I will dismiss it, if the amount of evidence provided does not merit belief. I do not subscribe to faith-based beliefs, my beliefs align with evidence and logic. Thus, I would be willing to accept your premise, granted you had extraordinary proof for every extraordinary claim made.

Another example of an extraordinary claim - it warrants extraordinary evidence for me to believe.

What's the biggest future error you're ever going to make?

To put it bluntly, he has, is, and will murder God. Same goes for you, me, and all man.

Injecting my thoughts, but that is my answer not Stew's obviously.

Meh, I've got my thoughts scattered throughout this forum. It shouldn't be hard to find what I endorse (hint, links), for anyone who cares.

I seriously doubt your claim here fwiw. I'm quite certain you hold some erroneous beliefs atm. (holocaust, building 7, Israel identity) Unless....

I most likely do, but I would certainly not be aware of them, or would simply consider them too trivial/functionally or intellectually unimportant to invest any thought into.

Of the beliefs, of which I am aware of however, and of the issues which I consider important (intellectually or functionally) my beliefs are highly aligned with evidence and logic.

This is an interesting question.

Yesterday I became aware of the "Werewolf game" by reading through the politics forum.

If anyone understands that, perhaps my biggest mistake is not looking enough like a villager.

Wow, congratulations.

Do you also think you know everything worth knowing?

I find myself in almost the opposite position - those things I know often hardly seem worth it. The things I dont know are the ones I'm really interested in.

Vote StewTradheir

Alternatively, I really like this answer Although I find your statement about "knowing everything worth knowing" to be completely delusional.

I smell patronizing behavior.....

It depends what you mean by 'worth'. Knowing Jesus is worth more than all other knowledge combined. I do not know everything, nor will I ever in this life.

Basically if one believes that salvation comes through faith in Jesus, then the revelation of knowledge of Christ and the gospel is the only thing worth knowing in a sense. However I think this will quickly become a discussion of semantics, because there are certainly other things worth knowing even if they pale in significance to Jesus.

Whilst I am one of the more arrogant posters on RGT, I would say I dont generally engage in patronising behaviour.

I take this admonition from the RGT rules seriously:

This thread is not a debate thread and I'm not expecting a 'defence' of that claim as such - I'm happy to take it as a meditative statement for the deep thinkers to mull over.



If this was a debate based thread, focussing on factual claims....I may well have been planning a patronising follow-up.

Even as a theist, I considered the journey of more value than the destination.

I guess it depends on what light you're looking at it in. I could think of instances of both journey>destination and journey<destination.

I know Jesus too, I just don't believe in him, based on faith - since I hold no faith-based beliefs (that I'm aware of).

Does this mean that I know everything worth knowing? or do I need to believe in him first, in order to know everything worth knowing?

Does this "revelation of knowledge of Christ and the gospel" come after I decide to believe in Jesus? or is it a requirement for one to truly believe in Jesus?

Essentially, what I'm asking is - in order for me to know everything worth knowing - do I need to believe in Jesus first? or do I need to know it first?

Some Basic Strategy:

Seer - Try to blend in. You don't want to stick out to the wolves or the villagers as both could kill you. Early on at night it's a good idea to search for people you think play well on both sides as it's good to know where they stand. Later obviously you should try to look at the people you think are suspicious. Another important decision for the seer is when to "come out" that is reveal that they are the seer. This varies widely game by game and depends on what information you have. The seer is very important to a villager win. You have to weigh the EV of coming out. The benefit is that you reveal all of your information; if you were to die then you cannot do so. The cost is that you are probably going to get eaten that night. This cost is much less in games with an angel, which is one reason that few are run.



I guess I'm hoping that real life is a game with an angel. Looks like I have a wolf and a villager(?) (wizard-50) voting for (lynch) me atm.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/59...e-12-13-a-173/

Nitpick someone else's posts VeeDDzz. You know what I meant even if I didn't spell it out perfectly. Dnot nticpik it is aonyinng.

lol nit picking its called THINKING wizard!

I am not nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking, or to annoy you, but to simply illustrate how faith-based beliefs can lead one to all sorts of conclusions - even regarding knowledge - that just do not stand up, and/or make sense when thoroughly examined.

I can understand how they make sense intuitively, but Karma and many other non-christian beliefs make sense intuitively too..

I apologise if its annoying, and I will refrain from doing it, but my pet-peeve issue with it, is that when you redefine words and/or leave room for interpretation, you can come to any conclusion - regarding anything - so it can always conveniently suit your purpose.

However, if you're going to redefine words left, right, centre, to answer for a fellow theist - words which otherwise have very specific meanings - like "worth" and "knowledge", then you should at least be aware of the fact that when you do this, you end up with conclusions which are open to scrutiny, and more often than not, will be scrutinized.

This thread has made me realize how awesome an RGT exclusive WW game would be. Seriously. Let's make it happen (as if... )

Thank you, splenda, for creating a useful thread!

Also, Stew, are you claiming seer here?

Yea, that's what I was implying.

The first of the links in the OP is really quite silly. What it is essentially doing is setting up a false dichotomy where the column of "natural man" or whatever is not just a very negative critique of those with a naturalistic worldview or, later on, poor theists but is just a bad quality critique in general.

For instance, hardly feel represented by either column. Clearly the right column appears to be mumbo jumbo of me, but I think the pejorative shoe horning of the left column is equally silly. Don't get me wrong, I think there are lots of really good critiques of the human condition that are well worth considering; this is not one of them.

That may be more delusional than I once was.

For the record, you appear to be writing about "knowing" a person or a deity based largely on anonymous and butchered writings, and perhaps on your own feelings and emotions. And if you are a Catholic, on the self-proclaimed authoritative corporate culture.

• How Do I Know? The Bible Tells Me So. ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪
  
• You Ask Me How I Know He Lives. He Lives Within My Heart ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫

Calling that Spiritual Growth is similar to calling abortion Pro Choice or calling censorship the Fairness Doctrine.

Yes I realize there are issues of semantics and loosely used terms in my previous posts, but I think if you're not looking at it with such a critical eye it is apparent what position I was presenting. If not, you need only ask.

OK

We are all permitted to revise and extend our remarks.