Studies that say NDEs are not real.

[Byblos]

It's of no use Rick. I engage with him every so often just to point out the absurdities of his positions for the benefit of the reader. Otherwise it's all a waste of time.

Post edit: I was reading a post by neo-x and noticed his sig line. I hope he doesn't mind me using it here as it is very appropriate.

Eyes are of no use when the mind is blind. How fitting.

[Kenny]

Keep the peace? Sorry Kenny, that's a load of crap. Jac wrote the book. And he already has you on ignore, so it makes no difference.
It doesn't even matter if you agree with what he wrote. I want you to read that section because I want you to understand our argument.

I already understand he argument from the book! Nicki explained it back on page 14 or 15 already; haven't you been keeping up?

Ken

No Kenny, you don't understand what Jac wrote. Otherwise you wouldn't have said this:

Nicki wrote:
Jac's book answered this quite nicely, I thought - in essence, that God is goodness, or good is what God is, and when he says what is right that's his expression of his nature. Hope my summary's all right, Jac.

Ken wrote:
Sounds like answer #1. Thanks for answering my question.

Ken

You want to try again?

I also said this:
Nicki answer was "X" is right because "X" is an expression of God's nature.
Do you agree this is the answer the book provides?

Ken

Actually Kenny,

You wrote:

Nicki answer was "X" is right because "X" is an expression of God's nature. Though worded differently, that is basically the same as #1.

Ken

It's not "basically" the same as #1. It's a completely different answer. #1 says morality is determined by God's decrees. Which would mean that if God decided to decree that murder is not wrong from now on, then morality is based on nothing more than God's arbitrary declaration. And there really would be no such thing as a moral law.

Whereas the third option is based on God's unchanging nature. And since God decrees according to His nature, or who He is. So, murder is wrong because murder is contrary to God's nature. And since God's nature is unchanging, morality is unchanging and objective.
Some of what I said, was just repeating what Jac said in his book. He says it much better than I can, so again, I ask you to read pg 93-97 of his book.

And yes, I agree with what Jac says about this in his book. Neither of the other 2 answers is logical.

Fair enough. To me the answer is the same as #1, but to you there is an obvious difference. But this obvious difference still does not support your claim! Believing good is God’s nature does not mean good is meaningless without God, good still has meaning to the person judging the action as good weather he believes in God or not.

Ken

[RickD]

Fair enough. To me the answer is the same as #1, but to you there is an obvious difference. But this obvious difference still does not support your claim! Believing good is God’s nature does not mean good is meaningless without God, good still has meaning to the person judging the action as good weather he believes in God or not.

Ken

Kenny,
The answer is the same as #1 to you, because you don't understand points 1 and 3. If you understood, you'd see the obvious difference.

And yes, it does support my point that "good" is meaningless without God. Without God, good is just an arbitrary word

Arbitrary actions are closely related to teleology, the study of purpose. Actions lacking a telos, a goal, are necessarily arbitrary. With no end to measure against, there can be no standard applied to choices, so all decisions are alike. Note that arbitrary or random methods in the standard sense of arbitrary may not qualify as arbitrary choices philosophically, if they were done in furtherance of a larger purpose; in the examples above, discipline in school and avoiding overcrowding at gas stations.

Without God, there ultimately is no purpose. Without God to measure against, to measure what's good or bad, there's no standard to know what's actually good. So, all decisions of what's good, are alike. Which ultimately makes them meaningless. Of course you'd say, "it's not meaningless to me!" But who really cares what you say. Are you the measure of what's good?

And to add to that, your belief of "no God", is essentially a form of nihilism. And nihilism says:

Nihilism is the philosophy that believes that there is no purpose in the universe, and that every choice is arbitrary.[6] According to nihilism, the universe contains no value and is essentially meaningless. Because the universe and all of its constituents contain no higher goal for us to make subgoals from, all aspects of human life and experiences are completely arbitrary. There is no right or wrong decision, thought or practice, and whatever choice a human being makes is just as meaningless and empty as any other choice he or she could have made.

Of course you're going to disagree, because you don't want to admit that your life is meaningless without God. But as I've said before, if you looked at this honestly, you'd have to see the truth.

Quotes from:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitrariness

[Kenny]

Rick
Without God, there ultimately is no purpose. Without God to measure against, to measure what's good or bad, there's no standard to know what's actually good.
Ken
Wrong. There is a standard, it just doesn’t include God.

Rick
So, all decisions of what's good, are alike. Which ultimately makes them meaningless.
Ken
Actually what people determine as good often differs from person to person.

Rick
Of course you'd say, "it's not meaningless to me!" But who really cares what you say. Are you the measure of what's good?
Ken
I determine what I consider good.

Rick
And to add to that, your belief of "no God", is essentially a form of nihilism. And nihilism says:
Ken
I sometimes wonder if you actually believe some of the crazy stuff you say. How you can live in the real world, interact with people and believe some of those absurd claims you make is beyond me.

Ken

[RickD]

Proverbs 26:4 indeed.

[B. W.]

Proverbs 26:4 indeed.

Proverbs 26:4 and now all who read can see what this verse means first hand and guess what - that's good!


-
-
-

[RickD]

<a class="rtBibleRef" href="http://biblia.com/bible/nasb95/Prov%2026.4" data-reference="Prov 26.4" data-version="nasb95" data-purpose="bible-reference" target="_blank">Proverbs 26:4</a> indeed.

<a class="rtBibleRef" href="http://biblia.com/bible/nasb95/Prov%2026.4" data-reference="Prov 26.4" data-version="nasb95" data-purpose="bible-reference" target="_blank">Proverbs 26:4</a> and now all who read can see what this verse means first hand and guess what - that's good!


-
-
-

indeed!

[Kenny]

So we’re quoting scriptures now? Consider Matthew 7:12.
It seems the very people who insist I consider to an alternative point of view, listen and try to learn from their words, make an effort to understand an opposing persons POV, these are the very people who are least likely to do that themselves. Kinda funny how that works huh?

Ken

[B. W.]

Proverbs 15:14 The mind of the intelligent seeks knowledge, But the mouth of fools feeds on folly

Proverbs 18:2 A fool does not delight in understanding, But only in revealing his own mind.

Proverbs 23:9 Do not speak in the hearing of a fool, For he will despise the wisdom of your words.

Proverbs 14:9 Fools mock at sin, But among the upright there is good will.

Proverbs 14:33 Wisdom rests in the heart of one who has understanding, But in the hearts of fools it is made known.

Quoted from the NASB
-
-
-

[Kurieuo]

So we’re quoting scriptures now? Consider Matthew 7:12.
It seems the very people who insist I consider to an alternative point of view, listen and try to learn from their words, make an effort to understand an opposing persons POV, these are the very people who are least likely to do that themselves. Kinda funny how that works huh?

Ken

I love it when your more Christian side comes out Kenny.

[B. W.]

So we’re quoting scriptures now? Consider Matthew 7:12.
It seems the very people who insist I consider to an alternative point of view, listen and try to learn from their words, make an effort to understand an opposing persons POV, these are the very people who are least likely to do that themselves. Kinda funny how that works huh?

Ken

I love it when your more Christian side comes out Kenny.

And how many post has Kenny made so far on this forum and on this thread to speak his mind freely?

and folks think we haven't considered his views?

Fact of the matter, Kenny does not regard any alternative point of view, nor will he listen and try to learn from the others words here, nor does he make an effort to understand an opposing persons POV on this thread. We have and tried and tried to have an intelligent conversation but to o avail, It is clear on prior admittance, Ken, stated he only values his own POV.

K,

He is using Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules"

I hope folks can become wise on this matter. Saul Alinsky’s dedicated his thesis book Rules for Radicals to Lucifer. It is the play book of the modern left in politics. However, it also reveals the tactics of the adversaries.

Posted below are 13 rules from Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals

1-“Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood.

2-“Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone.

3-“Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty.

4-“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.

5-“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

6-“A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones.

7-“A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news.

8-“Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new.

9-“The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist.

10- "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition." It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.

11-“If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.

12-“The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem.

13-“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

We as Christians need to understand these tactics. Rule 4 is used all the time against Christians and one common one concerns the nature of God's love. Another is not to judge...etc and etc...

K, now look at what Jesus said in John 7:24, "Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment." NASB

And note that RULE 11, RULE 13, And RULE 8 is being employed either intentionally or not by

Again: John 7:24, "Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment." NASB
-
-
-

[Kurieuo]

Yes, I don't argue with that B.W.
I'm quite aware to the spinning that goes on by those who deny God.

What I said was more to make Ken reflect and doubt himself. Analyse any possible "inner Christian" if you will.

Let me very openly summarise what I see regardless of whether I'm wrong and over-analysing.

Ken is at these boards not to just be a pain to us Christians as much as it might appear to the contrary.
His being a pain is because he was raised in a Christian household and then turned away in frustration.
At some point, for some reason, he resented his own Dad and/or the particular form of Christianity that he came to experience and know.
I expect the Christianity he knew was very judgemental, from Kenny's own words "fire and brimstone" talk, and had little message about the love and grace upon which is the cornerstone of the Gospel and why Christ came.
And if they did talk of love and grace, such was quickly contradicted and overturned, had the rug pulled out from, with a legalism that often strangles the "Good News".

So Kenny either saw or found some sort of love and grace that elsewhere. Sadly, not in Christianity.
Perhaps in someone else God placed in his life. Perhaps he's still searching.

And now, he's here because, well, at some level he's wondering about such Christianity.
Maybe he has loose ends with his younger Christian identity. I don't know,
but I do not sense that everything with Ken is as anti-Christian as it seems.

He won't let on, maybe even finds it hard to admit to himself.
But something doesn't add up with Kenny.

If I'm wrong, then I'm happy to be wrong still, for the hope that I am right.
What do I base this on? Some sort of gut intuition.

Nonetheless, these forums would actually be quite dead without the likes of Kenny around so...
And I do not intend to this in anyway as judgement upon those who treat Kenny with more strong words and call his bluff.
It is also good that people here state their minds and respond in very blunt terms. Authentic and honest. Direct. Stops any pretense that these issues don't matter.

However, for myself, I simply decided to opt for a different approach with Kenny several months back.

[Kenny]

So we’re quoting scriptures now? Consider Matthew 7:12.
It seems the very people who insist I consider to an alternative point of view, listen and try to learn from their words, make an effort to understand an opposing persons POV, these are the very people who are least likely to do that themselves. Kinda funny how that works huh?

Ken

I love it when your more Christian side comes out Kenny.

(LOL)

K

[Kenny]

And how many post has Kenny made so far on this forum and on this thread to speak his mind freely?

and folks think we haven't considered his views?

No; YOU haven ’t considered my views. If you had, you wouldn’t have made claims about me that you’ve made…. unless you’re just doing this out of anger.

Fact of the matter, Kenny does not regard any alternative point of view, nor will he listen and try to learn from the others words here,

You’re wrong. I’ve had plenty of conversations with people on this forum some whom have caused me to change some of my views on various issues. Of course that has never happened with you; you’re too quick to insult.

nor does he make an effort to understand an opposing persons POV on this thread. We have and tried and tried to have an intelligent conversation but to o avail,

So you said my life is meaningless, that I was a nihilist and if I were honest with myself I would see it as true. And because I object, I refuse to consider an opposing POV? Is this an example of an opposing POV you expect me to listen to? If I were as offensive with you, would you take me seriously? Why should you expect any more from me? Tell you what; if you want me to respect your POV, respect mine.


Ken

[B. W.]

Yes, I don't argue with that B.W.
I'm quite aware to the spinning that goes on by those who deny God.

What I said was more to make Ken reflect and doubt himself. Analyse any possible "inner Christian" if you will.

Let me very openly summarise what I see regardless of whether I'm wrong and over-analysing.

Ken is at these boards not to just be a pain to us Christians as much as it might appear to the contrary.
His being a pain is because he was raised in a Christian household and then turned away in frustration.
At some point, for some reason, he resented his own Dad and/or the particular form of Christianity that he came to experience and know.
I expect the Christianity he knew was very judgemental, from Kenny's own words "fire and brimstone" talk, and had little message about the love and grace upon which is the cornerstone of the Gospel and why Christ came.
And if they did talk of love and grace, such was quickly contradicted and overturned, had the rug pulled out from, with a legalism that often strangles the "Good News".

So Kenny either saw or found some sort of love and grace that elsewhere. Sadly, not in Christianity.
Perhaps in someone else God placed in his life. Perhaps he's still searching.

And now, he's here because, well, at some level he's wondering about such Christianity.
Maybe he has loose ends with his younger Christian identity. I don't know,
but I do not sense that everything with Ken is as anti-Christian as it seems.

He won't let on, maybe even finds it hard to admit to himself.
But something doesn't add up with Kenny.

If I'm wrong, then I'm happy to be wrong still, for the hope that I am right.
What do I base this on? Some sort of gut intuition.

Nonetheless, these forums would actually be quite dead without the likes of Kenny around so...
And I do not intend to this in anyway as judgement upon those who treat Kenny with more strong words and call his bluff.
It is also good that people here state their minds and respond in very blunt terms. Authentic and honest. Direct. Stops any pretense that these issues don't matter.

However, for myself, I simply decided to opt for a different approach with Kenny several months back.

I agree with you K, pretty much adds a confirmation to my own observations. As you know we let so many post here and let them go on and on in the expectancy that they find Jesus. Sometimes we just plant seeds for the future so they can come to their own senses later on. Other times, they get it and become born again. Other times, they reject altogether choosing to remain in darkness. Sometimes we have to act as guardians and take action. Other times, we miss it but learn from our mistakes. My apologies to you K for not reading your response correctly so forgive me on that. If you ever consider being a Mod again - let us know!

Blessings!
-
-
-