|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Mar 1, 2022 15:22:28 GMT
Nope, that's not true. Most people, by "evidence" though, mean "what will convince me" without any inclination or desire to be convinced, a desire which has nothing to do with evidence. Others are more a little more honest, but insist on setting materialistic parameters on what they consider "evidence," such that they believe they could subject God to some kind of materialistic measures (like a Sims character insisting that the programmer of the game be measureable by the parameters of the software or "he/she doesn't exist").
If that's true and if you can show me evidence I'll start thinking there is a god. Unfortunately every religion claims this and none of them can show the goods. Plus they've already proven your evidence as false.
Not sure you actually read my post. What would qualify for you as "evidence"? |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Mar 1, 2022 15:23:45 GMT
I greatly respect Freon for his faithfulness and adherence to his religion, even if we differ in the religion that we follow. I didn't mean "poor empty creatures" as an insult, just as a sad statement of fact for atheists.
Atheists believe that there is nothing more than themselves, and unfortunately, "self" is usually a disappointing and flawed deity to worship.
Do Animals and plants go to heaven? If not, sounds like the religious are the ones who do that "self" stuff. Atheist recognize more then humans. The planet doesn't revolve around humans. The planet has absolutely no use for humans. Many of the religious reject those that don't follow their religion. If there is a God that created this planet and life, he knows he screwed up bad creating humans. We destroy everything he/she made. It's so unfortunate that "going to heaven" was established as the "goal" of Christianity for so long. It's not. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Mar 1, 2022 15:25:25 GMT
It was quite a journey to come to my conclusions, so there is no way in a mere post, that I could share them with you.
Faith is powerful. It is worth having in your life, but I do not advocate any particular strategy to get it.
Having lived with, and without it, I can say I was not living up to my potential until I was able to understand it, and harness it.
And that is the question you must ultimately contend with. If you know something can enhance your ability to thrive, and yet you choose to repress it, simply because you cannot find a strategy that works for you, are you doing something intelligent? Unless you can prove that Faith is NOT beneficial to those who have it, then that question demands a resolution.
Freon
I think faith is pretty harmless if you don't let it interfere with your moral dcisionmaking or intellectual curiosity. A bit like having a wierd, or-potentially- weird hobby, you keep to yourself. Faith is "harmless"? On the contrary, it's the motivator for...well, everything. The issue is not whether "faith exists" or whether people "have faith." The issue is in where you place your faith. Without faith you would not get out of bed or put a spoon to your mouth. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Mar 1, 2022 15:26:50 GMT
I greatly respect Freon for his faithfulness and adherence to his religion, even if we differ in the religion that we follow. I didn't mean "poor empty creatures" as an insult, just as a sad statement of fact for atheists.
Atheists believe that there is nothing more than themselves, and unfortunately, "self" is usually a disappointing and flawed deity to worship.
You are mischaracterising atheists, but thank you for clarifying that you spoke out of compassion rather than contempt. I agree. There may be a tiny proportion of atheists that truly believe that "there is nothing more than themselves," but that is more indicative of gargantuan pathological narcissism than it is atheism. There are religious people that also behave as if "there is nothing more than themselves," and behaviour is a stronger indicator of belief than what is professed. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Mar 1, 2022 15:29:28 GMT
“I didn’t go to religion to make me happy. I always knew a bottle of Port would do that. If you want a religion to make you feel really comfortable, I certainly don’t recommend Christianity.” - C.S. Lewis A bottle of Port? Lightweight.... takes the thick end of the second bottle! Actually, Port is one of the most delicious things you can ever taste. I used to work with a Portuguese guy whose grandad had been employed, age 15 until retirement, at Dow's. His retirement present was a barrel, with his name, birthday, and start date. After working there nearly 60 years, this was bottled, the labels just his name & work dates, in 0.5l bottles. I was honoured to share one with Jão. In his cellar was far older Port. Under Windsor Castle, the Sergeants and Officers of the Household Cavalry have Port cellars. Both the Blues and Royals and the Household Cavalry have a retired officer employed as Port Buyer. Each member of the Mess pays a small sum monthly for Port. It is bought and cellared. None is drunk until it's at least 25 years old, so the monthly sum is for future members of the Regiment, maybe not born yet. On normal Mess nights, where I've been a civilian guest (smart dress, Regimental tie), 25 year old Port is served as the Loyal Toast. They can get the 100 year old stuff up for Royal Weddings, 150 year old for dining in a new CO, or stuff from the early 19th Century for the death of the Monarch or a Coronation. I'm told Prince Philip's funeral had them right at the back of this multi-million poundsworth of stock. He was well beloved. Yes, port can make you happy, especially when it has such strong associations with friendship, loyalty and community. It's especially nice with blue Cheshire or Stilton. Ah, but the strong associations with friendships, loyalty, and community indicate it's not just "about the port." For me, port was always the most "bang for the buck per volume." Not a huge discerning tongue for "potent potables" (as Alex Trek always said), and whatever port I tried was probably cheap. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Mar 1, 2022 15:30:11 GMT
Just a reminder for those who prefer to discussion religion over wine: We do have relgion section just for such airy conversations. But it always requires somebody to move the thread once the subject has veered that way. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Mar 1, 2022 15:32:53 GMT
Dated, but this one is emblematic of today's GOP has become...or, When Harry met Batshit: I haven't weighed in on the OP yet, but this is deplorable. This is the logical extension of "Christian nationalism," and "nationalistic Christianity" has been almost typical of American Christianity for probably 50 years now. If a Christian has to thing about where his/her loyalty lies—whether to America or Jesus—then their Christianity is probably more syncretistic idolatry than "Christianity." May God have mercy. |
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,411
|
Post by thor on Mar 1, 2022 18:47:48 GMT
Dated, but this one is emblematic of today's GOP has become...or, When Harry met Batshit: I haven't weighed in on the OP yet, but this is deplorable. This is the logical extension of "Christian nationalism," and "nationalistic Christianity" has been almost typical of American Christianity for probably 50 years now. If a Christian has to thing about where his/her loyalty lies—whether to America or Jesus—then their Christianity is probably more syncretistic idolatry than "Christianity." May God have mercy. Personally, I was surprised at the uproar the OP caused. It was intended to be a 'look at this asshat' kind of post. |
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Mar 1, 2022 20:29:19 GMT
Strange... all the Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland had religious upbringings. Maybe a religious upbringing isn't a prerequisite for kindness?
Well, ya, there are all sorts of paths to kindness. And all sorts of people that ignore those paths even when others try to urge them to stay on them.
Indeed. Quite right. And I assume we agree that religion doesn't necessarily mean kindness. |
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Mar 1, 2022 20:31:29 GMT
I think faith is pretty harmless if you don't let it interfere with your moral dcisionmaking or intellectual curiosity. A bit like having a wierd, or-potentially- weird hobby, you keep to yourself. I can hear in your response, that you only associate Faith with religion.
But it is much more pervasive than that. A simple example is self-confidence, Faith in one's self, or viewed in this context, belief that one is able to accomplish and overcome in new, untested circumstances, simply by choosing to see one's self that way. That view of one's self is a choice, based on no evidence, therefore it is Faith. Are you saying self-confidence is 'pretty harmless'?
Faith is MUCH bigger than religion, it is an aspect of our species.
Freon
I thought we were discussing religious faith, as in, there's a god (whichever one). |
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Mar 1, 2022 20:33:59 GMT
I think faith is pretty harmless if you don't let it interfere with your moral dcisionmaking or intellectual curiosity. A bit like having a wierd, or-potentially- weird hobby, you keep to yourself. Faith is "harmless"? On the contrary, it's the motivator for...well, everything. The issue is not whether "faith exists" or whether people "have faith." The issue is in where you place your faith. Without faith you would not get out of bed or put a spoon to your mouth. I usually put a spoon in my mouth before I go to sleep, in case I lose my faith in spoons overnight. I think you're trying to put a possessive umbrella over many things, giving them a good aspect, and sneaking religious faith in there like a naughty smuggler. |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Mar 1, 2022 20:38:39 GMT
Well, ya, there are all sorts of paths to kindness. And all sorts of people that ignore those paths even when others try to urge them to stay on them.
Indeed. Quite right. And I assume we agree that religion doesn't necessarily mean kindness.
I'm sure your last line makes any sense. Religion is a belief system. There is nothing in the meaning of the word religion regarding what that belief system is. So I don't understand the need to even state that it "doesn't necessarily mean kindness". No. It means a belief system.
Typically, though, kindness is a key feature of the major, worldwide religions.
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Mar 1, 2022 21:01:41 GMT
I can hear in your response, that you only associate Faith with religion.
But it is much more pervasive than that. A simple example is self-confidence, Faith in one's self, or viewed in this context, belief that one is able to accomplish and overcome in new, untested circumstances, simply by choosing to see one's self that way. That view of one's self is a choice, based on no evidence, therefore it is Faith. Are you saying self-confidence is 'pretty harmless'?
Faith is MUCH bigger than religion, it is an aspect of our species.
Freon
I thought we were discussing religious faith, as in, there's a god (whichever one). I do not differentiate the two. There is only Faith. What it is in, is irrelevant.
That is why I do not advocate any particular Faith, as most Religious people would in this conversation. To me, once you are capable of Faith, that alone makes you identical to anyone else who has done the same, regardless of what they actually believe in.
I call myself a Faithist (A Faithist Jew, to be specific), because to me, it is Faith itself which is important, even vital, not what one has Faith in.
Freon
|
|
|
|
Post by limey² on Mar 1, 2022 21:39:57 GMT
I thought we were discussing religious faith, as in, there's a god (whichever one). I do not differentiate the two. There is only Faith. What it is in, is irrelevant.
That is why I do not advocate any particular Faith, as most Religious people would in this conversation. To me, once you are capable of Faith, that alone makes you identical to anyone else who has done the same, regardless of what they actually believe in.
I call myself a Faithist (A Faithist Jew, to be specific), because to me, it is Faith itself which is important, even vital, not what one has Faith in.
Freon
Sounds kind of vague, New Age-y to me. |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Mar 1, 2022 21:45:13 GMT
I do not differentiate the two. There is only Faith. What it is in, is irrelevant.
That is why I do not advocate any particular Faith, as most Religious people would in this conversation. To me, once you are capable of Faith, that alone makes you identical to anyone else who has done the same, regardless of what they actually believe in.
I call myself a Faithist (A Faithist Jew, to be specific), because to me, it is Faith itself which is important, even vital, not what one has Faith in.
Freon
Sounds kind of vague, New Age-y to me. If it were a fad, I would have to agree with you, but this is a philosophy of one, intended to treat Faith pragmatically, as in, to incorporate its benefits without conflicting with a strong science background.
It is enlightening.
Or, horse-sh!t.
I'm ok either way.
Freon
|
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Mar 1, 2022 22:01:19 GMT
Faith is "harmless"? On the contrary, it's the motivator for...well, everything. The issue is not whether "faith exists" or whether people "have faith." The issue is in where you place your faith. Without faith you would not get out of bed or put a spoon to your mouth. I usually put a spoon in my mouth before I go to sleep, in case I lose my faith in spoons overnight. I think you're trying to put a possessive umbrella over many things, giving them a good aspect, and sneaking religious faith in there like a naughty smuggler. Not at all. The conversation before was "faith," not "religious faith." Everybody has "faith"—confidence in and allegiance to foundational axioms which cannot be proven, and more than that—fundamental motivations (often unexamined). "Religious faith" is merely one kind or expression of faith. To nitpick further, when Christianity originated, it more resembled a philosophy—a way of living aiming towards a telos—than a "religion" (which, at that time, was more about maintaining right relationships with the gods, and, unlike the religions of its time, had no sacrifices, temples, or images, resulting in the accusation that they were "atheists." The same accusation had been levelled at the Jews earlier, when it was revealed there was no "god" in their temple. Christians went further and had no temple. The substitution of the "church building" as "place of worship" is actually a betrayal of what the New Testament actually teaches—that humans are the "temple of God's spirit." But when there is a perceived blank, paganism (which comes naturally) tends to rush in to fill it. When we talk about "different religions" as if "religion" is one of many facets of life (and in this case, one option out of many based on private opinion), we are more beholden to the Enlightenment than we realize—there is no historical evidence that prior to the Enlightenment, anyone really thought that way (and most people not living in the west don't think that way today). |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Mar 1, 2022 22:02:14 GMT
I thought we were discussing religious faith, as in, there's a god (whichever one). I do not differentiate the two. There is only Faith. What it is in, is irrelevant.
That is why I do not advocate any particular Faith, as most Religious people would in this conversation. To me, once you are capable of Faith, that alone makes you identical to anyone else who has done the same, regardless of what they actually believe in.
I call myself a Faithist (A Faithist Jew, to be specific), because to me, it is Faith itself which is important, even vital, not what one has Faith in.
Freon
What if someone has "faith in the painful demise of puppies" (or some other distortion)? |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Mar 1, 2022 22:54:52 GMT
I do not differentiate the two. There is only Faith. What it is in, is irrelevant.
That is why I do not advocate any particular Faith, as most Religious people would in this conversation. To me, once you are capable of Faith, that alone makes you identical to anyone else who has done the same, regardless of what they actually believe in.
I call myself a Faithist (A Faithist Jew, to be specific), because to me, it is Faith itself which is important, even vital, not what one has Faith in.
Freon
What if someone has "faith in the painful demise of puppies" (or some other distortion)? I'm not sure what that statement even means.
Can you rephrase it.
Freon
|
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Mar 1, 2022 23:33:39 GMT
What if someone has "faith in the painful demise of puppies" (or some other distortion)? I'm not sure what that statement even means.
Can you rephrase it.
Freon
Well, if "having faith something" is more important than what that thing is (which it seems like you're saying), then you can "have faith in" killing puppies (or something worse). In other words, if somebody finds fulfillment, happiness, meaning, purpose, or whatever ("having faith in") in "killing puppies," is that okay? Because it's "faith in something"? |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Mar 1, 2022 23:45:18 GMT
I'm not sure what that statement even means.
Can you rephrase it.
Freon
Well, if "having faith something" is more important than what that thing is (which it seems like you're saying), then you can "have faith in" killing puppies (or something worse). In other words, if somebody finds fulfillment, happiness, meaning, purpose, or whatever ("having faith in") in "killing puppies," is that okay? Because it's "faith in something"? I get your meaning, but ultimately, you have to replace the word, 'Faith', with, 'believe without proof', for your sentence to have meaning. So, 'faith in the painful demise of puppies', becomes, 'belief without proof in the painful demise of puppies'. Do you agree that either way, the statement makes no sense.
Are you asking if it is possible to have Faith that there are puppies that die brutally? Again, it doesn't really make sense, because at whatever level you view this, it is testable. It might be very difficult to test, but it is possible, and therefore is not an appropriate target of Faith. It would be a perfect target for belief, however.
Faith not only has no proof, it DEMANDS no proof. It MUST have no proof. If even a single shred of proof is possible, Faith is not occurring. No 'leap', or choice', can happen, because it is the proof that is facilitating the belief, instead of our choice. In your other thread, you said, 'merely' make the choice to have Faith, as if doing so is easy.
Let me ask you, is having Faith easy?
Freon
|
|
