Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
9 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Bible and Plagiarism
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 31 of 51 (715429)
01-05-2014 1:54 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Raphael
01-04-2014 7:05 PM


Re: Plagiarism
Raphael writes:
I believe it is important to not blindly follow a source proven to be false.
What does "proven to be false" mean?
Is Goldfinger "proven to be false" because Fort Knox was never robbed? Did Ian Fleming "plagiarize" London street names from a city map?
There are many things in the Bible that are "proven to be false" - the Flood is one glaring example. (It's interesting that the Flood story was, in fact, "borrowed" if not officially plagiarized.)
I believe it is important not to "blindly follow" ANY source. But some of the ideas in the Bible may be worth following whether they were borrowed or not.
You can plagiarize mere facts but can you really plagiarize ideas?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Raphael, posted 01-04-2014 7:05 PM Raphael has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by AZPaul3, posted 01-06-2014 2:02 PM ringo has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 32 of 51 (715523)
01-06-2014 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by ringo
01-05-2014 1:54 PM


Re: Plagiarism
You can plagiarize mere facts but can you really plagiarize ideas?
Can someone "plagiarize" a fact?
If you tell me the sky is blue and I go tell Mary, is this plagiaism?
If you publish a paper showing that the sky appears to be blue and I copy and present parts as my own work then, yes, this is plagiarism. Not plagiarism of any "fact" but plagiarism of your intellectual property ... your ideas.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by ringo, posted 01-05-2014 1:54 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by NoNukes, posted 01-07-2014 9:33 AM AZPaul3 has replied
 Message 37 by ringo, posted 01-07-2014 10:45 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
Raphael
Member (Idle past 462 days)
Posts: 173
From: Southern California, United States
Joined: 09-29-2007


(1)
Message 33 of 51 (715528)
01-06-2014 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by PlanManStan
01-04-2014 11:41 PM


Re: What is faith?
Apologies for the late response! As you probably picked up I'm still a student and my quarter just began today so it is crazy haha.
PlanManStan writes:
That is an astounding story. But when you say that the actions are like the Biblical God, you forget the Allah (I use that term in the way we usually do) also supposedly cares.
quote:
{[]Allah supports with His help whoever He wills. There is lesson in that for people of insight.} (Al ‘Imran 3: 13)
True, and valid point. I suppose then it becomes a content issue. I have not read through the entire Quran, but from what I have read, there are some textual variances between it and the Bible. My point being, when Christians (for the most part) think of a God, they tend think of him in a certain way, and the same is true of Islam. Which is correct? Personally I don't believe either is; there is no way humans can comprehend how a transcendental being works, 100%.
All this to say that sure, Allah makes similar promises in the Quran, but if you understand the main differences between Allah and the "Christian" God (YWHW, Jehovah, Jesus), you realize that they are not the same God, at least ideologically.
PlanManStan writes:
So while I see your point, I'm still iffy on that part. Also, while I'm not trying to batter down the story or anything, did you ever try contacting your great grandmother about the money?
Haha that's a great point. To be perfectly honest, I didn't really think about doing that; I'm not much in contact with her and as I mentioned earlier, for her to send me anything is pretty unusual. So much so that I haven't received anything from her since that time, and that was almost 3 years ago.
Probably the real reason is my main point here: I just trust God to provide for me, regardless of where it comes from. And I don't mean to sound like a holy person by saying that or something, God is just good to the point where I don't need to worry about figuring that stuff out. He has it taken care of.
I'm not really seeing this part. You say that if this god exists, but then say that you mean the one mentioned in the Bible, just not the Christian God. Do you mean in the way that the three Abrahamic religions worship the same god?
When I said "not the Christian God per se" I meant the idea of God Christianity tries to sell. Rather, the character of God and Christ found directly from scripture. As previously mentioned, even though technically the three Abrahamic religions worship the same god, ideologically (at the least from the standpoint of the people in those religions) they are very different. If they were not, every Muslim would be a Christian and every Christian would be a Jew.
Whose other claims?
He claims there is no other God (Isaiah 46). There's one. By looking at his other claims, we can kind of answer some of your other questions. How do we know what God answers prayers? Well this God says he is the only one, none others exist. Kinda make sense?
Allah also says that there were no other gods, and there are plenty of divine hindu experiences or native American religious experiences. I'm a bit hazy.
Of course. Which illustrates the fact that at the end of the day, everybody has their own religious experience. What im not trying to do is say "I have the truth, I'm right, and you need to believe like me." You don't need to believe like me. All I'm doing is giving my experience, and challenging us to look at Jesus for ourselves, dropping pre conceived notions and opinions (and I will do the same).
For me, God has drastically changed my life now, in real time, and continues to do so every day. Jesus offers a hope and a future bigger than what's inside our realm of possibility, shattering every worldview. He promises peace where there is none, rest where there is none, and hope beyond our pain now. That's what I cling to, and what I find hope in. What do you find hope in?
Because, honestly, at the end of the day you can find evidence for or against anything. There are so many believers today for that reason: They have chosen to believe. The same can be said for non believers (not meaning to make that sound derogatory or less value). You have chosen not to believe, and therefore find reasons not to. That's why there are so many non believers. So at the end of the day we have to ask ourselves the question, and be honest with ourselves: What will I choose to believe? And if it sits well with you, more power to you! I don't need to argue about that. So it's chill
Ringo writes:
What does "proven to be false" mean?
The earth was once thought to be flat. That was proven to be false.
Bloodletting was once a prominent medical practice, but its benefits were proven to be false.
That's what I mean. There are many things I was taught growing up that are simply not true, and I had to come to terms with that, and to be honest, stuff like that shakes your worldview. But it's besides the point, because Jesus is not a "proven to be false" issue. He simply says "believe," speaking past our doubts and even contrary evidence.
Regards!
- Raph
Edited by Raphael, : No reason given.
Edited by Raphael, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by PlanManStan, posted 01-04-2014 11:41 PM PlanManStan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by PlanManStan, posted 01-06-2014 5:50 PM Raphael has replied
 Message 38 by ringo, posted 01-07-2014 10:52 AM Raphael has not replied

  
PlanManStan
Member (Idle past 3687 days)
Posts: 73
Joined: 12-12-2013


(1)
Message 34 of 51 (715531)
01-06-2014 5:50 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Raphael
01-06-2014 3:50 PM


Re: What is faith?
I'm still a student and my quarter just began today so it is
I totally understand, man. Same with me.
when Christians (for the most part) think of a God, they tend think of him in a certain way, and the same is true of Islam
I wouldn't be so sure. A large part of the difference (well maybe not large, but the point stands) is that Muslims try not to reify Allah, meaning they try not to represent him in any one way the Christians or Jews do.
How do we know what God answers prayers? Well this God says he is the only one, none others exist.
I'm not seeing the connection between the question and the answer here. Plenty of Gods say they are the only one. Anywhere from the differents sects of Islam and Christianity to other, radical and less known, sects of other things.
What im not trying to do is say "I have the truth, I'm right, and you need to believe like me." You don't need to believe like me. All I'm doing is giving my experience, and challenging us to look at Jesus for ourselves, dropping pre conceived notions and opinions (and I will do the same).
Oh, I never suspected that you did . I still don't see why Jesus, and not someone else.
What do you find hope in?
I find hope in the fact that every year, our lives and the human race are somehow getting better and better, improving constantly and setting new goals.
You have chosen not to believe, and therefore find reasons not to.
Couldn't the same be said for believers (see "Cheesus, Jesus on toast, etc.). And while I don't go out hunting for reasons not to believe, I do see your point. Depending on your pre-concieved notions, we interpret things differently. No way to change it.
Because, honestly, at the end of the day you can find evidence for or against anything.
I wouldn't be so sure. Evolution (yeah, I know, great time to bring this into the mix) has no evidence that I am aware of against it. Or gravity, to take a less controversial topic, has no evidence disproving it.
But it's besides the point, because Jesus is not a "proven to be false" issue. He simply says "believe," speaking past our doubts and even contrary evidence.
That's where you and I differ, and I think it is what you are getting at, if I am correct. What you are saying in the fourth quote of this (I think 4th) is that everyone interprets things differently and reacts to things differently. Personally, I would hate having to think something without some reason to think it. While I may do it subconciously (e.g. believing that everyone sees the same color red, believing that the grizzly bear is still alive, even though I haven't reseached about them in a little while, etc.), it would be difficult for me to do it conciously.
because Jesus is not a "proven to be false" issue.
I wouldn't say so. What if we proved that Jesus never existed on Earth? Wouldn't that be somewhat proving him to be false?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Raphael, posted 01-06-2014 3:50 PM Raphael has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Raphael, posted 01-07-2014 3:55 AM PlanManStan has replied

  
Raphael
Member (Idle past 462 days)
Posts: 173
From: Southern California, United States
Joined: 09-29-2007


(1)
Message 35 of 51 (715535)
01-07-2014 3:55 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by PlanManStan
01-06-2014 5:50 PM


Re: What is faith?
PlanManStan writes:
I wouldn't be so sure. A large part of the difference (well maybe not large, but the point stands) is that Muslims try not to reify Allah, meaning they try not to represent him in any one way the Christians or Jews do.
Right! Well I think we agree here. Meaning, they try not to represent him in any one way because they have a different concep t of him than Christians or Jews. So much so that to them, the concept of the Christian God does not exist, only Allah.
I'm not seeing the connection between the question and the answer here. Plenty of Gods say they are the only one. Anywhere from the differents sects of Islam and Christianity to other, radical and less known, sects of other things.
Sure. There are other religions and spiritual perspectives where the deity worshipped claims to be the only one. But what I'm getting at is that this God says he is the only one. Is it true? To be honest there's no way I can know. Maybe there are others out there. But based on my personal experience, he has affirmed his existence, effectively affirming his claims that he is the only one. In simpler terms, He claims he will do certain things. When he actually does them, in real life (speaking on faith right now, not miraculous signs) he confirms both his existence and the things he says in other places to be true. God is a god of his word.
Oh, I never suspected that you did . I still don't see why Jesus, and not someone else.
I think it's partly to do with my upbringing. Or maybe even mostly. If I had been born a Mormon, or a Buddhist, perhaps it would be Joseph Smith or the Buddha. Why Jesus? Because that's where my experience lies. And because of the claims Jesus makes. He says he is the way. The truth. The life. (John 14:6). "The truth?" If Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life that means there is no other way. I think Christianity is famous for using that simple fact as a heavy-handed weapon of conversion, or even to guilt-trip people into belief. I can admit that. But all those things aside, his words still stand.
I find hope in the fact that every year, our lives and the human race are somehow getting better and better, improving constantly and setting new goals.
That's commendable stuff. I can respect that. Something I love about humanity are the moments we come together on a central issue for the better. I think the opposite is also true though. Humanity has the same issues it's always had. Selfishness. Hatred. Deception. It's everywhere. What I love about Jesus is he brings us together under himself in equality. He lives and died to promise more than this life. We all have our stories, brokenness unique to us and the ones we love. He promises healing and a better life right now, and guarantees full restoration into what we were originally created to be.
What Christianity likes to do is create little "but you have to's" and requirements you need to fulfill before you're able to experience this assurance. (Romans 8) Jesus doesn't mention an act you need to do or or a building you need to attend or even a prayer you need to pray. He says just believe it's true, and it's yours.
I wouldn't be so sure. Evolution (yeah, I know, great time to bring this into the mix) has no evidence that I am aware of against it. Or gravity, to take a less controversial topic, has no evidence disproving it.
Well of course Evolution has evidence against it: Creation . Haha. Not trying to get into that conversation. But I mean that in the same way that nowadays there are many positions for or against basically everything. With Evolution, for example, if there was not an opposite position this website would not exist. Take coffee (or even just coffee beans) for instance. You can go online and probably find a plethora of articles on the benefits, and probably the same amount of articles on the horrible negatives. My point? There is value in both sides. To throw out the negatives (one side) completely because the evidence you've picked to coincide with the decision you made to trust the positives (the other side) would be pretty absurd (no offense at all intended). The same could be said for many things. Automobiles. Social Networking. Am i making sense?
That's where you and I differ, and I think it is what you are getting at, if I am correct. What you are saying in the fourth quote of this (I think 4th) is that everyone interprets things differently and reacts to things differently. Personally, I would hate having to think something without some reason to think it. While I may do it subconciously (e.g. believing that everyone sees the same color red, believing that the grizzly bear is still alive, even though I haven't reseached about them in a little while, etc.), it would be difficult for me to do it conciously.
Right. No I actually think we're on the same page here. I would also hate having to think something without some reason to think it. That's something shared by all of us I think. My point is there are reasons for both sides of any belief, that's why there are two sides. Belief in a God is a great example, because of the millions of people who have found, and still find, hope, peace, strength and purpose in what he promises. To them, this is not just "12 Benefits of Drinking Coffee" but something so true that they would consider their lives worthless compared to the belief, and many gave up their lives. For something they had no reason to believe in? Thousands dying for a cause they knew was a lie? Doesn't make much sense to me. But that's me
I wouldn't say so. What if we proved that Jesus never existed on Earth? Wouldn't that be somewhat proving him to be false?
I think it totally would. But that's the point, and the hardest part about this whole thing. There is evidence which tries to prove he did. And there is counter evidence arguing the opposite. Until we prove one way or the other, it's a matter of choice. So the hard question comes right back around for us. Considering his claims, what will we choose?
Regards!
- Raph

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by PlanManStan, posted 01-06-2014 5:50 PM PlanManStan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by PlanManStan, posted 01-07-2014 5:04 PM Raphael has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 51 (715546)
01-07-2014 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by AZPaul3
01-06-2014 2:02 PM


Re: Plagiarism
qs Not plagiarism of any "fact" but plagiarism of your intellectual property ... your ideas.[/qs]
Not quite right. Plagiarism is almost orthogonal with intellectual property.
Plagiarizing means taking credit for someone else's work. So yes, you can plagiarize facts. As an example, claiming personal credit for someone else's scientific or historical research would be plagiarism despite the fact that there no intellectual property protections that prevents you from doing such claiming.
So if I learn that the sky on Pluto is marmalade colored by reading your book on the subject, it would be plagiarism for me to take credit for that discovery when I tell Mary. I can cure that aspect of things by giving you the credit instead.
Perhaps one or more of whoever wrote the books of Luke, Matthew, Mark, and John are plagiarizers.
I agree with an aspect of your example regarding Mary and the blue sky. If someone wants to argue that a story in the Bible is plagiarized from some preceding mythological work, they are implicitly arguing that the story did not happen. But you cannot generalize from that to saying no factual account can be plagiarized.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by AZPaul3, posted 01-06-2014 2:02 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by AZPaul3, posted 01-07-2014 1:49 PM NoNukes has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 37 of 51 (715548)
01-07-2014 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by AZPaul3
01-06-2014 2:02 PM


Re: Plagiarism
AZPaul3 writes:
Can someone "plagiarize" a fact?
Of course. You collect observations of the stars (or whatever) and I take your notes and publish them as my own. That is pagiarism.
AZPaul3 writes:
Not plagiarism of any "fact" but plagiarism of your intellectual property ... your ideas.
I disagree. Plagiarism is stealing the expression of facts and/or ideas. You can't "own" an idea any more than you can own a fact. You can only own the way it is recorded.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by AZPaul3, posted 01-06-2014 2:02 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by NoNukes, posted 01-07-2014 11:48 AM ringo has replied
 Message 41 by AZPaul3, posted 01-07-2014 1:10 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 38 of 51 (715549)
01-07-2014 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Raphael
01-06-2014 3:50 PM


Re: What is faith?
Raphael writes:
ringo writes:
What does "proven to be false" mean?
The earth was once thought to be flat. That was proven to be false.
You said in Message 15, "I believe it is important to not blindly follow a source proven to be false."
We're talking about a source here - e.g. the Bible - not a specific statement made by a source. Many statements made by the Bible have been proven to be false - e.g. that the earth is flat. Does that mean that the entire source is "proven to be false"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Raphael, posted 01-06-2014 3:50 PM Raphael has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 51 (715554)
01-07-2014 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by ringo
01-07-2014 10:45 AM


Re: Plagiarism
Stealing expression is copyright infringement. Plagiarism is lying about authorship. Plagiarism is not about ownership at all.
Facts have no owners. I agree with that. But presenting someone else's scientific research as your own is plagiarism and you cannot cure that by rewriting in your own words.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by ringo, posted 01-07-2014 10:45 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by ringo, posted 01-07-2014 11:55 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 40 of 51 (715558)
01-07-2014 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by NoNukes
01-07-2014 11:48 AM


Re: Plagiarism
NoNukes writes:
Stealing expression is copyright infringement. Plagiarism is lying about authorship. Plagiarism is not about ownership at all.
Yes, that's a good clarification.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by NoNukes, posted 01-07-2014 11:48 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 41 of 51 (715573)
01-07-2014 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by ringo
01-07-2014 10:45 AM


Re: Plagiarism
I disagree. Plagiarism is stealing the expression of facts and/or ideas. You can't "own" an idea any more than you can own a fact. You can only own the way it is recorded.
I think the cold has gotten to you, ringo. First you say you can plagiarize a fact and then you say you cannot own, therefore protect from plagiarism, a fact. I agree you cannot own facts. Facts, as soon as they are known instantly become public domain. I can give a for-fee lecture pointing up the positions of all the stars (the facts) in your catalogue without any fear of copyright infringement. What I cannot do is sell your catalogue after the lecture without permission, as you say the expression of your work, the idea of your intellectual property.
As for owning ideas ... all of patent and copyright law are built specifically to accomplish this very thing.
[ABE] I yield to NoNukes.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by ringo, posted 01-07-2014 10:45 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by NoNukes, posted 01-07-2014 3:21 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied
 Message 46 by ringo, posted 01-08-2014 10:40 AM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 42 of 51 (715580)
01-07-2014 1:49 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by NoNukes
01-07-2014 9:33 AM


Re: Plagiarism
Plagiarizing means taking credit for someone else's work. So yes, you can plagiarize facts.
Word games.
You have plagiarized the intellectual accomplishment by taking credit for the feat (finding/discerning/describing the facts). The facts were there all along regardless and can never be owned by anyone. It is the intellectual feat, not the facts themselves, that has been plagiarized.
As for the gospels, there is plenty of academic feeling that Mark and Luke were built upon Matthew and that John was built upon the other three with the last three books emphasizing and embellishing different aspects of the story and, especially in the case of John, different goals to achieve in the writing. There is still, however, not sufficient evidence to make this a firm conclusion. But, since it seems quite clear that none of the gospels as they appear today were written by, or solely by, their purported authors then the whole thing appears to be plagiarism layered upon plagiarism.
Edited by AZPaul3, : spelin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by NoNukes, posted 01-07-2014 9:33 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by NoNukes, posted 01-07-2014 3:12 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 51 (715584)
01-07-2014 3:12 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by AZPaul3
01-07-2014 1:49 PM


Re: Plagiarism
You have plagiarized the intellectual accomplishment by taking credit for the feat (finding/discerning/describing the facts).
This seems a lot like a word game to me. The distinction being made here is between plagiarizing facts and non-facts. What you argue here is correct, but it's really not what is under dispute.
But, since it seems quite clear that none of the gospels as they appear today were written by, or solely by, their purported authors then the whole thing appears to be plagiarism layered upon plagiarism.
Not having been written by their purported authors does not make them plagiarism. For example if you wrote a book about President Obama, and claimed to be a member of his staff, or his gardener, that would not be plagiarism. It would be some other form of dishonesty.
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)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by AZPaul3, posted 01-07-2014 1:49 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 44 of 51 (715585)
01-07-2014 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by AZPaul3
01-07-2014 1:10 PM


Re: Plagiarism
What I cannot do is sell your catalogue after the lecture without permission, as you say the expression of your work, the idea of your intellectual property.
If you bought the catalogue, then you can surely sell it after the lecture, regardless of what the author wants. A closer issue is whether you could make and sell your own copies of ringo's book.
In some cases you might be able to do something pretty close to that. If the catalogue were merely a list of the position and brightness of all of the stars above a certain brightness, the catalog might well be unprotectable by copyright. Kinda like the famous telephone book case involving Feist vs Rural Telephone phone book case. The Supreme Court found that the alphabetical listing of everyone's phone number was not protectable.
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)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by AZPaul3, posted 01-07-2014 1:10 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
PlanManStan
Member (Idle past 3687 days)
Posts: 73
Joined: 12-12-2013


Message 45 of 51 (715594)
01-07-2014 5:04 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Raphael
01-07-2014 3:55 AM


Re: What is faith?
he concept of the Christian God does not exist, only Allah.
So I guess it comes down to whether or not they recognize the Christian god as the same god, just misrepresented.
He claims he will do certain things. When he actually does them, in real life (speaking on faith right now, not miraculous signs) he confirms both his existence and the things he says in other places to be true. God is a god of his word.
Wait, but doesn't that seem like a somewhat weak argument? For example, that Quaran quote that I made, doesn't it affirm Allah's existence? I guess, as I said above, it depends on the relationship of the Christian and Muslim gods. I could see it going either way and it is pointless to argue it.
Humanity has the same issues it's always had. Selfishness. Hatred. Deception. It's everywhere. What I love about Jesus is he brings us together under himself in equality. He lives and died to promise more than this life. We all have our stories, brokenness unique to us and the ones we love. He promises healing and a better life right now, and guarantees full restoration into what we were originally created to be.
I can respect that. Humans are naturally selfish and aggressive, but also social and somewhat moral (I'll stay away from morality for the sake of staying on topic). But at the same time, I would say that humanity is getting better. Not only is slavery widely aboloshed, but it is mostly the older generations that cling to racism and close-mindedness. I suspect that in 50 years time, the world will have quite a different outlook.
There is value in both sides. To throw out the negatives (one side) completely because the evidence you've picked to coincide with the decision you made to trust the positives (the other side) would be pretty absurd (no offense at all intended). The same could be said for many things. Automobiles. Social Networking. Am i making sense?
So I see your point, but the question now is what are the benefits and negatives of religion. In other words, what can you get from religion that you get no where else and what negatives go along with it?
but something so true that they would consider their lives worthless compared to the belief, and many gave up their lives. For something they had no reason to believe in? Thousands dying for a cause they knew was a lie? Doesn't make much sense to me. But that's me
I never doubt someone's faith; it's almost always sincere. So no, it's not that they died for something they knew was a lie (they didn't, they believed it was true). While the word absurd seems somewhat harsh, I find it surprising that people today would die for something like religion. The people of the past I give more leeway to, as religion was how they understood the world and made sense of everything, which is commendable.
I see your point at the end, that there are reasons for belief. I totally think so. The only thing left is "are they valid reasons?".
But yeah, let's politely ignore evolution and morality for the time being

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Raphael, posted 01-07-2014 3:55 AM Raphael has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Raphael, posted 01-09-2014 4:13 PM PlanManStan has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024