Simple question?

Quote: rxwine

The thing is, even if we accept, Frgamble's "everything is faith" proposition, he still expects us to consider a claimed resurrection of a crucified man on faith as reasonable to accepting a plane is probably going to fly safely to our destination nearly 100% of the time.. One of those is repeated many times a day, and the other has never been confirmed.

No I don't. What I would like you to accept is that faith is an essential aspect of life. This really is beyond doubt. However, I do not think that someone should accept faith in God in the same way they would that some guy is who he says he is. Obviously, they are different. There is obviously much more observable evidence based on experience (which I know Evenbob does not accept but I thought I would mention it anyway) and other things that while not proof make the decision to trust the person fairly easy. When you are talking about really important questions this evidence can be less convincing. These questions are things like: does God exist, is there life after death, is there objective moral truths, does this person love me, should I marry her, what direction should I take in my life? These type of questions are going to engage your intellect and wisdom much more and require real thought and reflection.

I don't understand what you are talking about.

Not having faith in A does not mean you can not have faith in B.
Having faith in A does not mean you have to have faith in B.

Questioning one thing does not mean you have to question everything.

Not questioning something does not mean that you can not question anything.

Taking one thing on faith does not mean you have to take everything on faith.

Not taking something in faith does not mean that you can't take anything on faith.

There is a difference in not questioning something because you choose not to, and not questioning something because you can not.

I don't understand your statement claiming that someone who trusted nothing would be an enemy of human life. If you can't find anyone who actually professes this, then there are no such enemies of human life.

Like atheism its impossible to truly live influenced by its ideals? What are the ideals of atheism?

Quote: FrGamble

There is obviously much more observable evidence based on experience (which I know Evenbob does not accept but I thought I would mention it anyway.

It's only evidence if you close your eyes,
cover your ears, and pinch your nose
closed. Examine your 'evidence' in the
smallest scientific way and you discover
it's not the evidence you thought it was
at all. If you perform the due diligence
on all religions, and ferret out what's
really going on, you'll always end up
back where you started.

You're a smart guy. But somewhere along
the line you dumbed up, you turned off
the inquisitive part of your brain, and you
gave up. Now you do everything within
the narrow confines of your religion. You
filter all your thoughts and inquiries thru
what others have told you. Not a way I would
want to live, why do you.

Okay now I'm really confused.

Quote: Dalex64

Taking one thing on faith does not mean you have to take everything on faith.

Not taking something in faith does not mean that you can't take anything on faith.

I think this digression started when I thought your list of quotes about faith were way off in that they seemed to say that faith is useless or stupid. My response is that we cannot count the amount of times we act on faith in any given day. The idea of faith is not stupid or useless. Then we went around and about talking about day to day faith versus religious faith, etc. I think we really need to come full circle and recognize that faith is a reasonable act based on evidence but not requiring mathematical or certain proof. Religious faith or faith in regards to the big questions of life is obviously going to be much harder to arrive at than the day to day faith you mentioned earlier.

Quote:

I don't understand your statement claiming that someone who trusted nothing would be an enemy of human life. If you can't find anyone who actually professes this, then there are no such enemies of human life.

Yeah this was sloppy language on my part in response to Nareed's over zealous and completely incorrect statement that faith requires us to be considered stupid animals and that it was bad for humanity. My simple point is that you cannot live life as a human being thinking that every decision you make must be verified and proved.

Quote:

Like atheism its impossible to truly live influenced by its ideals? What are the ideals of atheism?

Again sloppy. Atheism as it has been declared many times by the atheists on this forum is "nothing" so technically it doesn't have ideas (not evidence, reason, or logic). It has maybe more like consequences. If you really think that life and all that exists turns out to be nothing but an accident, then if it is taken seriously (again thank God not many atheists do this) it can lead to grave consequences.

Quote: Evenbob

It's only evidence if you close your eyes,
cover your ears, and pinch your nose
closed. Examine your 'evidence' in the
smallest scientific way and you discover
it's not the evidence you thought it was
at all.

Then show me how that list of evidence I recently listed fails your strange test of evidence?

Quote:

You filter all your thoughts and inquiries thru
what others have told you. Not a way I would
want to live, why do you.

I do not do this and I'm a little insulted you would think I do. Is the only reason you think this because I agree with the Church and that is inconceivable to you? Maybe it is you who has to stop filtering and ignore what you have been told? I don't need to tell you that this type of post is unhelpful. If you think I have turned off my brain show me where and how. If all you are going to do is throw around baseless insults when you don't like something then maybe you should rethink some of your posts.

Quote: FrGamble

Atheism as it has been declared many times by the atheists on this forum is "nothing" so technically it doesn't have ideas (not evidence, reason, or logic). It has maybe more like consequences.

Benefits, not consequences. Being able
to sleep at night because you're not
hounded by Catholic guilt. Never thinking
about heaven or hell because they don't
exist. Being able to think without first
running it thru the filter of a faulty religion.

Quote:

If you really think that life and all that exists turns out to be nothing but an accident

That's the life you live every day. Like it or not.

Quote: FrGamble

I do not do this and I'm a little insulted you would think I do. .

You have to, you have no choice. The fact
that you think you don't is amusing. You
were brainwashed in 8 years of seminary
training to see everything thru the eyes of
the Church. That's the purpose of the
seminary. Surely you know that. I have a
good friend who is an ex priest and he
says it was brainwashing for sure, and he
wasn't even aware of it till years later
when he'd been away from the Church
for a good while. That you don't see it
isn't surprising.

Quote: FrGamble

Okay now I'm really confused.

I think this digression started when I thought your list of quotes about faith were way off in that they seemed to say that faith is useless or stupid. My response is that we cannot count the amount of times we act on faith in any given day. The idea of faith is not stupid or useless. Then we went around and about talking about day to day faith versus religious faith, etc. I think we really need to come full circle and recognize that faith is a reasonable act based on evidence but not requiring mathematical or certain proof. Religious faith or faith in regards to the big questions of life is obviously going to be much harder to arrive at than the day to day faith you mentioned earlier.

Yeah this was sloppy language on my part in response to Nareed's over zealous and completely incorrect statement that faith requires us to be considered stupid animals and that it was bad for humanity. My simple point is that you cannot live life as a human being thinking that every decision you make must be verified and proved.

Again sloppy. Atheism as it has been declared many times by the atheists on this forum is "nothing" so technically it doesn't have ideas (not evidence, reason, or logic). It has maybe more like consequences. If you really think that life and all that exists turns out to be nothing but an accident, then if it is taken seriously (again thank God not many atheists do this) it can lead to grave consequences.

The problem is you are claiming there is only one kind of faith, one type of faith, or one definition of faith that applies to all uses of faith.

I am continuing to state that there are at least two: faith in things that you could verify for yourself if you chose to do so, and faith in things which are impossible to verify.

All of those "cute quotes" are talking about faith in the unverifiable.

What people choose to have faith in and why is what I call "stupid" as it were, not faith itself or the decision to take something on faith.

There is another term we can add to the mix, "blind faith". What does that mean, and what does it apply to?

I find your lack of faith in humans to do the right thing without promise of supernatural reward and punishment to be disappointing. I think there is a lack of evidence to justify your fears. Is there a known percentage of atheists who do the wrong thing? I know there are atheists who do the right thing. There are also people who believe in god who do the wrong thing. Has anyone done a quantitative comparison on the two?

Do you count the Hindus and Buddhists among the atheists, since they do not believe in your god? Or is belief in false gods and the guidance people receive from him (which really must be from each-other since they aren't worshiping a real god) better than not believing in any gods at all?

Quote: FrGamble

It surely is not the whole purpose.

Then why do you keep hammering at it every time marriage equality comes up?

Aristotle did mean "You can't have your cake and eat it too."

Quote:

That does seem unnatural, its a good thing that nothing of what you describe would be even recognizable to a Catholic.

I'm a firm believer that one ought to step outside one's self, and one's institutions, in order to see them as they are. Jews deify the Torah, Christians the Crucifix and the saints and the virgin and split their one "god" into three parts (reverse syncretism?). I understand Muslims have a number of "holy" figures they worship or revere, but I'm quite ignorant about Islam to say more

Quote:

Actually what you describe is not equal.

That's the point.

Quote:

Do you deny that things can be different or separate AND equal?

People and institutions can be different and equal. They cannot be separate and equal.

See, if they could be, we'd still have as many pagans as Christians in Europe, or at least a substantial pagan population. Constantine I issued the Edict of Milan, formally establishing legal toleration of all religions within the Roman Empire. But once he made Christianity the state religion, all the others became, at best "separate but equal" under the law.

How many pagans in Europe today?

Look at all of these things that this catholic believes can lead, and has led in the past, to demonic possession

http://catholicmoraltruth.com/firstcommandment.htm

This is the fear of punishment, for not doing what you are taught, what you are told. This very sort of belief, which apparently people still believe in sincerely today, is the sort of thing which led to the witch hunts.