Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Don’t mean to burst your bubble, but he meant it this way: even though you might have gotten, for example, over 700 on SAT it doesn’t mean diddly. My words not his.

I can’t help you about your updated post as I only read my own posts. - Just kidding, of course.

But, your post reminds me of the old joke:

I never make mistakes.
Oh, actually I have made one in my life - The time I thought I was wrong (but actually I wasn’t wrong).

I ruined the joke with my delivery. See the thread regarding comedians and high IQ for reference what that might mean - lol.

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt that's what he meant, your words are almost treason and violate the first principle of Sklanskyanity. Next you will be saying that DS believes IQ test results don't mean diddly.

Anyway too late. My Sklanskyanity rating of '700 something' is on my cv to stay.

chez

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

mr. Sklansky, I hear what you're saying. and if this version of God were the only God we were debating about, I would think this an issue worth more consideration.

However, I don't think this God you are talking about exists. the God I believe in loves you (yes, you, David), and wants to have a personal relationship with you. He wants very much to give you a life more abundant than you could imagine - not just in 'eternity' but here and now.

and He doesn't punish people in some fiery pit to be tortured by some little red devil with a pitchfork and horns. He simply wants you to spend your life, and ever after, with Him. he gives you that option. if you choose not to take it, or not to put your Faith in Him, then you have chosen an eternity of separation from Him. you can call this 'Hell' if you want. but it's not a punishment for anything. it's your choice. the bible says 'the wage of sin is death.' not eternal punishment. we are all sinners, eventually going to die the physical death which is appointed to all humans...

anyway, from your stance, it must seem like this doubters' dilemma is a very horrible thing. (doubt, by the way, doesn't mean that you don't believe) and i'm sure it is a real problem for a lot of people. but, there is more to it. and simply acknowledging that God may exist is just barely a starting point. if you want some more certainty one way or another, at least pursue it and do some research.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

This thread seems to be bringing a different kind of Christian out of the woodwork. They don't believe in an eternal hell and seem to think that just being good is enough to give you a nice shot at heaven.

You could almost say these folks are Jewish except that they believe Jesus showed up to get everybody back in line, but not much more than that.

Reply
 

You claim that semi-believers are in a worse state than either non-believers or whole-hearted believers.

Yet isn't the capacity to entertain the two (or more) sides of a concept the mark of an intelligent man? And wouldn't the entertainment of such a concept in different perspectives be preferable to a rigid and unchanging viewpoint?

Re: Reply
 

[ QUOTE ]

Yet isn't the capacity to entertain the two (or more) sides of a concept the mark of an intelligent man? And wouldn't the entertainment of such a concept in different perspectives be preferable to a rigid and unchanging viewpoint?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to a God who demands 100% belief.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'll take the fires of Hell rather than supplicate myself to a god that would punish me for not believing in him after giving me the free will to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]
I hope everybody who actually read this line realizes how incredibly stupid it is.

[ QUOTE ]
True atheists are the safest of all, since mentally we are capable if accepting the existence of whoever shows up.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is completely contraty to what you just said, and is just as ridiculous.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I hope everybody who actually read this line realizes how incredibly stupid it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah the new Sklanskianity, refutation by sillyness.

If you think about what his saying instead of taking it so literally you might see it's not so silly.

chez

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

Why should I?

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you think about what his saying instead of taking it so literally you might see it's not so silly.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why do people feel the need to exaggerate their point to the extent of utter irrationality, instead of just saying what they mean in the first place? Is it because they don't think their position is valid stated truthfully? If the OP had said "I despise the thought that God would give us free will, then punish us for using it to not choose him," I could accept that statement. I might still attempt to refute it, but I would at least accept the rationality of it. But the statement he made was ridiculous.

If the OP did, in fact, mean what you contend he did, then he (and everybody else who employs that tactic) needs to start saying what they mean.

So now I want to know. To the OP: did you mean precisely what you said?

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you think about what his saying instead of taking it so literally you might see it's not so silly.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why do people feel the need to exaggerate their point to the extent of utter irrationality, instead of just saying what they mean in the first place? Is it because they don't think their position is valid stated truthfully? If the OP had said "I despise the thought that God would give us free will, then punish us for using it to not choose him," I could accept that statement. I might still attempt to refute it, but I would at least accept the rationality of it. But the statement he made was ridiculous.

If the OP did, in fact, mean what you contend he did, then he (and everybody else who employs that tactic) needs to start saying what they mean.

So now I want to know. To the OP: did you mean precisely what you said?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you just change [ QUOTE ]
I'll take the fires of Hell

[/ QUOTE ] to [ QUOTE ]
I'll take the risk of the fires of Hell

[/ QUOTE ] then I agree with it and it also what I took his statement to mean - maybe it wasn't clear or maybe it wasn't what he meant, unambiguous language is tough.


chez

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you think about what his saying instead of taking it so literally you might see it's not so silly.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why do people feel the need to exaggerate their point to the extent of utter irrationality, instead of just saying what they mean in the first place? Is it because they don't think their position is valid stated truthfully? If the OP had said "I despise the thought that God would give us free will, then punish us for using it to not choose him," I could accept that statement. I might still attempt to refute it, but I would at least accept the rationality of it. But the statement he made was ridiculous.

If the OP did, in fact, mean what you contend he did, then he (and everybody else who employs that tactic) needs to start saying what they mean.

So now I want to know. To the OP: did you mean precisely what you said?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you just change [ QUOTE ]
I'll take the fires of Hell

[/ QUOTE ] to [ QUOTE ]
I'll take the risk of the fires of Hell

[/ QUOTE ] then I agree with it and it also what I took his statement to mean - maybe it wasn't clear or maybe it wasn't what he meant, unambiguous language is tough.


chez

[/ QUOTE ]

Chez, you were probably right about the +700 thing. It probably was meant in the context of “another 700+ over analyzing something, instead of discussing the main point” ( I hadn’t really read all the context.) But, here you might have gotten it right.

I, too, am not sure how the OP meant his statement - literally or rhetorically. But, I do like your, interpreting it rhetorically, view. (Not saying I agree with it or your new version of it.)

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

A civilization's version of god or the origins of the universe nearly always reflects the people's life/historical experiences and the natural environment. It thus seems much more likely that those people invented their idea of god than that that actual God created those people.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why should I?

[/ QUOTE ][Prove God doesn't exist.]

So others may benefit and learn from your wisdom.

In fact, I'll go you one better. Prove it to me and I'll become an atheist.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

Why is what I said stupid? Because you believe in Hell? I haven't murderered anyone, practiced unethical behavior, or done anything that should deserve eternal pain and suffering. So if using my free will to decide that there's nothing out there is enough to keep me from a happy afterlife, I'm OK with that.

Not sure how my statement of atheism is contrary, please explain. I don't believe in a creator/god figure at all on any level, so if miracles start occurring, something that convinces me I'm wrong, then I'll have no choice in the matter, will I? You need to be right. Otherwise you're a victim of a massive hoax.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

It has to be rhetorical, I don't in hell.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why should I?

[/ QUOTE ][Prove God doesn't exist.]

So others may benefit and learn from your wisdom.

In fact, I'll go you one better. Prove it to me and I'll become an atheist.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can bag two of us for sure with such proof Cole, and probably even the rest of the religious posters here as well. By all means start a new thread and show your proof. I'll even kick you back for my lifetime 30% of what I now tithe and would save if I become an atheist by virtue of your proof.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

If I can assert, along with Descartes, I think; I am, then I can equally assert I think; I know God does not exist. (Of course, you can do likewise, and I do not deny this.)

Pay up.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

That won't cut it. You have to prove it to others, not just say it is proved to yourself because of your own individual thought process.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

So, I guess I'm not in for a financial windfall? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

[ QUOTE ]
But things change when we are talking about not just the existence of God, but rather the existence of a God who will reward, or even perhaps punish you for eternity, unless you fully believe or at least rate the existence of such a God highly likely.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Christianity has done its utmost to close the circle and declared even doubt to be sin. One is supposed to be cast into belief without reason, by a miracle, and from then on to swim in it as in the brightest and least ambiguous of elements: even a glance towards land, even the thought that one perhaps exists for something else as well as swimming, even the slightest impulse of our amphibious nature- is sin! And notice that all this means that the foundation of belief and all reflection on its origin is likewise excluded as sinful. What is wanted are blindness and intoxication and an eternal song over the waves in which reason has drowned."

from Nietzsche's Daybreak

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

Nietzsche was wrong.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Nietzsche was wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh yeah? Read these series of threads and tell me there aren't a bunch of Christians swimming on the waves in which reason has drowned.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

[ QUOTE ]
...tell me there aren't a bunch of Christians...

[/ QUOTE ]
The vast majority of Christians get a lot of theological things wrong. Just because the majority of Christians think/behave a certain way doesn't make that the correct Christian perspective.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

Yes it does. A belief system is defined by the majority of its believers.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Everybody else knows what I am talking about. Everybody else understands that it is neccesary to Define "God" before they place a degree of certainty on his existence.

[/ QUOTE ]

The wording of your first post in this thread seems to indicate you don't understand this. I don't assign a probability that "god" exists because I consider the concept meaningless.

Re: The Anguish of Semi Believers.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yes it does. A belief system is defined by the majority of its believers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Definition of Belief System: (from dictionary.com)

[ QUOTE ]

belief system
noun
Definition: faith based on a series of beliefs but not formalized into a religion; also, a fixed coherent set of beliefs prevalent in a community or society.

[/ QUOTE ]

Christianity is a religion.