The Knowledge of God is Innate - 02

[Calvin Ramsey]

These intuitive truths belong to the several departments of the senses,
the understanding, and our moral nature. In the first place, all our
sense perceptions are intuitions. We apprehend their objects
immediately, and have an irresistible conviction of their reality and
truth. We may draw erroneous conclusions from our sensations; but our
sensations, as far as they go, tell us the truth. When a man feels pain, he
may refer it to the wrong place, or to a wrong cause; but he knows that
it is pain. If he sees an object, he may be mistaken as to its nature; but
he knows that he sees, and that what he sees is the cause of the sensation
which he experiences. These are intuitions, because they are immediate
perceptions of what is true. The conviction which attends our sensations
is due not to instruction but to the constitution of our nature.


For those of you with an interest in learning about Augustinianism
and Predestination as well as other fascinating topics, you will find
lots of articles to read or listen to on your mp3 player, while at home
or at work, from these websites:

*See especially* : http://www.the-highway.com/Calvinism_Meeter.html

http://monergism.com/

http://monergism.com/mp3/

http://monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/whatismonergism2.html

http://calvinistcorner.com/predestination.htm

http://ccel.org/

http://reformed.org/calvinism/

http://reformedreader.org/

http://carm.org/predestination-and-election

http://the-highway.com/predestination_index.html

http://albatrus.org/english/theology/predestination/verses_concerning_predestination.htm

http://nicenecouncil.com/media/

http://the-highway.com/calvinism.html

http://evolutionfacts.blogspot.com/

http://scienceagainstevolution.org/

http://leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/

http://wordofhisgrace.org/science.html

http://godandscience.org/

http://www.evidenceforchristianity.org/

http://www.whitehorseinn.org/

http://spurgeon.org/~phil/hall.htm

http://homepage.mac.com/shanerosenthal/reformationink/classic.htm

http://wabashcenter.wabash.edu/resources/result_browse.aspx?topic=675&pid=650

http://puritansermons.com/toc.htm

http://grmi.org/renewal/Richard_Riss/evidences/

[sbalneav]

Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
> These intuitive truths belong to the several departments of the senses,
> the understanding, and our moral nature.

If our knowledge of God is innate, then are we all elect?

--
__ _ | Nothing is enough for the man to whom enough is too little.
(_ |_) | -- Epicurus, 341-270 BCE
__)|_) |

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/9/2012 1:14 PM, sbalneav wrote:
> Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>> These intuitive truths belong to the several departments of the senses,
>> the understanding, and our moral nature.
>
> If our knowledge of God is innate, then are we all elect?

Go back and (re-)read my last post to you.

Either you must have missed it, or else you are *very* slow to learn.

<smirk>

[sbalneav]

No, you didn't actually answer the question.

--
__ _ | Everything existing in the universe
(_ |_) | is the fruit of chance and necessity.
__)|_) | -- Democritus

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/9/2012 1:31 PM, sbalneav wrote:
> Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>> On 11/9/2012 1:14 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>>> Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>> These intuitive truths belong to the several departments of the senses,
>>>> the understanding, and our moral nature.
>>>
>>> If our knowledge of God is innate, then are we all elect?
>>
>> Go back and (re-)read my last post to you.
>>
>> Either you must have missed it, or else you are *very* slow to learn.
>>
>> <smirk>
>
> No, you didn't actually answer the question.
>

Yes, I did.

You're just having trouble grasping it.

<smirk>

[sbalneav]

Note to elect lurkers: Notice how Calvin simply diverts?

--
__ _ | You do ill if you praise, but worse if you censure,
(_ |_) | what you do not understand.
__)|_) | -- Leonardo da Vinci

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/9/2012 2:50 PM, sbalneav wrote:
> Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>> On 11/9/2012 1:31 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>>> Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>> On 11/9/2012 1:14 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>>>>> Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>>> These intuitive truths belong to the several departments of the senses,
>>>>>> the understanding, and our moral nature.
>>>>>
>>>>> If our knowledge of God is innate, then are we all elect?
>>>>
>>>> Go back and (re-)read my last post to you.
>>>>
>>>> Either you must have missed it, or else you are *very* slow to learn.
>>>>
>>>> <smirk>
>>>
>>> No, you didn't actually answer the question.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I did.
>>
>> You're just having trouble grasping it.
>
> Note to elect lurkers: Notice how Calvin simply diverts?

Actually, notice how I like to make the non-elect deduce the answer by
using reason, while playing with their mind.

[Smiler]

Reason is a foriegn country to you, Calvin.

--
Smiler,

The godless one. a.a.# 2279

All gods are tailored to order. They're made to

exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/9/2012 9:33 PM, Smiler wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 15:27:18 -0500, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>
>> On 11/9/2012 2:50 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>>> Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>> On 11/9/2012 1:31 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>>>>> Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/9/2012 1:14 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>>>>>>> Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> These intuitive truths belong to the several departments of the
>>>>>>>> senses, the understanding, and our moral nature.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If our knowledge of God is innate, then are we all elect?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Go back and (re-)read my last post to you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Either you must have missed it, or else you are *very* slow to learn.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <smirk>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, you didn't actually answer the question.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Yes, I did.
>>>>
>>>> You're just having trouble grasping it.
>>>
>>> Note to elect lurkers: Notice how Calvin simply diverts?
>>
>> Actually, notice how I like to make the non-elect deduce the answer by
>> using reason, while playing with their mind.
>
> Reason is a foriegn country to you, Calvin.

Prove it.

<blink><blink>

<smirk>

[Smiler]

No need. You prove it yourself in every post you make.

[Calvin Ramsey]

Good. Then you should be able to pick any one of my posts and point out
where exactly "reason is a foriegn(sic) country to me".

Of course, if you're unable to do that, then you incriminate yourself as
being
a liar, and from then on anything you post or say is unreliable at best.

So, uh, let's see what you can do there, Smiley.

("Oh, this should be fun to watch.")

<smirk>

[Smiler]

Any belief in an unevidenced supposed superbeing is unreasoned.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/11/2012 7:26 PM, Smiler wrote:

> Any belief in an unevidenced supposed superbeing is unreasoned.

You thinking there would be tangible, observable, and empirical evidence
for God is itself very unreasonable.

But that's your problem, not mine.

[Smiler]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:20:35 -0500, Calvin Ramsey wrote:

> On 11/11/2012 7:26 PM, Smiler wrote:
>
>> Any belief in an unevidenced supposed superbeing is unreasoned.
>
>
> You thinking there would be tangible, observable, and empirical evidence
> for God is itself very unreasonable.
>

Your excuses for the lack of evidence for this supposed god character of
yours are of no value.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/12/2012 6:52 PM, Smiler wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:20:35 -0500, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>
>> On 11/11/2012 7:26 PM, Smiler wrote:
>>
>>> Any belief in an unevidenced supposed superbeing is unreasoned.
>>
>>
>> You thinking there would be tangible, observable, and empirical evidence
>> for God is itself very unreasonable.
>>
>
> Your excuses for the lack of evidence for this supposed god character of
> yours are of no value.

They're not excuses.

They are very reasonable reasons.

The fact that you fail to recognize that says alot about your, shall we
say, fate.

<smirk>

[Smiler]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:38:54 -0500, Calvin Ramsey wrote:

> On 11/12/2012 6:52 PM, Smiler wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:20:35 -0500, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/11/2012 7:26 PM, Smiler wrote:
>>>
>>>> Any belief in an unevidenced supposed superbeing is unreasoned.
>>>
>>>
>>> You thinking there would be tangible, observable, and empirical
>>> evidence for God is itself very unreasonable.
>>>
>>>
>> Your excuses for the lack of evidence for this supposed god character of
>> yours are of no value.
>
> They're not excuses.

Yes they are.

>
> They are very reasonable reasons.

Nope. Just transparent excuses.

>
> The fact that you fail to recognize that says alot about your, shall we
> say, fate.

Your unevidenced empty threats have no meaning to those of us that do
not believe in your supposed god character, not even 'alot' [sic].

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/13/2012 8:28 PM, Smiler wrote:
> Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>
>> On 11/12/2012 6:52 PM, Smiler wrote:

>>> Your excuses for the lack of evidence for this supposed god character of
>>> yours are of no value.
>>
>> They're not excuses.
>>

>> They are very reasonable reasons.
>>

>> The fact that you fail to recognize that says a lot about your, shall we
>> say, eternal fate.

>
> Your unevidenced empty threats have no meaning to those of us that do

> not believe in your supposed god character, not even alot.

Well, you see, that's the thing with innate knowledge.
Since everyone has it, there's no need for anyone to prove it.

But, if you insist, your attempts to stifle my bringing it up
is very good evidence that you're trying your best to keep
from thinking about it.

IOW, you're only fooling yourself.

See how that works?

You're welcome.

<smirk>

[Smiler]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 22:21:38 -0500, Calvin Ramsey wrote:

> On 11/13/2012 8:28 PM, Smiler wrote:
>> Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/12/2012 6:52 PM, Smiler wrote:
>
>>>> Your excuses for the lack of evidence for this supposed god character
>>>> of yours are of no value.
>>>
>>> They're not excuses.
>>>
>>> They are very reasonable reasons.
>>>
>>> The fact that you fail to recognize that says a lot about your, shall
>>> we say, eternal fate.
>>
>> Your unevidenced empty threats have no meaning to those of us that do
>> not believe in your supposed god character, not even alot.
>
> Well, you see, that's the thing with innate knowledge. Since everyone has
> it, there's no need for anyone to prove it.

Another unevidenced excuse.

>
> But, if you insist, your attempts to stifle my bringing it up is very good
> evidence that you're trying your best to keep from thinking about it.

Where did you qualify as a mindreader? If I were you, I'd ask for my money
back.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 20:45:29 +0000, Smiler <Youm...@JoeKing.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 22:21:38 -0500, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>
>> On 11/13/2012 8:28 PM, Smiler wrote:
>>> Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/12/2012 6:52 PM, Smiler wrote:
>>
>>>>> Your excuses for the lack of evidence for this supposed god character
>>>>> of yours are of no value.
>>>>
>>>> They're not excuses.
>>>>
>>>> They are very reasonable reasons.
>>>>
>>>> The fact that you fail to recognize that says a lot about your, shall
>>>> we say, eternal fate.
>>>
>>> Your unevidenced empty threats have no meaning to those of us that do
>>> not believe in your supposed god character, not even alot.
>>
>> Well, you see, that's the thing with innate knowledge. Since everyone has
>> it, there's no need for anyone to prove it.
>
>Another unevidenced excuse.

Not even that - "everyone" doesn't have it.

>> But, if you insist, your attempts to stifle my bringing it up is very good
>> evidence that you're trying your best to keep from thinking about it.

Lie noted.

>Where did you qualify as a mindreader? If I were you, I'd ask for my money
>back.

He's at least borderline psychopathic - he came looking for us to
harass and harangue us over it.

We didn't go looking for him.

And now he's lying about why re react negatively.

[Dakota]

The subject line should read "The Knowledge of God is inane."

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/14/2012 3:45 PM, Smiler wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 22:21:38 -0500, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>
>> On 11/13/2012 8:28 PM, Smiler wrote:
>>> Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/12/2012 6:52 PM, Smiler wrote:
>>
>>>>> Your excuses for the lack of evidence for this supposed god character
>>>>> of yours are of no value.
>>>>
>>>> They're not excuses.
>>>>
>>>> They are very reasonable reasons.
>>>>
>>>> The fact that you fail to recognize that says a lot about your, shall
>>>> we say, eternal fate.
>>>
>>> Your unevidenced empty threats have no meaning to those of us that do
>>> not believe in your supposed god character, not even alot.
>>
>> Well, you see, that's the thing with innate knowledge. Since everyone has
>> it, there's no need for anyone to prove it.
>
> Another unevidenced excuse.

Prove it.
<g>

>> But, if you insist, your attempts to stifle my bringing it up is very good
>> evidence that you're trying your best to keep from thinking about it.
>
> Where did you qualify as a mindreader? If I were you, I'd ask for my money
> back.

It doesn't take being a mindreader; just someone who understands human
nature in light of what the Bible teaches.

[Budikka666]

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/e789f4adad4e8fad?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/5ddc9354493b62b3?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/5cfb83a18dbc7442?scoring=d&

[Les]

On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 21:27:25 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>On 11/14/2012 3:45 PM, Smiler wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 22:21:38 -0500, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/13/2012 8:28 PM, Smiler wrote:
>>>> Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/12/2012 6:52 PM, Smiler wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Your excuses for the lack of evidence for this supposed god character
>>>>>> of yours are of no value.
>>>>>
>>>>> They're not excuses.
>>>>>
>>>>> They are very reasonable reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>> The fact that you fail to recognize that says a lot about your, shall
>>>>> we say, eternal fate.
>>>>
>>>> Your unevidenced empty threats have no meaning to those of us that do
>>>> not believe in your supposed god character, not even alot.
>>>
>>> Well, you see, that's the thing with innate knowledge. Since everyone has
>>> it, there's no need for anyone to prove it.
>>
>> Another unevidenced excuse.

An old one one too since even ancient relgious fanatics like Jesus son
of known only to the mother also used it when he was ridiculed

>Prove it.
><g>

Asking somebody to dis-prove something that he has failed to prove
in the first place is a clear sign just how desperate he is :-)

That is like demanding we cut him a slice of bread before he
has even half-baked the loaf.

<More Calvadross snipped>

Les Hellawell
Greeting from:
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County

"For the assertion that “There is no God” is just as much a claim to
knowledge as is the assertion that “There is a God.” Therefore, the
former assertion requires justification just as the latter does. "
- William Lane Craig, "Reasonable Faith"

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/15/2012 6:48 AM, Les tried so very hard to make sense when he wrote:

> An old one one too since even ancient relgious fanatics like Jesus son
> of known only to the mother also used it when he was ridiculed

What was it you were trying so desperately to get out, but just couldn't
seem to
find the right words for?

You need to think about what you want to say, and then make sure you've
typed the right letters on your keyboard, *before* hitting the ENTER key.

Got it?

You're welcome.

<smirk>

--
"Is English your First Language, Les?"