Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   This belief thing
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 31 of 162 (782647)
04-27-2016 5:25 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Dr Adequate
04-26-2016 11:37 PM


Re: Side Effect of Curiosity
Interesting. It's not a history of idolatry, it includes some phrases that sound like an imitation of the OT, and much of it is an attack on biblical religion, the Trinity, the Son of God and so on, an extension of what jar posted. "Partners" could be aimed at biblical religion, the Trinity that is, but "female gods" raises questions. Could it be referring to Catholicism's saints and Virgin Mary? Makes me wonder if like the religion of Joseph Smith it's been revised over time.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-26-2016 11:37 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 32 of 162 (782648)
04-27-2016 5:43 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Tangle
04-27-2016 1:45 AM


All books are unique. All faiths claim to be the truth. The people worshipping in the temples of Vietnam believe their version as fervently as you believe yours. The commonality is the need to believe in something, anything will do it seems.
No, I meant it's unique in the sense that it is a history, and it's a history that is coherent over a millennia and a half of different writers. Faith in God based on the Bible is faith based on the historical reports that demonstrate the existence and character of God. Faith in Jesus Christ is based on the historical accounts of His life, crucifixion and resurrection. Not faith in "propositions" as Coyote's Heinlein quote has it. And not just a compendium of teachings which is mostly what other religions are based on.
Knowledge that the future exists as well as the past forces us to think ahead, and knowledge of our certain eventual deaths forces ideas of perpetual life on us. Our imaginations and curiosity inevitably lead to superstitions and inventions designed to satisfy our need to know and understand and take some control of the future. Without rational, evidence based thinking and the scientific method, all they had was stories designed to explain the inexplicable.
I honestly do not believe that any religion ever invented was the product of such psychological motivations. That's the sort of ethnocentric explanation modern westerners are likely to make up out of whole cloth. I believe the majority of the religions, at least the pre-Christian nonbiblical religions, originally came out of experiences of the supernatural or "ghosts" and that sort of thing, and were fitted into inherited myths, such as the distorted mythified versions of the promise of a Savior all inherited from Eden. But practitioners of such religions, especially those who live a monastic life of disciplined meditation and ritual, also experience all kinds of supernatural phenomena which confirms them in their beliefs.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Tangle, posted 04-27-2016 1:45 AM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by caffeine, posted 04-28-2016 4:50 PM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 33 of 162 (782660)
04-27-2016 8:57 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Faith
04-26-2016 10:51 PM


Religion as a path
I see Dr A already provided examples of the Qur'an dealing with idolatrous religions and in fact many other religions do as well.
But there is another way that religions deal with what YOU call idolatrous religions and that is by acknowledging that different people have different beliefs and those beliefs should be respected. That by the way is also the position taken in the Bible (ain't it great that the Bible is so filled with contradictions? ).
I'm sure you are familiar with Kings 5 and the story of Naaman the leper.
Remember that as Naaman is about to return to Syria, after he has acknowledged the power of the god of Israel; he asks for two mules of dirt from Israel to take back with him since he wishes to worship the god of Israel and so will need some of Israel so that that god can be with him.
But he has a bigger issue. His master still worships the gods of Syria and so he asks "Is it okay if I go with my master when he worships other gods and support him?" and the answer is that of course he can do so. There is no admonition to try to get Naaman's master to change allegiance or for Naaman not to go with him to worship the other gods. Common courtesy was of greater importance than which god was being worshiped.
This is the position held by many of the world's religions, that of religion as a path, a journey; an understanding that different people will follow different paths but that the important points, stewardship, concern for the welfare of others and the world we live in are common to all religions.
It's also the position held my much of Christianity today. It's only a small limited segment of today's Christianity that tries to deny the worth and value of all the world's religions.
Edited by jar, : fix sub-title.
Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Faith, posted 04-26-2016 10:51 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Faith, posted 04-27-2016 9:44 AM jar has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 34 of 162 (782661)
04-27-2016 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by jar
04-27-2016 8:57 AM


Re: Religion as a path -- but most don't lead to God
I see Dr A already provided examples of the Qur'an deals with idolatrous religions and in fact many other religions do as well.
Which is only to be expected of a religion that imitates the Old Testament. But it isn't an answer to my claim, which was that the Bible gives a history of the world that explains how the idolatrous religions came about -- i.e. through the Fall, which gave Satan and his horde power to rule human beings and invent religions that put Satan in the place of God and deny the true God. The Koran merely accuses biblical religion of idolatry, how very clever of the devil.
But there is another way that religions deal with what YOU call idolatrous religions
The Bible is very clear about the nature of idolatrous religions, not just my own notion. Any religion that worships any god but the true God is idolatrous. Pretty clear, jar.
and that is by acknowledging that different people have different beliefs and those beliefs should be respected.
Of course "other religions" do this, but the Bible does not. People should be respected of course, but not all beliefs are to be respected though it always helps to be cautious in how one talks to people about such things. Hinduism is quite famous for accepting all gods and all religions for instance. And the priests of the Roman pagan religions in the time of the early Church would have been happy to accept Christianity as one of their religions too, if it weren't for the fact that the followers of Christ wouldn't accept any religion but Christ. That's what got them thrown to the lions you know.
That by the way is also the position taken in the Bible (ain't it great that the Bible is so filled with contradictions? ).
I'm sure you are familiar with Kings 5 and the story of Naaman the leper.
Remember that as Naaman is about to return to Syria, after he has acknowledged the power of the god of Israel; he asks for two mules of dirt from Israel to take back with him since he wishes to worship the god of Israel and so will need some of Israel so that that god can be with him.
The commentaries I read this morning treat this as a holdover superstition of Naaman's since the God of Israel doesn't need to be worshipped on His own turf. But Naaman is a new believer and needs time to grow into his new religion.
But he has a bigger issue. His master still worships the gods of Syria and so he asks "Is it okay if I go with my master when he worships other gods and support him?" and the answer is that of course he can do so.
That is not the answer he was given. He may have taken it that way but all Elisha said was Go in peace. The commentaries say Elisha didn't give either a yes or no here. Naaman no doubt took it as a freeing of his conscience about participating in his master's idolatrous worship, but he was now a believer in the God of Israel and over time would have to give up the idolatry. By not saying one way or the other Elisha allowed Naaman the time he needed for that.
I'm actually surprised to find the commentaries taking this position because I did think that Elisha essentially told him he could participate with his master without fear of losing his job, knowing that Naaman was now a believer in the God of Israel and needed time to grow in his faith. Perhaps there are other commentaries that take this position but I only read a couple this morning.
In any case this situation is always regarded as an exception to the rule that idolatrous worship is an offense that won't be tolerated. What you are doing is taking the incident out of context as usual. One exception can never be made the rule, and the Bible is otherwise very clear that the rule is that the practice of idolatrous religions violates the Second Commandment will eventually be punished.
There is no admonition to try to get Naaman's master to change allegiance or for Naaman not to go with him to worship the other gods. Common courtesy was of greater importance than which god was being worshiped.
There was certainly wisdom involved in not putting Naaman to such a serious test of his brand-new faith, which he would be alone in practicing when they went back to Syria (or perhaps with others who had witnessed his healing as well) but not courtesy that in any way justified the participation in idolatry, only tolerance for the time being and for the sake of nurturing his new faith.
This is the position held by many of the world's religions, that of religion as a path, a journey; an understanding that different people will follow different paths but that the important points, stewardship, concern for the welfare of others and the world we live in are common to all religions.
Yes indeed, that IS the position of the WORLD'S RELIGIONS which are all followers of the demon gods, but it is not the position of the true religion of the Bible. The things that are common to all religions are not the central thing to the true God, who wants to set people free from sin and from the demonic rule over them that was brought about at the Fall. This "path" is in reality lined with primroses.
I read all that stuff when I first began to study religion and thought all religions were basically the same thing. I started out with Hinduism which besides its own three hundred gods is quite happy to embrace any other gods as well, no one of them considered better than the others. Took me a couple of years of reading to recognize that all religions are not the same, that basically they are all variations on a theme of false religion, except the Bible, which is the only source of the truth about all these things. Of course it offends people to hear that in this day of egalitarianism, and I was quite surprised to come to that conclusion myself based on all my reading.
It's also the position held my much of Christianity today. It's only a small limited segment of today's Christianity that tries to deny the worth and value of all the world's religions.
Not sure how small and limited it is, but in any case any "Christianity" that doesn't recognize that people need to be set free from the other religions is false to the true God.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 8:57 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 9:54 AM Faith has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 35 of 162 (782662)
04-27-2016 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Faith
04-27-2016 9:44 AM


Re: Religion as a path
I understand that is your position and belief Faith, but it is not what all Christians believe. For example the vast majority of Christians not only understand that the Roman Catholic Church is Christian but are actually Roman Catholics.
The Bible is filled with contradictions and that is much of its strength. As I pointed out to you in Kings 5 there is no attempt to convert Naamans master and Naaman accompanying him and supporting him in worship of a god other than the God of Israel is accepted.
The very term Israel alludes to the common Hebrew understanding at that time that mankind struggles with both God and man.
But your strongly held beliefs are no more valid than others' strongly held beliefs. The big difference is that most Roman Catholics would recognize that you too are a Christian.
Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Faith, posted 04-27-2016 9:44 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Faith, posted 04-27-2016 10:08 AM jar has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 36 of 162 (782663)
04-27-2016 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by jar
04-27-2016 9:54 AM


Re: Religion as a path
I understand that is your position and belief Faith, but it is not what all Christians believe. For example the vast majority of Christians not only understand that the Roman Catholic Church is Christian but are actually Roman Catholics.
And they are sadly deceived and need to be set free from that false belief.
The Bible is filled with contradictions and that is much of its strength.
Another very serious deception you believe and preach to others.
As I pointed out to you in Kings 5 there is no attempt to convert Naamans master and Naaman accompanying him and supporting him in worship of a god other than the God of Israel is accepted.
And as I just pointed out to YOU this is not the case. It was NOT "accepted" but at best tolerated for the sake of not trying Naaman's new faith beyond his tolerance.
The very term Israel alludes to the common Hebrew understanding at that time that mankind struggles with both God and man.
It was only Jacob who struggled with God and was named Israel or Prince with God. You make up meanings that are not in the Bible.
But your strongly held beliefs are no more valid than others strongly held beliefs. The big difference is that most Roman Catholics would recognize that you too are a Christian.
That would not have been the case a hundred or so years ago and certainly not in the time of the Reformation and earlier when I would have been tortured to death for my "heresy."
Some beliefs ARE more valid than others, some doctrines ARE false and only one is true. It isn't who holds them but objective criteria that determine which is which. The Bible is really quite clear to an honest reading which is which.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 9:54 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 10:24 AM Faith has replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 37 of 162 (782664)
04-27-2016 10:18 AM


Topic Reminder
This thread is not about how one branch of Christianity is the one, right and true religion, and how adherents believe they can prove it. It's about the nature of belief. Make the discussion less personal by focusing on non-Christian religions like Islam or Judaism. Explore what it is about the nature of belief that causes some to think their religion is the one that is right and true.
Please, no replies to this message.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 38 of 162 (782665)
04-27-2016 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Faith
04-27-2016 10:08 AM


Re: Religion as a path
Faith writes:
jar writes:
The Bible is filled with contradictions and that is much of its strength.
Another very serious deception you believe and preach to others.
I understand that is your belief but remember, people can actually read what is written.
Faith writes:
jar writes:
As I pointed out to you in Kings 5 there is no attempt to convert Naamans master and Naaman accompanying him and supporting him in worship of a god other than the God of Israel is accepted.
And as I just pointed out to YOU this is not the case. It was NOT "accepted" but at best tolerated for the sake of not trying Naaman's new faith beyond his tolerance.
No, what you pointed out was that Commentators have tried to explain away that and other contradictions; but that is NOT what the story actually says.
At the time the story was written the belief was that there was a God of Israel. The Bible simply reflects the various gods that the people of each era created, how they saw their god at that time. The commentators come later and their job is to try to change the perception of the Bible, to recreate its message to fit their belief system.
But in the story of Naaman found in Kings 5 there is absolutely no indication that the Israelis did not believe the dirt was both necessary and a reasonable gift or that the gift was made to protect Naaman's new faith. Come one. This is a guy that just got cured of leprosy. That's a foundation for a fairly strong belief.
Faith writes:
jar writes:
But your strongly held beliefs are no more valid than others strongly held beliefs. The big difference is that most Roman Catholics would recognize that you too are a Christian.
That would not have been the case a hundred or so years ago and certainly not in the time of the Reformation and earlier when I would have been tortured to death for my "heresy."
Yup, but we are not living a hundred years ago (and you are exaggerating once again. In some areas you might have denied the Roman Catholic a job or felt a Roman Catholic should not become President but you would not have been tortured or killed for your beliefs for many hundreds of years. And even during the so called Reformation it was as likely that a Protestant would kill a Roman Catholic for their beliefs as that the Roman Catholic would kill the Protestant, particularly when location is considered.
Faith writes:
Some beliefs ARE more valid than others, some doctrines ARE false and only one is true. It isn't who holds them but objective criteria that determine which is which. The Bible is really quite clear to an honest reading which is which.
Yes, we know that is your belief, but it not a belief held by all Christians.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Faith, posted 04-27-2016 10:08 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Faith, posted 04-27-2016 11:16 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 39 of 162 (782669)
04-27-2016 11:16 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by jar
04-27-2016 10:24 AM


Re: Religion as a path
I was going to end this topic anyway, when Admin came along, so this will be my transition post. I believe I've answered you sufficiently but of course nothing would ever convince you or those who would rather believe things are as you say they are. The only point I failed to make to my satisfaction was that the RCC would torture me TODAY too if they could get away with it, but the political situation is against them. Nevertheless all the same rules that fueled the Inquisition are still on their books and if and when they get power again you can bet any real Biblical Protestants that are still left in the world WILL be tortured and killed. And of course it is their murderous dealings with "heretics" and insistence that all bow to the Pope that was the reason for eventually denying Catholics political power in the Protestant countries. Most Catholics in these countries today think more like Protestants, which is a good thing, but that doesn't stop the RCC papal powers from having other plans.
As for "the nature of belief" I think I may already have said all I have to say on that too. I hope Vimesey will answer my post to him eventually but to explain how belief in religion in general comes about I have only the view that it's either inherited or a supernatural experience was the convincing factor. I guess sometimes people are persuaded by what a religion seems to offer, but others would have to present that argument. And as for the origin of the religions from a general worldly point of view I think it's about myths that become hero worship for starters. Nimrod became the "god" of a religion in his time for instance, as one of the "mighty men." And supernatural experiences were probably a part of that too.
Unless somebody has something to say to me about what I've said along these lines I think I'll "abandon" this topic now for lack of any more to say about it.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 10:24 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 40 of 162 (782671)
04-27-2016 11:25 AM


Beliefs, Commentators and Apologists.
On the topic "This belief thing", strongly held beliefs have given rise to two professions, the Biblical Commentator and Apologist.
There are those Christians who hold a set of beliefs more strongly than any actual reality or evidence. One set of such beliefs is that the Bible is one book, that there really is a correct Bible, that the Old Testament was meant to foreshadow the New Testament and that it is free from errors, contradictions or misrepresentations.
It does not matter that there is not one universally accepted Canon but rather many different selections of what should be in the "Christian" bible that range from just those books that were likely Canonized while Jesus would have been alive to monstrous tomes that include over 80 books.
Note that it is now an extra-Biblical belief the determines how to interpret the Bible and not what is actually written or actually exists.
The need to revise what is actually written to align with what is believed to be true runs right from the very beginning of the Bible until the end. The fact that the two creation myths are mutually exclusive, that the order and method of creation between the stories is contradictory and even the descriptions of the two gods are entirely different simply gets denied. The god character in Genesis 2&3 cannot lie and the serpent cannot tell the truth and so some additional definition of death needs to be created even though it is absent from the story.
The goal is to support the beliefs over the Bible, to support beliefs over reality.
But despite the Apologists and Commentators, the actual writings still exist. Folk can go read the stories themselves. The different Canons do exist; there is no such thing as "The Bible".
But there is another more reasonable explanation and that is to recognize that the so called Bible (from whichever Canon is selected) is simply an anthology of anthologies; a collection of separate stories, tales, myths and laws that reflected individual unique cultures of a given period and how they saw their relationships with the universe, man and god and how they envisioned the god they chose to worship.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by NoNukes, posted 04-27-2016 5:05 PM jar has replied
 Message 43 by Phat, posted 04-27-2016 6:18 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 162 (782691)
04-27-2016 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by jar
04-27-2016 11:25 AM


Re: Beliefs, Commentators and Apologists.
But despite the Apologists and Commentators, the actual writings still exist. Folk can go read the stories themselves. The different Canons do exist; there is no such thing as "The Bible".
There is, in fact, something pretty close to a de facto Bible. Close enough that I don't think the fact that there are different Canons is an insurmountable issue in most discussions with Fundamentalists or even in 90+ percent of the discussions on EvC. The KJV and a few translations that incorporate exactly the same books as the Bible pretty well constitute the text that is cited in the vast majority of discussions at EvC. Absent a visiting Jehovah Witness, Mormon or Catholic, essentially nobody here quotes a text that cannot be found in the KJV even if the translation is different. In only a few discussions to even those differences matter.
Of course no version of the Bible did existed at any time when Jesus, Paul, or Peter was alive. A fact that does not stop people from claiming that Jesus wrote the Bible in some way.
Note that it is now an extra-Biblical belief the determines how to interpret the Bible and not what is actually written or actually exists.
I do note that. Normally the excuse given is that you have to read the Bible 'spiritually' a phrase which almost always turns out to mean buy the doctrine or the agenda before you read.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 11:25 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 5:58 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 42 of 162 (782696)
04-27-2016 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by NoNukes
04-27-2016 5:05 PM


Re: Beliefs, Commentators and Apologists.
NN writes:
Of course no version of the Bible did existed at any time when Jesus, Paul, or Peter was alive. A fact that does not stop people from claiming that Jesus wrote the Bible in some way.
The concept of a Bible is a later Christian creation itself and distinct from Canonization; a list of what is in out out of a theology set. It's likely the first five "books" of the Bible were Canonized at the time Jesus was alive and we do know there were also many other books being circulated and accepted as scripture including some that did not make it into the Western Canon. Jesus is said to have even referenced some.
But even today, the Jews see scripture as the individual scrolls, each a separate work. It's within Christianity that that distinction has been lost.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by NoNukes, posted 04-27-2016 5:05 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 43 of 162 (782700)
04-27-2016 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by jar
04-27-2016 11:25 AM


Re: Beliefs, Commentators and Apologists.
jar writes:
But there is another more reasonable explanation and that is to recognize that the so called Bible (from whichever Canon is selected) is simply an anthology of anthologies; a collection of separate stories, tales, myths and laws that reflected individual unique cultures of a given period and how they saw their relationships with the universe, man and god and how they envisioned the god they chose to worship.
If what you say is true, perhaps we need more modern day stories in order to better explain how todays culture relates to the gods we choose to worship---including GOD, Creator of all seen and unseen. I might argue that we have many lesser gods in todays world.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 11:25 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(1)
Message 44 of 162 (782704)
04-27-2016 6:36 PM


We need to get away from the damn bible and Christianity.
The thread isn't about A religion or even religion, it's about humanity's obvious need for belief systems and the observed fact that all societies create them.
It's also a puzzle to me that even though we observe the fact that humanity invents these things, it does not then naturally lead to the conclusion that the one that we ourselves are born into/subscribe to is not also man made.
It's an obvious logic error but, as we've seen with Faith's comments above, the belief is stronger than the logic. Faith simply can not believe that a fervant believer in Shinto has an equally strong claim to the truth as she does or that both could have invented, despite the fact that she believes other belief systems than her's have been invented.
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Phat, posted 04-27-2016 6:52 PM Tangle has replied
 Message 46 by Faith, posted 04-27-2016 7:20 PM Tangle has replied
 Message 48 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 8:54 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 45 of 162 (782705)
04-27-2016 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Tangle
04-27-2016 6:36 PM


Ripleys Believe It Or Not
The thread isn't about A religion or even religion, it's about humanity's obvious need for belief systems and the observed fact that all societies create them.
It's also a puzzle to me that even though we observe the fact that humanity invents these things, it does not then naturally lead to the conclusion that the one that we ourselves are born into/subscribe to is not also man made.
If what you say is true, then even you have a need to believe in something. What is it, then? Humanity-at-large?

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Tangle, posted 04-27-2016 6:36 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Tangle, posted 04-27-2016 8:37 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024