The Faith & Religion mega Thread

Metaphysical has it's right (e.g: gravity, space, time) and wrongs too... (e.g: ghosts,,, enough said.)

Originally Posted by OregonJim Ahh, but you forget - this is a purely 'metaphysical' analogy. You are now inroducing 'physical' considerations into a metaphysical analogy. An atheist is indeed ignorant of Hell. But to carry the analogy out of the metaphysical and into the physical takes away the whole premise of the analogy.

Well then I say get rid of #3. Otherwise you're saying that, ignorant of it or not, --ll could technically not exist.

Funnier part of all this is that I KNOW Purgatory exists, because I live down the street from Purgatory Chasm. Yes, it's a real place.

http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/dcr...servation.html

Originally Posted by rtmistler Well then I say get rid of #3. Otherwise you're saying that, ignorant of it or not, --ll could technically not exist.

I agree, but #3 was primarily to avoid the inevitable flurry of comments that I 'forgot' to mention the 'possibility'.

Originally Posted by rtmistler nor do I hold with the mindset that an atheist is any more or less ambivalent than others with respect to random accidental death situations; i.e. if they see it unfolding and can do something about it, they will.

It's stipulated that the atheist doesn't see it unfolding.

The whole 1, 2, 3, analogy? Have to say I'm amused and will give you some credit for thinking a'la quantum physics.

Seems more like Pascal's wager to me.

You're terminally ill and just hanging on by life support. A christian, a monk, and muslim are all observing your situation: The christian pulls the plug ... because you are saved

This doesn't sounds like the usual Christian attitude (e.g. Christian groups are typically against assisted suicide and the like).

Regina Spektor - "Laughing With" [Official Music Video]
https://youtu.be/-pxRXP3w-sQ

Quite frankly, I'd suggest that we Christians(?!?!?!!!) should probably stop ... dead-stop ... this emphasis on: "saved."

As in: "Holier than thou," or, in general, "–er than thou!"

Howcum? Because these things quite-necessarily create a gulf, between "the believer" (say ...), and "the entire rest of the world universe."

And so, here's where a particularly nasty aspect of "human nature" takes over. Once you become suitably convinced that "your ass is 'saved,'" not only are you not-particularly-interested in what might happen to the other guy, but you might be eager(!) to see the other guy burn!

<< Insert the entirety of Tim LaHey's (wildly successful, I might add ...) "Left Behind" series here. >>

Well, I just happen to instead be reminded of a certain Pharisee, who deigned to regard with contempt a nearby Publican. (I seem to recall that, in his self-sanctimonious praying, he actually referred to that Publican.) Ahh, but did not the then-mortal Son of that God perceive the matter quite differently?

Or, as none other than Charles Dickens once put it:

"Man,'' said the Ghost, "if man you be in heart, not adamant, forbear that wicked cant, until you have discovered What the surplus is, and Where it is. Will you decide what men shall live, what men shall die? It may be, that in the sight of Heaven, you are more worthless and less fit to live than millions like this poor man's child. Oh God! to hear the Insect on the leaf pronouncing on the too much life among his hungry brothers in the dust!''

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs And so, here's where a particularly nasty aspect of "human nature" takes over. Once you become suitably convinced that "your ass is 'saved,'" not only are you not-particularly-interested in what might happen to the other guy, but you might be eager(!) to see the other guy burn!

This simply demonstrates that you have no idea what it means to be "saved".

If one has no concern for his fellow human beings, he is most definitely NOT saved.

The simple fact that some Christians annoy you about this is strong evidence that your assertion is wrong. The 'Christians' that DON'T annoy you are the ones you should be worried about.

Once again, you are relying on human nature alone and denying the power of God.

Your arguments always have the flavor of "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with b------t". An artful use of emphasis and form does little to improve the substance.

Being "saved" is the same as "luck," I would not "wish" it on my frenemies... If we'd all stop thinking like "we" think rather than everyone, then maybe there'd be real hope unlike fairy tales and luck.

This is all good fun, isn't it? Discussion from several different points of view, which isn't going to change anyone's opinions because beliefs are so individual. rtmistler is the only person, so far, who has mentioned any beliefs other than Christian or Atheist; is there anyone following this thread with different beliefs prepared to throw their opinions into the mix?

Originally Posted by OregonJim The atheist argument ALWAYS degenerates to this. ALWAYS. WITHOUT FAIL. Frankly, I'm a bit surprised it took this long. Zealotry is a noble virtue that has been largely lost, especially in America. <snip>

This isn't a case of "degenerates to" unless you admit that reason with fundamentalist zealots is doomed from the start since they never even consider an opposing view, leaving only that conclusion. This is exactly because I meant "zealot" in it's most extreme form as not only convinced but fanatical, one who cannot be reasoned with and considers anyone holding different views as "ignorant and/or evil infidels" but out of the kindness of your heart, and certainly not to serve your superior non-condescending pose <sarc>.

On a less abstract level it has been said that if one arrives at work and a co-worker says "Are you well? You don't look so good" you're probably safe to ignore that statement. If, OTOH, your co-workers are doctors and nurses and several of them think "you're looking a little green around the gills today", you might want to consider some bed rest.


....And, BTW there is no evidence of a truck nor that if it did exist, it threatens anyone.

Kids learning best from (instead of at) 2 does make more :cents: and we can teach old dogs new tricks.

Originally Posted by enorbet This isn't a case of "degenerates to" unless you admit that reason with fundamentalist zealots is doomed from the start since they never even consider an opposing view, leaving only that conclusion. This is exactly because I meant "zealot" in it's most extreme form as not only convinced but fanatical, one who cannot be reasoned with and considers anyone holding different views as "ignorant and/or evil infidels" but out of the kindness of your heart, and certainly not to serve your superior non-condescending pose <sarc>.

Let me make an observation, and you tell me if there is any truth in it.

You label me as a "fundamentalist zealot". I hold a strong set of beliefs that is in direct opposition to your strong set of beliefs. We have exchanged pages and pages of evidence, on both sides, yet you continually discount MY evidence as not credible. You are not only unwilling to acknowledge a single point, you've ignored at least half of the evidence I've posted. Now, WHO is the "fundamentalist zealot" again? Who is the one who "does not even consider an opposing view"?

Originally Posted by enorbet And, BTW there is no evidence of a truck nor that if it did exist, it threatens anyone.

You don't even see the difference between reason and rationalization. Sad (honestly, not sarcasm).

Originally Posted by OregonJim Originally Posted by enorbet ... ....And, BTW there is no evidence of a truck nor that if it did exist, it threatens anyone. You don't even see the difference between reason and rationalization. Sad (honestly, not sarcasm).

You'd need laws i.e: a truck license and a cross walk, with a bunch of humans doing human sh#!

Food we need that (trough water here.) Shelter? Many times! Scientists as doctors? Yes, and more pay for their teachers... mass-murder for the home team thanks to opinions? Nope!

Stupid honest! If we can't say anything and get away with it you're a moron!

delete\dub

Originally Posted by TobiSGD If an allknowing god puts people in an environment, knowing that they will fail to obey his orders to not eat a certain fruit, but doing it anyway, one could come to the conclusion that this god may at the very least be partially guilty in the outcome. If I leave my dog alone in a room with a chunk of meat in his reach there is no one to blame but me if he eats it. And since I am not allknowing I even could count on the small chance that the trap does not trigger, contrary to the Christian god, who knew exactly what would happen, but still acted like he was surprised and punished humankind for something he knew would happen before setting the stage.

Dogs and humans are different.

A dog eating a piece of meat is doing so because of instinct.

Adam and Eve were very intelligent.
Adam came up with names of all creatures.

They never got sick and had a perfect life.

God only required one simple thing.

He could have made them do the right thing, but he did/does not want robots.

And God was not surprised at what they did.

He did not punish mankind.

When they ate the apple, Satan became the ruler of mankind.

God's justice required him to be fair even to Satan.

If God had left it there and never done anything to reconcile man to Himself, then he might be considered unfair.

But the good news of the gospel is that God so loved the world, that at infinite cost to himself, he provided a means
of removing man's debt of sin and of dealing with the nature of sin in man.