100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Community > Posts By > cuzimwhiteboy
|
Topic:
Is 'faith' a gift?
|
|
TO Creative:
I think you're disregarding the fact that faith is also a willful disregard of evidence, and not just "ignorance of conflicting information." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quiet by This Will Destroy You
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Tonight's Simpsons
|
|
Damn I missed it! I thought they were doing reruns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Yur fav band EVER...
|
|
Sigur Ros on some days and Pig Destroyer on others
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Original sin... explained...
|
|
no one knows so just accept it like everything else that goes along blind faith... have a nice day!??
But why accept this fairytale where there are many other fairytales to consider? That’s the point. 
Also, for some people, "just accepting" anything is neither a reasonable nor desirable approach to life. Seeking out the truth through rational inquiry, and following the evidence wherever it leads is the most intellectually honest approach to us. Thanks. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Is 'faith' a gift?
|
|
I think faith is a choice. You choose to believe or not believe something. I’ve been thinking about this all day. And this is true. And the ultimate truth is that we choose to have faith by choosing what we belief. Hmmm, but how much of what we believe is by choice? I smell a Nature vs. Nurture debate.
Does it mean that I need to accept the collection of stories that were put together in a cannon by King James and labeled as the Holy Bible? For the most part, the canon was voted on and accepted in late 4th century. I think Athanasius was behind the list of books to be canonized. Also, I think Hebrews and Revelation wouldn't be universally accepted as 'divinely inspired' until centuries later. The King James Bible was an early 17th century English translation of a 16th century Greek text by Erasmus. I hope I remembered correctly. 
Hope you're having a great new year, Abra!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Is 'faith' a gift?
|
|
Faith and trust imply an underlying belief in someone, or something.
Faith is belief without evidence, or when evidence can be shown to refute the belief. Trust is belief in accordance with the preponderance of the available evidence. All beliefs hinge on some type of evidence, i.e. observation/experience, authority, logic. The big issue is how RIGOROUS that evidence is, in order to sustain a particular belief. For example, I DON'T have faith in evolution theory, I TRUST it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Church of the Inner Springs (aka bed)
I'm in Texas y'all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Any Pagans Out There?!!!
|
|
No agnostic means you don't care either way, what he is polytheistic without practicing, ploytheism means you eblieve in more tha one God or Goddess, him saying the other would get angry so he gives thanks to no one, meaning he doesn't practice or give prayers to anyone, but eh still believes there to be more than one.....am I close? I would think the polytheism implies the praise or worship of many gods. I dunno. Agnostic means an "absence of knowledge". Theoretically, there can be agnostic theists, agnostic atheists, gnostic theists and gnostic atheists. Absence of knowledge? No, it means this: Main Entry: 1ag·nos·tic Pronunciation: \ag-ˈnäs-tik, əg-\ Function: noun Etymology: Greek agnōstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnōstos known, from gignōskein to know — more at know Date: 1869 1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god 2: a person unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics> — ag·nos·ti·cism \-tə-ˌsi-zəm\ noun Pretty much the first definition, absence of knowledge...is that religion teaches these days? Good call, Fear . I went with the colloquial meaning. I should have a broken it down into "a + gnosis" which equals "without + knowledge of spiritual or esoteric mysteries". Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spanks-a-lot
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Any Pagans Out There?!!!
|
|
<---not a pagan, but I've been called an infidel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Any Pagans Out There?!!!
|
|
No agnostic means you don't care either way, what he is polytheistic without practicing, ploytheism means you eblieve in more tha one God or Goddess, him saying the other would get angry so he gives thanks to no one, meaning he doesn't practice or give prayers to anyone, but eh still believes there to be more than one.....am I close? I would think the polytheism implies the praise or worship of many gods. I dunno. Agnostic means an "absence of knowledge". Theoretically, there can be agnostic theists, agnostic atheists, gnostic theists and gnostic atheists. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Any Pagans Out There?!!!
|
|
I try to give thanks to no God because I feel that all the others will become angry then(I'm not sure what its called though) So, you recognize the existence of many gods, but you don't praise one in particular? Is that what you meant, or were you joking? I think that could count as kathenotheism. I could be wrong though. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Preaching vs Deriding
|
|
Preach To advocate, especially to urge acceptance of or compliance with Deride To speak of or treat with contemptuous mirth. What's the lesser of these two "evils"? If someone tells you how great his religion is or someone tells you why your religion is stupid, which is more offensive? What about one's lack of religion? I don't appreciate it when people call me a demon, tell me I'm a moral failure, or say that I'm possessed by the spirit of the anti-Christ. Either way, calling a person's beliefs, or lack thereof outright stupid is still in bad taste. Live and let live. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Do Tell!!!
|
|
now that is an interesting concept.......and do you pray to the porcelin god? 
Not as much these days. I've definitely matured in my old age. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Original sin... explained...
|
|
I wonder why there is a difference between disobedience and evil... or obedience and good... of course there is. If someone told you to do something evil such as kill someone and you didn't then disobedience wouldnt be evil. The hidden assumption is that one can properly define "good and evil" and also be able to distinguish these in a particular context or circumstance. Disobedience to an order of killing someone might be the right or wrong thing to do. It all depends on the situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Original sin... explained...
|
|
I will give one more explanation and then if you still don't get what I am saying then we can agree to disagree. When I was a kid sometimes my mom wouldn't let me do things and I would never know why. When I would ask she would say "because I said so." Kind of like that. They didn't know why they couldn't all they knew was "because God said so". We'll probably have to agree to disagree since I don't think Adam and Eve's behavior is synonymous with children, but more importantly the DECISION TO DISOBEY anything (choice A or choice B) presumes that one has the knowledge in which to distinguish right from wrong (choice A from choice B). God told them he didn't want them choosing B, but how could they possess the concept of what's right and wrong (A and B) since they hadn't eaten the fruit first to gain that knowledge? That's the paradox. Thanks for the debate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Original sin... explained...
|
|
Chaz,
We'll have to agree to disagree I think. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
i don't give a dime
|
|
It's really tricky to define "miracle" for philosophical discussion. The scientific method won't allow this concept anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Original sin... explained...
|
|
Uhh lets see. God told them the only thing they were not supposed to do is eat from that tree. thats how. My point was this: Prior to eating from the tree, they had to FIRST decide to eat from it. How could they have known even with God's decree that it was immoral since they hadn't actually eaten the fruit? They had no knowledge of immorality. That's the paradox.
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
