are really literary license to make a point, it does not change my beliefs. I am not walking away if the stories are not true, because I agree with the message. That is as close to faith as I can come. If you have the faith of a child and can honestly still feel that way I am envious and more power to you. The world needs more of it.

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole ......even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians.

---

Since you don't believe in Jesus' resurrection, you definitely aren't a Christian. You might not even be Catholic.

Without the miracle of the resurrection, our faith is dead. As Paul said in I Corinthians 15:17 - "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins."

---

I said I believe it was not necessary to be historic. I will find out the truth someday, until that day I go to church, practice the sacraments and believe in the path the Christ set forward. Live as good a life as I can. Was it historic? Beats the **** out of me.

You are right about one thing, I would not make a good Baptist or Protestant. To questioning...

---

It is absolutely necessary for it to be historic. The Christian faith is BASED on the historic resurrection of Jesus, not on a moral code or example set by him.

---

All I said was whether it is a historic fact or a parable to illustrate a point does not change my believe.

---

And I'm saying that if it doesn't change what you believe, then you don't.

---

And I am saying that if you have to have miracles to believe, believe is pretty weak...

---

And I am saying the miracle of resurrection IS the belief. It doesn't make it weak, it is nonexistent without it.

---

Geez, I qualified several times to avoid this crap, personal opinion. Not saying Church or anyone has to agree. Not saying I am right. Saying that if it was not historic, it does not change my beliefs. I do not not need a literal miracle to validate my belief. Did it happen? I do not know. All I know is that Jesus did exist, he was crucified and his impact changed the world. I follow the Catholic teachings, but am honest enough with my self to question the historIcal accuracy of the Bible. At that point, needed to make a decision. Either I believe in the message or I don't.

Therefore, EVEN if all the miracles are really literary license to make a point, it does not change my beliefs. I am not walking away if the stories are not true, because I agree with the message. That is as close to faith as I can come. If you have the faith of a child and can honestly still feel that way I am envious and more power to you. The world needs more of it.

---

This isn't crap, it's the truth.

And as I said before, if it doesn't change what you believe, then you don't. Meaning, you are not a believer, aside from looking to Jesus for fortune cookie feel-goods.

You think requiring miracles makes your belief weak. But since you don't require them, WHAT you believe is weak.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole ......even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians.

---

Since you don't believe in Jesus' resurrection, you definitely aren't a Christian. You might not even be Catholic.

Without the miracle of the resurrection, our faith is dead. As Paul said in I Corinthians 15:17 - "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins."

---

I said I believe it was not necessary to be historic. I will find out the truth someday, until that day I go to church, practice the sacraments and believe in the path the Christ set forward. Live as good a life as I can. Was it historic? Beats the **** out of me.

You are right about one thing, I would not make a good Baptist or Protestant. To questioning...

---

It is absolutely necessary for it to be historic. The Christian faith is BASED on the historic resurrection of Jesus, not on a moral code or example set by him.

---

All I said was whether it is a historic fact or a parable to illustrate a point does not change my believe.

---

And I'm saying that if it doesn't change what you believe, then you don't.

---

And I am saying that if you have to have miracles to believe, believe is pretty weak...

---

And I am saying the miracle of resurrection IS the belief. It doesn't make it weak, it is nonexistent without it.

---

Geez, I qualified several times to avoid this crap, personal opinion. Not saying Church or anyone has to agree. Not saying I am right. Saying that if it was not historic, it does not change my beliefs. I do not not need a literal miracle to validate my belief. Did it happen? I do not know. All I know is that Jesus did exist, he was crucified and his impact changed the world. I follow the Catholic teachings, but am honest enough with my self to question the historIcal accuracy of the Bible. At that point, needed to make a decision. Either I believe in the message or I don't.

Therefore, EVEN if all the miracles are really literary license to make a point, it does not change my beliefs. I am not walking away if the stories are not true, because I agree with the message. That is as close to faith as I can come. If you have the faith of a child and can honestly still feel that way I am envious and more power to you. The world needs more of it.

---

This isn't crap, it's the truth.

And as I said before, if it doesn't change what you believe, then you don't. Meaning, you are not a believer, aside from looking to Jesus for fortune cookie feel-goods.

You think requiring miracles makes your belief weak. But since you don't require them, WHAT you believe is weak.

---

Noted.

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole ......even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians.

---

Since you don't believe in Jesus' resurrection, you definitely aren't a Christian. You might not even be Catholic.

Without the miracle of the resurrection, our faith is dead. As Paul said in I Corinthians 15:17 - "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins."

---

I said I believe it was not necessary to be historic. I will find out the truth someday, until that day I go to church, practice the sacraments and believe in the path the Christ set forward. Live as good a life as I can. Was it historic? Beats the **** out of me.

You are right about one thing, I would not make a good Baptist or Protestant. To questioning...

---

It is absolutely necessary for it to be historic. The Christian faith is BASED on the historic resurrection of Jesus, not on a moral code or example set by him.

---

All I said was whether it is a historic fact or a parable to illustrate a point does not change my believe.

---

And I'm saying that if it doesn't change what you believe, then you don't.

---

And I am saying that if you have to have miracles to believe, believe is pretty weak...

---

And I am saying the miracle of resurrection IS the belief. It doesn't make it weak, it is nonexistent without it.

---

Geez, I qualified several times to avoid this crap, personal opinion. Not saying Church or anyone has to agree. Not saying I am right. Saying that if it was not historic, it does not change my beliefs. I do not not need a literal miracle to validate my belief. Did it happen? I do not know. All I know is that Jesus did exist, he was crucified and his impact changed the world. I follow the Catholic teachings, but am honest enough with my self to question the historIcal accuracy of the Bible. At that point, needed to make a decision. Either I believe in the message or I don't.

Therefore, EVEN if all the miracles are really literary license to make a point, it does not change my beliefs. I am not walking away if the stories are not true, because I agree with the message. That is as close to faith as I can come. If you have the faith of a child and can honestly still feel that way I am envious and more power to you. The world needs more of it.

---

This isn't crap, it's the truth.

And as I said before, if it doesn't change what you believe, then you don't. Meaning, you are not a believer, aside from looking to Jesus for fortune cookie feel-goods.

You think requiring miracles makes your belief weak. But since you don't require them, WHAT you believe is weak.

---

Noted.

---

Lol. Teach you to engage with a True Believer.

Waco1947 said:

---

Your putting false words in my mouth

---

Feel free to clarify.

JXL said:

---

If they aren't real events, then why would any of it matter? If it's all mythology, then you might just as well worship Aphrodite, who after all is the Goddess of Love.

---

Bingo. That has long been my point with him, though this is much more succinct.

quash said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

The problem I see, RMF, is that accepting all beliefs as equally valid leads to charlatans like Osteen and other con men, who use Christ as a means for profit and influence, while sincere belief in what is really no more than a psychological fixation cannot help the person address his or her real need for the living God.

I believe in a God who actually exists as three Persons, who has the power and the interest to help me become the man I not want, but need to be. I believe in the God of Miracles, not for the sake of spectacle, but for the power in every crisis to reach anyone, even at their worst moment.

I believe there is an Evil one who seeks to keep us from having a relationship with God, and his tricks include making some settle for a philosophical idol or a god in symbol only. I believe we must take a step of faith to reach the real God, who uses that as the start of our walk to become the persons He means for us to become.

Think of the account where Jesus walked on water. Recall that He commanded Peter to walk on the water to Him, and just for a few steps, Peter was able to walk on water because he trusted Jesus.

That was a real event, not a metaphor or myth. And it matters in these days of hard-faced materialism to stand by that truth. Not for the sake of winning an argument, but in witness to God's power and intentions.

---

No not "real events." But They are oral histories yet lack historicity. Other evidence of actuality.

---

Yes, real events.

You deny what you choose not to accept. You cannot legitimately say you accept this part of Scripture but not that.

---

In my opinion, it is a mix. Some facts are documrntable, there was a Census. Pilate existed. Etc... But some also seem to be parables or hyperbole ......even resurrection

My point is that it does not change my belief. The message is the same. My Moslem friend made a good point, who lacks faith more someone that applies logic and science to their belief OR someone that REQUIRES miracles to believe?

I agree with him, I dont need the walking on water to ba a literal event that occurred at 2:07 pm on March 35th in 32 AD to agree with Jesus message. Or that his purpose was to add love to the law.

Many Baptist traditionally don't believe Catholics are Christians.

---

Since you don't believe in Jesus' resurrection, you definitely aren't a Christian. You might not even be Catholic.

Without the miracle of the resurrection, our faith is dead. As Paul said in I Corinthians 15:17 - "And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins."

---

I said I believe it was not necessary to be historic. I will find out the truth someday, until that day I go to church, practice the sacraments and believe in the path the Christ set forward. Live as good a life as I can. Was it historic? Beats the **** out of me.

You are right about one thing, I would not make a good Baptist or Protestant. To questioning...

---

It is absolutely necessary for it to be historic. The Christian faith is BASED on the historic resurrection of Jesus, not on a moral code or example set by him.

---

All I said was whether it is a historic fact or a parable to illustrate a point does not change my believe.

---

And I'm saying that if it doesn't change what you believe, then you don't.

---

And I am saying that if you have to have miracles to believe, believe is pretty weak...

---

And I am saying the miracle of resurrection IS the belief. It doesn't make it weak, it is nonexistent without it.

---

Geez, I qualified several times to avoid this crap, personal opinion. Not saying Church or anyone has to agree. Not saying I am right. Saying that if it was not historic, it does not change my beliefs. I do not not need a literal miracle to validate my belief. Did it happen? I do not know. All I know is that Jesus did exist, he was crucified and his impact changed the world. I follow the Catholic teachings, but am honest enough with my self to question the historIcal accuracy of the Bible. At that point, needed to make a decision. Either I believe in the message or I don't.

Therefore, EVEN if all the miracles are really literary license to make a point, it does not change my beliefs. I am not walking away if the stories are not true, because I agree with the message. That is as close to faith as I can come. If you have the faith of a child and can honestly still feel that way I am envious and more power to you. The world needs more of it.

---

This isn't crap, it's the truth.

And as I said before, if it doesn't change what you believe, then you don't. Meaning, you are not a believer, aside from looking to Jesus for fortune cookie feel-goods.

You think requiring miracles makes your belief weak. But since you don't require them, WHAT you believe is weak.

---

Noted.

---

Lol. Teach you to engage with a True Believer.

---

Birds of a feather...