The Faith & Religion mega Thread

Originally Posted by enorbet Thank you... I had forgotten that zealots can be so sanctimonious, smug and manipulative.

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. Nobody stands up for what they believe in anymore, and the rest of the world has been shouting that from the rooftops about us for decades. Have you traveled to China? Australia? Japan? South Africa? They are always amazed at the fat cat, lethargic, self-absorbed nature of Americans and, more recently, Europeans. They see our idea of 'tolerance' as the sick, perverted anti-virtue that it is. Problem is, this disease is starting to spread worldwide, and we're seeing the global collapse of leadership because of it. This year's election is the biggest joke in the history of the country, bar none. Go ahead and laugh, call me crazy, call me a nut, but it's happening right in front of your eyes. As soon as you kicked God out in the '60s, He stood back and let you have exactly what you asked for.

"Every man does what is right in his own eyes". That's where we are today. Some actually believe it's a GOOD thing. God help us.

So, thank you for the compliment.

you have little knowledge of ancient history outside modern, evolution-driven, liberal conspiracy theory. ...

Really? An ad hominem attack? Really?! Let us all kindly bear in mind "the rules of engagement." I have never said such things of you, and I would cordially ask you to refrain saying such things of me ... or anyone. (Or, if I may suggest, heaping-on such phrases as "evolution-driven," "liberal," or "conspiracy theory!") We're engaging in respectable water-cooler discussion here, friend!

"Friend," and ... like it or not ... "brother." (Hey, you can pick your friends, but you can't pick your relatives.)

- - -

There's a big difference between "proof" and "strong evidence". Further, as I said earlier, I didn't NEED any evidence - I already trusted it to be true - but I FOUND all the evidence later (or rather, discovered the abundance that others had found and continue to find).

Aye, but here's the conundrum: if you "trusted it to be true," then it wasn't "evidence." It was "affirmation." But, strictly speaking, this is neither "evidence," nor "strong evidence," nor "proof!" You started with a premise that you had already accepted ... based on "trust" or "faith" ... and so, everything piled on top of that. "To which I say, 'God Bless You!'" ... and I say that with perfect sincerity. But, such a position, perfectly-legitimate though it be, is not in alignment with those who choose to pursue "evidence" or "proof."

Fortunately or unfortunately, there really isn't much "evidence," much less "proof," to be found in any religious pursuit.

However: "religion," quite purposely, does not operate in those (limited) circles. ("Faith is the 'evidence' of things not seen", etc.)

If "those circles" were in any way sufficient to satisfy "all of human thought, fear(!), and contemplation," then there would obviously be no need whatsoever for "religion." But, given that they are not 'sufficient,' religion stands proud and independent: without apology. "Science" is, by design, near-sighted. Religion, by design, is not. And, "may the both of them continue, as both of them legitimately always should."

There are times that "we humans" choose to embrace the self-imposed strictures of 'Science.' And, there are times that "we same humans" choose to cast them off. We need not apologize. We need not strive too hard to reconcile one against the other. . . . And we certainly should courteously refrain from flinging stones at one another, across this perceived abyss (which is not present)!

Originally Posted by ntubski 4. There is no truck, and you are pushed into a car coming the other way that the Christian didn't see.

What, exactly, is your 'car' in this analogy?


Yet another straw man argument.

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs Really? An ad hominem attack? Really?! Let us all kindly bear in mind "the rules of engagement." I have never said such things of you, and I would cordially ask you to refrain saying such things of me

Ahh, but you conveniently (deliberately?) quoted only a PORTION of my statement, while removing critical context. I said, "all of your information so far SUGGESTS that...". Not quite playing fair, are we?

This is EXACTLY the kind of thing that causes misinterpretation, which brings us full circle to the original concern!

Yes. Hypotheticals are not right or wrong, like opinions there hypothetical...

^^Whoops. Next page: lalala...^^

Originally Posted by OregonJim Oh, they are decidedly unique, and not like "any other nation". Here is some interesting history from an Israeli.

Israeli's unique and not like 'any other nation' ... Nonsense. Last time I checked they defecated and peed like the rest of us. Furthermore... do you think the Jewish God (Islam/Christianity/Judaism) is the only God that has ever existed?

The Jewish God is just the latest god in a whole string of fairy-tales.

If a god exists it would possess such an intelligence that no human would be able to understand it.

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. Nobody stands up for what they believe in anymore, and the rest of the world has been shouting that from the rooftops about us for decades. Have you traveled to China? Australia? Japan? South Africa?

1. LOL, are you serious?

2. So the most advanced technological nation in the planet should take lessons on fairy-tales, 'identity' and tradition from lesser cultures? Hah, again, LOL... are you serious?

Perhaps it is time that we start sacrificing animals again

---

We're moving into a new era, stop being such a reactionary.

Originally Posted by OregonJim 1. A Christian sees the truck and pushes you out of the way, saving your life. 2. An atheist doesn't see the truck, leaves you alone, and you die. 3. There is no truck.

Logical fallacy - you say the truck represents "hell" - there is no evidence that hell etc exists.

The truck represents danger, nothing more. The idea that only Christians would save you from that danger, again, is a logical fallacy. Just because someone does not believe in fairy-tales, does not mean they want to see people killed if they could help.

Originally Posted by OregonJim This year's election is the biggest joke in the history of the country, bar none.

Ummm... Go back in America's history. Every election has been more or less a joke.

We create heroes in hindsight, always, 150 years from now people will be praising the wisdom of George W Bush. That's how humans are.

Originally Posted by orasis Ummm... Go back in America's history. Every election has been more or less a joke.

This statement alone obliterates any credibility in your stream of recent posts.

Originally Posted by orasis Logical fallacy - you say the truck represents "hell" - there is no evidence that hell etc exists. The truck represents danger, nothing more. The idea that only Christians would save you from that danger, again, is a logical fallacy. Just because someone does not believe in fairy-tales, does not mean they want to see people killed if they could help.

Not a logical fallacy. You apparently ignored option #3. An analogy does not require your belief.

Furthermore, you don't get to redefine the analogy and then call 'logical fallacy' once again. THAT is a logical fallacy.

Originally Posted by OregonJim This statement alone obliterates any credibility in your stream of recent posts.

I'd beg to differ but won't, "in human"s" we trust?"

:Edits.

Do you think that's freedom your breathing?

Originally Posted by OregonJim What, exactly, is your 'car' in this analogy?

Potential negative metaphysical consequences of believing in Christianity. Your initial analogy only enumerated positive or neutral consequences.