Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Theism and Atheism => Topic started by: jeremyp on September 15, 2016, 07:13:02 PM
-
Jesus 'n' Mo totally nailed it (http://www.jesusandmo.net/2016/09/14/wind2/).
-
EXPLAIN! :)
-
Been done before, Jeremy.
-
EXPLAIN! :)
Is that 40 days up already? :(
-
and nights! Hopefully not in the wilderness.
Welcome back la Sass.
-
Jesus 'n' Mo totally nailed it (http://www.jesusandmo.net/2016/09/14/wind2/).
Jeremy,
Are you going to explain please?
-
Jesus 'n' Mo totally nailed it (http://www.jesusandmo.net/2016/09/14/wind2/).
Not quite sure how they 'nailed it', jeremy. Perhaps the cartoon simply supports your personal opinion.
-
Someone posted that cartoon before. I can't pretend to understand it, I presume it mocks.
-
Jeremy,
Are you going to explain please?
The cartoon explains it perfectly well.
When people claim to have strong faith, what they mean is that they are good at ignoring rational argument and evidence.
-
Interesting that the faithiests are all whining that they can't understand a perfectly obvious cartoon.
-
Interesting that the faithiests are all whining that they can't understand a perfectly obvious cartoon.
They aren't all whining: I'm not, but then, I didn't bother to look at it!
-
Interesting that the faithiests are all whining that they can't understand a perfectly obvious cartoon.
Who is whining?
-
The cartoon explains it perfectly well.
When people claim to have strong faith, what they mean is that they are good at ignoring rational argument and evidence.
What exactly is it, which you thought you understood about faith?
Faith is the willingness to think and act on the basis of what we know of God, (however, little that may be) and to TRUST him, that he will not let us down.
Jesus 'n' mo did not discuss faith.
Jesus: " What exactly do you mean when you say your faith is "strong"?
Mo: That we are STEADFAST in our BELIEFS.
Jesus:That we DO NOT FLINCH WHEN FACE WITH LOGICAL REFUTATION.
MO: Nor do we bend in the face of contradictory evidence.
Jesus: So in the contest of FAITH, "Stength really means "unwillingness to admit you are mistaken"
MO: Pretty Much.
Jesus: Faith is....
Mo: Never having to say you're wrong.
[/b]
Logical refutation.
Contradictory Evidence.
Unwillingness to admit you are mistaken.
Never having to say you're wrong.
When it comes to the existence of God do any of the above exist?
If atheist believe they do, they have greater faith than Christians.
May be that is the only thing that the cartoon actually nailed to the mast.
-
"The True Meaning of Strong Faith"
Those that are totally taken in.
ippy
-
"The True Meaning of Strong Faith"
Those that are totally taken in.
ippy
Totally taken in? Have you any verifiable evidence for that???
-
Totally taken in? Have you any verifiable evidence for that???
Yes, the word faith, those stricken with faith take whatever faith it happens to be, without verifiable evidence, thus the words taken on faith, means they are accepted without verifiable evidence and this amounts to being totally taken in, by, in most cases the irrational.
ippy
P S Verifiable evidence, couldn't resist.
-
Yes, the word faith, those stricken with faith take whatever faith it happens to be, without verifiable evidence, thus the words taken on faith, means they are accepted without verifiable evidence and this amounts to being totally taken in, by, in most cases the irrational.
ippy
P S Verifiable evidence, couldn't resist.
That verifiable evidence is not verifiable evidence. It is your opinion, not verifiable evidence, So, have a think, and then come up with some actual verifiable evidence, so that I don't have to ask again for verifiable evidence.
Best wishes, verifiable evidence seeker.
-
BA
What verifiable evidence do you have that you have not been totally taken in?
-
BA
What verifiable evidence do you have that you have not been totally taken in?
Because I normally deal with verifiably sensible people who share my views, and not with the strangely, verifiably obsessed, on this forum.
-
Its a fun cartoon, and it did make me laugh, but I think its rather narrow in its conception of what 'faith' means. It basically reduces to the question of whether god exists. Rational argument and scientific interrogation say no, so having strong faith is an untenable position blah blah blah
Except people don't have faith to be determinedly self-deluded. In my experience strong faith is usually the result of people's experience. In other words it works for them so they're sticking with it. That's why its so impervious to typical debate-style discourse. Its foundation is something felt, rather than understood.
At least that's how my wife tells it. I wouldn't know.
-
BA
What verifiable evidence do you have that you have not been totally taken in?
The evidence of the things coming to pass, the things God foretold.
God doing all the things he says he would. Jesus Christ, is one of those verifiable evidences.
Unless you have evidence which is beyond any doubt that he was not the Son of God or the Promised Messiah.
God, Christ, Bash and myself already know that you do not.
-
The evidence of the things coming to pass, the things God foretold.
God doing all the things he says he would. Jesus Christ, is one of those verifiable evidences.
Unless you have evidence which is beyond any doubt that he was not the Son of God or the Promised Messiah.
God, Christ, Bash and myself already know that you do not.
Circular reasoning, unsupported assertions and the negative proof fallacy all squeezed into three lines; are you going for some kind of anti-record here ? this is a masterclass in how not to think and reason.
-
Circular reasoning, unsupported assertions and the negative proof fallacy all squeezed into three lines; are you going for some kind of anti-record here ? this is a masterclass in how not to think and reason.
Classic stuff! When you read a post you cannot sensibly answer, just make a blanket denunciation!
-
Classic stuff! When you read a post you cannot sensibly answer, just make a blanket denunciation!
Two
-
Two
Don't be so puerile.
Three - saves you the time.
Have a good day.
-
Four
-
Four
Hope you are well this morning, on this rather gloomy Nottingham day.
-
Hope you are well this morning, on this rather gloomy Nottingham day.
It is rather gloomy. Not feeling ever so well as it happens. I fear a visit to the quack is on its way. Hope you are ok, though.
-
It is rather gloomy. Not feeling ever so well as it happens. I fear a visit to the quack is on its way. Hope you are ok, though.
Had a disastrous night, actually. Needed to contact the District Nurse only to find my phone dead. Had to wake up my neighbour, at just on midnight, and she lent me her mobile. It looks as though I'll have to get my own now, after managing without for years.
-
Had a disastrous night, actually. Needed to contact the District Nurse only to find my phone dead. Had to wake up my neighbour, at just on midnight, and she lent me her mobile. It looks as though I'll have to get my own now, after managing without for years.
Sorry to hear all that - a mobile sounds like a sensible back up plan. We had a similar situation a while back where the landline dropped out, was very glad we had the mobile. Doesn't have to be a flashy one - just basic to make the call.
-
Sorry to hear all that - a mobile sounds like a sensible back up plan. We had a similar situation a while back where the landline dropped out, was very glad we had the mobile. Doesn't have to be a flashy one - just basic to make the call.
Right. Looking online it's bewildering, the range of different phones. I'm looking at the £5 type models, being a bit of a cheapskate!
-
Right. Looking online it's bewildering, the range of different phones. I'm looking at the £5 type models, being a bit of a cheapskate!
think that's all you need. Don't think of of as cheapskate, just pragmatic.
Note I have strong faith that such a phone will be sufficient - in a vague attempt to stop the derail
-
think that's all you need. Don't think of of as cheapskate, just pragmatic
You're right, of course. No use me trying to look cool with one of these phones that practically does the washing up for you!
-
think that's all you need. Don't think of of as cheapskate, just pragmatic.
Note I have strong faith that such a phone will be sufficient - in a vague attempt to stop the derail
Back on the rails, and joy, you now have a strong faith!!
-
think that's all you need. Don't think of of as cheapskate, just pragmatic.
Note I have strong faith that such a phone will be sufficient - in a vague attempt to stop the derail
Perhaps you could split the last few posts off and call it 'rapprochement'. ;D
-
Back on the rails, and joy, you now have a strong faith!!
To bring it fully back, and to link it to something that was mentioned by ekim elsewhere, there is an element in which 'string faith' might well allow for more questioning than 'weak' faith. If someone is confident in something they deem important they can accept challenge sometimes more easily than someone having doubts. I think there is a type of unquestioned and unexamined faith (note I am not using that simply as regards religions but also morals, politics) which does not react well to questioning but you can have strong faith after examination of the questions. Indeed I think you can have strong faith, while still entertaining doubts, and perhaps that is the only way to have strong faith
-
Circular reasoning, unsupported assertions and the negative proof fallacy all squeezed into three lines; are you going for some kind of anti-record here ? this is a masterclass in how not to think and reason.
When will you accept the above statement is illogical and unreasoned?
Circular argument is a made-up and unfounded argument when it comes to Jesus Christ.
Nothing circular, no assertions and no negative proof all positive. Everything about Christ is positive and has been preached all
over the world since the time his first disciples told of his resurrection.
Anyone going for a masterclass in repetition only have to read your statement. Which means absolutely nothing and isn't worth the the paper it was written on. Now it has been laid bare that a statement such as above is a brain washing exercise for atheists by atheists. But when we look at the reality is means absolutely nothing. You say Christians need faith and some brain washed.
But what we believe is based on reality and a truth passed down from the witnesses for 2,000 years. We have Christ to support our belief. You have nothing and no one to support the things you state. It takes enormous faith to write such a statement as above and believe no one will see the untruth behind it, and the sand foundations as it topples in the face of those Christians who know why they believe and who founded what they believe.
An epic failure on your part.
-
Had a disastrous night, actually. Needed to contact the District Nurse only to find my phone dead. Had to wake up my neighbour, at just on midnight, and she lent me her mobile. It looks as though I'll have to get my own now, after managing without for years.
Hope you are okay, Bash... :)
-
To bring it fully back, and to link it to something that was mentioned by ekim elsewhere, there is an element in which 'string faith' might well allow for more questioning than 'weak' faith. If someone is confident in something they deem important they can accept challenge sometimes more easily than someone having doubts. I think there is a type of unquestioned and unexamined faith (note I am not using that simply as regards religions but also morals, politics) which does not react well to questioning but you can have strong faith after examination of the questions. Indeed I think you can have strong faith, while still entertaining doubts, and perhaps that is the only way to have strong faith
Your last sentence sums up my position. I think that anyone who says they never have doubts is either not being truthful, or hasn't really thought deeply about it. I have spent virtually my whole adult life considering my beliefs, and I have had many difficult times. By now I have reached a stage where I am quite sanguine about my personal position; which is not to say that I am free of all doubt. As you suggest, the more my faith is put to the challenge the stronger it has become, and that I think is because I also challenge myself in face of the doubts; and I have grown because of it.
-
Your last sentence sums up my position. I think that anyone who says they never have doubts is either not being truthful, or hasn't really thought deeply about it. I have spent virtually my whole adult life considering my beliefs, and I have had many difficult times. By now I have reached a stage where I am quite sanguine about my personal position; which is not to say that I am free of all doubt. As you suggest, the more my faith is put to the challenge the stronger it has become, and that I think is because I also challenge myself in face of the doubts; and I have grown because of it.
Isn't it odd - that I have experienced almost exactly the same process but in the other direction - that is towards disbelief. I hesitate to use the word atheism because it is too 'hard' a description for me - but still it remains true for me that the more I think about belief or more properly unbelief, the more I become free of any suspicion of a god existing. However, having recently had my mind sent spinning by another thread of NS's about cognitive bias - I will now have to start re-examining my thought processes.
Alternatively I may just watch Holby City tonight.
-
I think the other aspect of this sort of faith is that it has to admit that it can be wrong. That's where the strength comes from in understanding that it has been examined. I feel much more in common with a theist who recognises the nature of our restrictions as regards knowledge than with an atheist who just tells me that all theists are deluded and if they impart their beliefs to their children are guilty of child abuse as well.
I am by any sensible definition an ignostic atheist but I am ignostic on a whole lot more than the god proposition. Indeed at base the best description of me is some firm of absurdism but that's a position that militates against being string, as a strong absurdism would be very absurd
-
Indeed I think you can have strong faith, while still entertaining doubts, and perhaps that is the only way to have strong faith
I get a bit confused here. Faith has come to mean something very akin to belief, indeed the words are frequently used interchangeably. The well known definition in Hebrews tells us that faith is to be sure of what we hope for and certain of what we cannot see. Nothing there about doubt. Indeed doubt would presumably undermine such certainty and thus diminish faith. Being sure of something and doubting it are not really compatible, are they? If the only way to have strong faith is to entertain doubts then what do we mean by faith? Presumably something other than being sure and certain. In practice, I imagine just about everyone must experience some doubts but if certainty is the goal then surely these would have to be suppressed in order to maintain faith. It would seem to me that any religion based on belief/faith must necessarily involve an uncomfortable tension between the ideal of certainty and the fact of doubt. Or am I missing something here?
I did once come across a writer who distinguished between faith and belief in a way that make rather more sense to me - 'belief clings and faith lets go'. Looked at in this way faith and belief are in fact opposites. One grasps and contracts, the other opens and releases. Faith in this sense would not depend on any kind of belief but it would be a complete abandonment of that approach to life. Ultimately, we all have to let go with respect to life, or else have a very uncomfortable ride, because we're not actually in control. If we refuse to let go whilst breathing then we'll find ourselves having to do it when our last breath arrives.
-
Hope you are okay, Bash... :)
Much better now, Sassy, thank you.
-
Good post, Bramble. I think I see a faith, insofar as any such thing as being consistent as being based on a set of beliefs. A person may hold those beliefs and think they are actually pieces of knowledge having never grasped the issues of knowledge. A person may hold those beliefs as beliefs but never challenged them. My take is that someone who holds them as beliefs, and has challenged them will have a faith that is more likely to stand up to further scrutiny than one that has not been examined.
While I am not sure that I agree with the contrast between belief and faith in the second para, I think that there is an element of trust that someone might have in their faith based on their own experience of challenging that might be seen as a letting go. In that it becomes less import for the person to explain or insist on their correctness as they understand that other's have their own version. There are often debates where it seems to me those with faith construct a set of attempts at argument, William Lane Craig's (in)famous five, would be one that seem adrift from their actual faith, adrift from their internal reasons to believe.
Now, of course, I may be wrong in this since I'm not much of a believer in anything, and certainly not a one with a strong faith but the people whose faith I have challenged who were least upset by it, and who were able to adjust their views have always been those who had already spent most time challenging themselves. I think there cones a time when you can have too many doubts to have a strong faith and then one might react badly to challenge, or too few and then one might not understand the challenge but I was using strong in the sense of well tempered.
-
Isn't it odd - that I have experienced almost exactly the same process but in the other direction - that is towards disbelief. I hesitate to use the word atheism because it is too 'hard' a description for me - but still it remains true for me that the more I think about belief or more properly unbelief, the more I become free of any suspicion of a god existing. However, having recently had my mind sent spinning by another thread of NS's about cognitive bias - I will now have to start re-examining my thought processes.
Alternatively I may just watch Holby City tonight.
But the important thing there is, you don't stop thinking about it. In the final analysis you may well change nothing: but the open mind is crucial.
Hope you are feeling better now.
-
But the important thing there is, you don't stop thinking about it. In the final analysis you may well change nothing: but the open mind is crucial.
Hope you are feeling better now.
Well, can't stop thinking. You know you attend another funeral of a friend and your mind does that wandering about thing during the eulogy, or through 'O God our Help in Ages past' as it did last week and you're going around in an ever downward spiral trying to figure out what the whole sorry business of life and death is all about.
Still feeling unwell so booked in. I expect it will be my age. ::)
-
Well, can't stop thinking. You know you attend another funeral of a friend and your mind does that wandering about thing during the eulogy, or through 'O God our Help in Ages past' as it did last week and you're going around in an ever downward spiral trying to figure out what the whole sorry business of life and death is all about.
Still feeling unwell so booked in. I expect it will be my age. ::)
We all know those feelings. With me I now find such occasions full of hope, both for the person going and for my own part. It is difficult to express the exact feeling, but it is a mixture of sadness and loss obviously, but essentially one of unbridled hope.
I expect it will be your age. We all start aching when we reach 30!
-
Hah! I wish.