 |
Precisely : that is what you BELIEVE. But is that reality?Quote:
Originally Posted by simoneaugie
.
I note that the claimed-to-be Christian US Nation is waging war nearly worldwide, and killing the others that you all disagree with.Quote:
Originally Posted by simoneaugie
But I as non-Christian do not wage war. Nor do I as a non-Christian kill those who I disagree with.
But I agree with your line : What a waste of time and resources.
Indeed. But not only a waste. How immoral!
;)
The etymology of the word BELIEVE. Is interesting:Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
Quote:
O.E. belyfan, earlier geleafa (Mercian), gelefa (Northumbrian), gelyfan (W.Saxon) "believe," from P.Gmc. *ga-laubjan "hold dear, love," from PIE base *leubh- "to like, desire" (see love).
Is anything we "hold dear" real? What do you hold dear, Credendovidis? Isn't it your "vidis"--your point of view? That certainly is one of the things I hold dear for myself, even though there's no "objective proof" that mine is in any way superior or preferred to anyone else's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
Quote:
Originally Posted by ordinaryguy
Any BELIEVES one may have MAY BE REAL. Of course. But to have these believes getting accepted as real by other not co-believers, one should provide objective supporting evidence for that. And that is precisely why I do not try to proselytize my personal world view onto others. Unlike those Christians do whom I refer to here in this topic, who attack me and/or talk down on me, all because I am not one of them.
.
My "Credendovidis" handles shows my approach : I BELIEVE it when I see it. At the same time I do not try to convince anyone else that what I believe or not believe is factual or "the one-and-only-truth".
.
So what do I hold dear (i.e. : what do I believe)?
I hold dear that for everything there will be a good natural reason/explanation. Some of the explanations were found thousands of years ago. Other were only discovered recently by increasing scientific understanding. Again others may only be found in the future. And may be there even will be certain things for which we can not find any explanations.
But on itself that is no reason for me to introduce and BELIEVE in some deity/deities, for whom in my personal views is no reason to exist, as nature seems to be quite capable of getting to all that there is now without any deity or deities involved. And science is increasingly supportive of that view with real objective scientific findings and Theories explaining that what still needed to be explained on a scientific basis. Note that a Scientific Theory is an objective supported thesis, with near "factual" value.
.
Of course I can not prove a negative. I can not (and do not feel any reason to) prove that no deity/deities exist.
Those who BELIEVE in a deity (a positive and therefore much easier to prove belief) should continue to BELIEVE in the deity/deities of their preference (no problem).
But if they insist that what they BELIEVE should be the reality for all others also, I always ask for objective supported evidence for that wild claim. So far I still have to receive the first ever objective evidence. That seems a rather problematic item to provide...
.
Just as you do I not hold that my believes are superior or preferred to anyone else's believes. Therefore I do not make wild claims based on that what I believe to be correct (as in true). I always make sure that when I make a statement that I hold to be true, that I can back that statement up with objective supporting evidence. And not with empty metaphysical and/or religious claims.
.
Reality, I hold dear, is both tangible and intangible. It cannot be "pinned down" and written about, thus supporting a belief, because it defies classification and a complete description.
Does physics not support this duality? I'm thinking about how a light photon is both a wave and a particle. You can describe the experimental results, but not really explain the phenomenon. And light seems to precognitively go where it can, not where it can't.
A light photon can shine upon a religious person and on one who can't say, "I believe." The sun is warm on both. It may be a particle or a wave but we just feel the warmth and have light to see by. We are limited by our reason. (And possibly the fact that we did not bring our electron microscope to the beach.)
Socrates is one of the fathers of the age of reason. But to make reason, he leaves out all ideas that do not follow logic. Reason cannot explain reality, but it thinks that it can. Reality does not follow a pattern that our minds can grasp. Some follow religion to explain the gaps.
First of all reason does not think. Humans think.Quote:
Originally Posted by simoneaugie
.
Secondly : reality is the state of things as they are or appear to be, rather than as one wish them to be. Note that religion (based on belief) tends to involve more of that "wish them to be".
.
Maybe reasoning can not explain all of reality (or better : what appears to be reality), but most of our reality is properly and objective-supportively explained by reason.
Some may indeed follow religion to explain the gaps. But these religious explanations have an even smaller chance to be reality, as they fail any objective support. That grey area is small and gets smaller every day.
;)
I do agree that as man's knowledge grows and he can explain what was a mystery, his attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, will be affected in many ways. But as we wait for that knowledge, we can only deal with what we have, the best way possible. For now we have a structure for our government, which is changing and growing and our religion, which is going through the same changes albeit slower. They both are for order, and consistency, and stability, basically for the whole of society, until we discover a better way, or improve on the way it is. There is room for many beliefs, thoughts, and endeavors, as we learn more about ourselves, and the culture of others, and the conflicts that come with change, and no compromise.
[QUOTE=Credendovidis
It is only on the Christianity board that one feels that constant attempt to put pressure towards conversion.
Why can (some) Christians not understand that one can be interested in their religion without any need or wish to become a Christian? Their pushy approach only adds up to resentment.
;)[/QUOTE]
You won't like my response any more than you did Chuck's, but I think it needs to be said again.
Christians know what the devastation will be in the end. We know what is going to happen to unbelievers. We care! We do what we do--because we don't want to see anyone lost.
I know, I know, you don't believe in hell, but we do. We know it is a real place and we are doing the very best we can to keep people from ending up there. I hate being pushy but it has to be said before it's to late.
WRONG - TOTALLY WRONG. You do not know that (know as in "factual") : you BELIEVE that!Quote:
Originally Posted by Donna Mae
Nothing wrong with belief, but once you mix up belief with reality you make no longer any sense.
.
Totally correct! And yes I agree : you BELIEVE that!Quote:
Originally Posted by Donna Mae
.
Again : no you don't know that (know as in "factual") : you BELIEVE that!Quote:
Originally Posted by Donna Mae
Nothing wrong with belief, but once you mix up belief with reality you make no longer any sense.
.
You do not hate being pushy. You are pushy around the entire board. So you seem to love that!Quote:
Originally Posted by Donna Mae
But that aside : too late for WHAT? For something real, or for something you BELIEVE?
;)
If that's what you BELIEVE, that's fine. I've done what I can.
Precisely : that is what I think is correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Donna Mae
I respect your views, and can only hope you respect mine.
;)
Guys, this post is going nowhere, both sides have expressed their views, opinons and beleifs about as much as I see they can be.
In fact the last few pages have been fairly well repeated and repeated opinions from previous posts.
Anyone got any new thoughts or has this post fairly well ran its course ?
I agree, Chuck, this has become a debate about semantics more than a discussion about the original post.
I'd hate to see the thread closed, but rather back on track.
Yes, that is why I posted the comment instead of just closing it,
If the OP believes it has ran its course I have no problem,
** trying to just bring some new blood ( so to spead) into it.
But after 10 pages I don't see any real movement since page 5 or 6
So what do the rest of the thread posters thing
*** if we keep it moving I will delete my posts as not to dirty up the threads
That's up to you and everyone else, Chuck. I just know I'm done.
Well I'd really like to see a response to my post #60 on page 6, which has a follow up post #67 on page 7... but maybe that's just me! :D
MAYBE I NEED TO PUT IT IN BOLD RED CAPS INSTEAD?
Yeah... that was probably uncalled for, but oh well! :D
I replied to that in post 61 (a response to inthebox - as it was a near-similar remark... )Quote:
Originally Posted by jillianleab
The question "Do you want to believe in God?" was replied with :
.
It's not IF I want to believe.
.
Further in that reply I explained my position. That it is not a case of want, but of can't.
Most Christians seem to think that believing in a deity/deities is an open option, available to all. They are wrong. That option is only a valid position for them.
However most non-believers are unable to believe in a deity/deities. For them that idea is totally invalid.
So it's not WANTING or NOT WANTING to believe in God.
.
That also is - together with the absence of any objective support for the Christian belief to be valid - the reason why I object against Christians using the word WRONG when referring to non-belief. For them it may seem wrong. But is it wrong? If that were true they would be able to provide objective support for their own belief...
;)
Chuck : as far as I am concerned you may close this topic : As a non-believer I am open and interested in the Christian religion. I never disclaimed nor supported it's validity. That same approach towards non-believers is however not seen from many of those who believe in Christianity... How intolerant!
;)
May I ask to close this topic straight away, and not wait till there are another ten or so reactions with remarks directed at me by others? Because in that case I would like to post a few "final comments" before you close this topic.
;)
Actually, no, you didn't answer my question, not at all. You answered if you want to believe, I didn't ask that.
I asked why you think you must "do" anything. Why you would want to "pretend"? Why you can't carry on with your life as you see fit and not worry about your eternal soul? Why it's so important to you that people say "believe" when it's not having a direct effect on your life or your government?
You replied that you are "holding up a mirror"; which means you don't want your questions answered, you want to argue. If you had a valid point behind it, that might be OK, but you don't. Or at least, you haven't expressed it. It seems you just want to argue.
Then I asked you why you are so ovewhelmed with convincing yourself to believe, or with finding a way to articulate overcoming your lack of belief; but you aren't concerned with that - you just want to argue.
I answerd your question. It all comes down to faith. That, in essence, is what every religion boils down to. Faith. You either have it or you don't. You, obviously, don't. Why does it bother you so much that other people do?
.Quote:
Originally Posted by jillianleab
I asked why you think you must "do" anything. Why you would want to "pretend"?
.
Any statements towards that I made in response to (many) Christians time and time again telling me I had to change my views. My statement also referred to posts on this board that are basically Pascal Wager's. All views on afterlife and whatever includes that are based on the acceptance of the Biblical claims as true. On BELIEF. Nothing else. Not on reality.
.
.
Why you can't carry on with your life as you see fit and not worry about your eternal soul?
.
I do carry on with that, thanks very much! And I do not worry about that. Why would I? All these assumptions are - a least from my point of view - based on (with all respect) religious superstition.
.
As stated in the many previous posts I reacted to the repeated "advice" given by (some) Christians, even after I clearly showed no interest in that. Next to that : being married to a devout Roman Catholic for some 40 years, I am interested in that religion. Also I come in frequent contact with believers of that religion, who's often curious behaviour and views add to my interest in Christianity.
Also the strong contrasts between groups of Christians with their different views and approach (2500+ different Christian denominations), and of different attitude (from serenity to aggressive creationists and ID'ers feed my curiosity.
.
.
Why it's so important to you that people say "believe" when it's not having a direct effect on your life or your government?
.
I respect whatever any person may BELIEVES. But that does not prove that what he/she believes is factual reality. It is what he/she BELIEVES to be "true". Until objective supporting evidence for that claim is provided it remains that way.
.
.
You replied that you are "holding up a mirror"; which means you don't want your questions answered, you want to argue.
.
A strange conclusion. Holding up a mirror shows you who you are and how you think. Not who I think you are, and what I think of you.
.
.
If you had a valid point behind it, that might be ok, but you don't. Or at least, you haven't expressed it. It seems you just want to argue.
.
But I have a valid point. A very valid point. Only you - and many with you - seem so blinded by their BELIEF that they fail to see that.
.
.
Then I asked you why you are so overwhelmed with convincing yourself to believe, or with finding a way to articulate overcoming your lack of belief; but you aren't concerned with that - you just want to argue.
.
Also not true. I am not "overwhelmed" at all with doing that. All I did was show that BELIEF in a deity/deities is not a voluntary option to non-believers. And that as a result of that converting to another belief system is not something you just do. It requires reasoning, support, logic, etc. All failing in religion.
.
.
I answered your question. It all comes down to faith. That, in essence, is what each and every religion boils down to. Faith. You either have it or you don't. You, obviously, don't. Why does it bother you so much that other people do?
.
Indeed I do not have any faith in (your) Christian basics.
But that does not bother me at all. It bothers all those Christians who insist that I should change my ways and views. Who are disrespectful of my position. And to my repeated statements that I am not interested to convert myself to their religious views.
.
Why should I not be interested in the Christian religion and the influence it provides to and on western society?
Why should I not react to statements by Christians of being WRONG, by those who's views are based on BELIEF and not on fact?
You do not have to BELIEVE in that religion to realize that it also has indirect influence on the lives of those who do not believe in it.
.
Remember : nothing wrong with BELIEF. Please feel free to BELIEVE. And to continue to BELIEVE without ever having to provide objective support for that BELIEF.
But know that every time you claim that what you BELIEVE is true (as in reality or fact) , I will ask for objective supporting evidence for that.
Whether you like that or not.
And whether Fr Chuck and co. continue to remove my posts and/or close topics who's development is not to their personal liking.
.
.
This entire topic is NOT about semantics. It is about the questionable position and attitude of many Christians towards those who do not believe.
It is about Christian claims of others being WRONG or suggestions that others are WRONG.
And it is about Chrisitian intolerance towards other views. And about Christian lack of respect for other views.
Unfortunately all these do not seems to be features of many Christian individuals here on this board.
;)
While I can agree with you to a point, I can say that this is not entirely true. There are those that don't wear their religion, or beliefs on their sleeves, and are very respectful of anothers belief. I don not let the actions of some, sway my interactions with the good people, who don't engage in offensive, desrespectful behavior. You find those people in all religions, not just Chritianity. FOR SOME HUMANS, That's THE BEST THEY CAN DO!!Quote:
And it is about Chrisitian intolerance towards other views. And about Christian lack of respect for other views.
I have clearly and repeatedly stated that I refer to the more conservative and aggressive group of Christians.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
But I can not state that in EVERY line and paragraph...
:rolleyes:
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:24 AM. |