|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Living According to Christ: Is it Reasonable? | |||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Jaywill writes: If Jesus should come back at 12:00 PM tonight where will you be at 12:01? Where are you suggesting we would be?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Jaywiill writes: If Jesus should come back at 12:00 PM tonight where will you be at 12:01?
Straggler writes: Where are you suggesting we would be? Don't be a "straggler" when it comes to believing in the Savior Jesus. You put the rest together. I still don't know where you think I will be at 12:01 if Jesus returns at midnight tonight. Where do you think I will be?
Jaywill writes: You have no garuantee as to when your last opportunity to be saved will be. Do you think it is reasonable to live each day as if Jesus were going to come again at midnight? That is a lot of goodbyes to undertake on a daily basis.........
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Jaywill writes: That is the principle of the 12:00 / 12:01 thing. Time will run out for the unbeliever. That's the point. Then where do you think that I, as stubborn minded unbeliever, will be at 12:01. I'm not asking for "details". Just what you think will be the case based (presumably) on your interpretation of the bible.
Jaywill writes: But by loving Him so you are giving them the greatest life and teasure to them. Surely all this depends where they (and I) will be at 12:01. Unless we have some idea of where you think I and those I care about are going to be at 12:01 I don't really see how anyone can assess what would constitute reasonable behaviour in anticipation of this event.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
So basically your answer to the question posed in this thread is that you think it is "reasonable" to live according to Christ because if you don't God's vengeance, retribution and punishment await you.
In effect Pascal's wager.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Pascal's wager is a pretty piss poor reason in my opinion. But it at least is arguably a reason.
Jaywill writes: It is reasonable in every age, then and now and years from now, and for every reason. This however is just vague nonsense. Can you be more specific as to what you mean?
Jaywill writes: It is reasonable to live in Christ and unto Christ for any and all reasons. "Any and all reasons". I assume that fancying men with beards is not the sort of reason you are alluding to here?
Jaywill writes: Not believing in Christ, once having heard of Him, is stupid. I am sure that not believing in Allah once you have heard of him is considered equally stupid by many others. How do I pick which one to follow? Or can I just ignore them all?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Jaywill writes: If you're all fixed and ready for a debate with Pascal, it has nothing to do with me. Your entire position in this thread (and apparently in life) is rooted in your belief that there ultimately lies a choice between some sort of bliss or damnation. It seems Pascal has everything to do with you. Whether you realise it or not.
Jaywil writes: I can't think of any good reason to not become a believer and follower of Jesus today. You can't? You can't even see why there might be a case for significant doubt or even (gasp!) why others might be equally convinced of their own equally implausible alternative doctrines? Then I would suggest that it is you rather than I that has not thought this through sufficiently.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
At the root of your position here do you believe that there is an individual choice between some sort of "bliss" and some sort of "damnation"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Still at the root of your position here is the belief that there is an individual choice between some sort of "bliss" and some sort of "damnation". Essentially Pascal's wager.
Jaywill writes: If I drop my faith in Jesus Christ (if I possibly could) and pick up your philosophy, what does your philosophy offer me in terms of these things? You can cite all the psychological comfort or confidence of belief in the world - But this has no bearing on what is or is not real does it? So do you think it is reasonable to discard what is real for what makes you feel good? I guess that is the question here in your own particular case.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Your belief in the reality of that which you need to believe is real is indeed strong. Nobody disputes the strength of your belief. But is personal need to believe in something a basis for calling belief in that thing "reasonable"?
Jaywil writes: The root of my position is that it is reasonable to love and accept Jesus as the Savior, the Lord, the Son of God. Without invoking a sermon, berating me with scripture or citing a list of things that you think would be lacking in your life if you didn't believe in Jesus can you tell me why you think it is reasonable to hold this belief? Because every single member of every other religion and all of those who hold no particular religious beliefs at all are failing to see the reasonableness of your position that you find so self-evident. Frankly your beliefs seem to be borne of need rather than reason.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein. AdminPD Edited by AdminPD, : Warning
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
If I wanted to ignore Christ it would be very easy for me to do so. I certainly wouldn't hang out on a debate board filled with bible thumpers and scripture screamers. In addition I doubt all those that believe in alternative religions do so in order to denounce Christ in the way you are implying.
But none of this answers the question. Is your evident need to believe in Christ sufficient basis upon which to describe your belief in Christ as reasonable?
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein. AdminPD Edited by AdminPD, : Warning
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Jaywill writes: I asked a specific poster what his philosophy offered instead of the benefits my faith in Christ offered. The questions has not been answered yet. Oh I see. You are asking me what benefits I personally gain from not believing in Christ. Is that right? If that is your question then I guess my answer is that I don't decide what to believe on the same sort of cost-benefit-pascals-wager basis that you evidently do. I simply find the evidence for Christ's existence as lacking as all the other equivalents and thus don't believe in any of them. Certainly I see no reason to choose Christianity over any other religious doctrine.
Jaywill writes: Sure I need to believe in God. God created me and placed that need within me. Of course he did. Is your evident need to believe in Christ sufficient basis upon which to describe your belief in Christ as reasonable?
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein. AdminPD Edited by AdminPD, : Warning
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Jaywill writes: I said "YOUR PHILOSOPHY" whatever that may be. Well MY PHILOSOPHY doesn't involve believing in things because they make me "happy" (or whatever other Pascals wager type reason might apply). I guess MY PHILOSOPHY involves some sort of evidentially valid cause to accept something as real before believing it to be so. Radical I know.....
Jaywill writes: Sure I need to believe in God. Is your evident need to believe in Christ sufficient basis upon which to describe your belief in Christ as reasonable?
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein. AdminPD Edited by AdminPD, : Warning
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Is Jaywill's evident need to believe in Christ sufficient basis upon which to describe his belief in Christ as reasonable?
Because that is what the whole thing boils down to.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein. AdminPD Edited by Straggler, : No reason given. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Phage writes: The fact that there are strong beliefs other than in the New Testament proves that strong belief isn't something that you can use as evidence for your position. But it seems as if thats all you have to offer. Jaywill writes: First off though faith and belief are rather subjective things that does not mean that faith and belief must always be about things which are not true or not realities. There is a class of things which though experienced through faith and belief are nonetheless realitities. The Triune God is definitely in that class. You don't actually seem to be disagreeing with Phage's conclusion here?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
aywill writes: It could be, as for instance John Frame (Christian philosopher) suggests, that ANY world view of any kind utilizes circular reasoning. I'm sure he does. Christian philosophers are keen on suggesting that all forms of knowledge are equally as absurd as the foundations of the beliefs they are attempting to justify.
Jaywill writes: I know some of my reasoning may be circular. I don't feel too bad about it because God is the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. Anyone could apply exactly the same arguments to justify absolute faith in anything couldn't they?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024