Why did Jesus Leave?

[Archaeopteryx]

Because unlike my belief in God, which I have freely chosen, belief in a unicorn on my front lawn does NOT line up with reality, therefore I freely choose to reject it. That is my choice.

In other words, it's not your choice at all. You can't will yourself into a belief. You aren't convinced, and therefore don't believe. You can't simply choose to believe otherwise.

 

[devolved]

Because unlike my belief in God, which I have freely chosen, belief in a unicorn on my front lawn does NOT line up with reality, therefore I freely choose to reject it. That is my choice.

If you can't believe otherwise, then it's not a choice. If it's really a choice, then you could make a choice to believe in that unicorn... but you can't. If you can't do something, then it's not the same thing as you choosing to do the other thing.

You have only one other option as a choice... and that would be choosing not to make either decision until you go outside and check whether there's a unicorn in your front lawn. If there isn't, then you don't have a choice to believe that there is.

Belief is not a choice. It's a natural progression of (our perception of) evidence and how our minds work.

 

[amariselle]

<staff edit>

That is a highly inaccurate statement. Truth is in fact very important to me.

You clearly said we can change our beliefs, and when I asked how that idea is in agreement with your previous statement that we don't choose our beliefs at all, your response was to insult my intelligence. As I said, such a response undermines everything else you might say. Attacking someone else's intelligence is not adequate support for your particular position or perspective on an issue.

But, since you seem to think that truth isn't important to me, I will quote Pontius Pilate: "What is truth?"

You seem to think you know what ultimate truth is, because you apparently think I'm not interested in it. So, what would be your answer to that question?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

That is a highly inaccurate statement. Truth is in fact very important to me.

You clearly said we can change our beliefs, and when I asked how that idea is in agreement with your previous statement that we don't choose our beliefs at all, your response was to insult my intelligence. As I said, such a response undermines everything else you might say. Attacking someone else's intelligence is not adequate support for your particular position or perspective on an issue.

"That's just like, your opinion, man." You see how easy that is?

But, since you seem to think that truth isn't important to me, I will quote Pontius Pilate: "What is truth?"

You seem to think you know what ultimate truth is, because you apparently think I'm not interested in it. So, what would be your answer to that question?

Maybe he should take a leaf out of your book: "I refuse to answer rhetorical questions!"

 

[amariselle]

I've actually said that I'm not defining faith. I said that imaginary is one of the attributes of faith as a belief. A belief is an imaginary construct. Do you understand what imaginary means? It means that it exists as a picture of reality in your head. Whether it matches up with reality or not is a secondary discussion.

Except, my belief in God is not just "a picture in my head." That's a convenient thought though, because it allows you to dismiss my beliefs without taking them seriously.

So, you downgrade from "damaging" to "have effect on". I think it's a progress. Having effect on doesn't imply damage, neither it implies any modification of anything substantial.

I'm actually not "downgrading" at all. People can in fact have a damaging effect on someone else's beliefs, just as they can have a positive effect on them. People can harm or help each other in all sorts of ways, and words are very powerful.

The way you phrased it made it sound like it lines up with reality by not having a conflict with reality, but fair enough.

I apologize if my wording was unclear.

A false perception can appear to line up with reality, hence that's how scam artists get paid. I think that we have to agree that just because something seems to line up with reality doesn't necessarily make is so, especially when you can't explain or demonstrate how... which you admitted that you can't.

Some things are simply outside the physical and material realm. That doesn't mean they aren't real, and it doesn't mean belief in God is the same as falling for a scam.

 

[amariselle]

In other words, it's not your choice at all. You can't will yourself into a belief. You aren't convinced, and therefore don't believe. You can't simply choose to believe otherwise.

Again, I choose what I believe and what I don't.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Again, I choose what I believe and what I don't.

So choose to believe in the unicorn.

 

[amariselle]

If you can't believe otherwise, then it's not a choice. If it's really a choice, then you could make a choice to believe in that unicorn... but you can't. If you can't do something, then it's not the same thing as you choosing to do the other thing.

You have only one other option as a choice... and that would be choosing not to make either decision until you go outside and check whether there's a unicorn in your front lawn. If there isn't, then you don't have a choice to believe that there is.

Belief is not a choice. It's a natural progression of (our perception of) evidence and how our minds work.

I freely chose to believe in God, that was my choice.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Except, my belief in God is not just "a picture in my head." That's a convenient thought though, because it allows you to dismiss my beliefs without taking them seriously.

You haven't given us a reason to take them seriously! Consider your claims about the Bible as an example.

 

[amariselle]

So choose to believe in the unicorn.

I've already chosen not to. If I wanted to believe in unicorns, I could. In fact, there was a time when I was a young girl, that I did believe in unicorns, I was fascinated by them. I have since chosen to reject that belief, but I have not chosen to reject my belief in God.

We DO have a choice. We have free will and a brain. We are thinking, intelligent people, fully able to make choices.

 

[amariselle]

"That's just like, your opinion, man." You see how easy that is?

You do seem very fond of using that dismissive statement. But it actually does not apply to what I said.

Maybe he should take a leaf out of your book: "I refuse to answer rhetorical questions!"

It's not a rhetorical question at all. He said that I seem to be uninterested in truth. Obviously he has an idea of what truth is, and I want to know what he actually thinks about truth.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

It's not a rhetorical question at all. He said that I seem to be uninterested in truth. Obviously he has an idea of what truth is, and I want to know what he actually thinks about truth.

My question earlier wasn't rhetorical either. That didn't stop you from dodging it by claiming it was rhetorical.

 

[amariselle]

You haven't given us a reason to take them seriously! Consider your claims about the Bible as an example.

It's not my job to get you to take the Bible seriously. Obviously I can't make that decision for you. I can only make that decision for myself, and I have.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I've already chosen not to. If I wanted to believe in unicorns, I could.

Then go ahead. Right now. Choose to believe that there is a unicorn in your backyard at this very moment.

We DO have a choice. We have free will and a brain. We are thinking, intelligent people, fully able to make choices.

Except when it comes to unicorns in backyards apparently.

 

[devolved]

I'm actually not "downgrading" at all. People can in fact have a damaging effect on someone else's beliefs, just as they can have a positive effect on them. People can harm or help each other in all sorts of ways, and words are very powerful.

You are switching the semantics here, as you do it quite often. Beliefs are not the same as people. You can't damage a belief. That's what you originally said - people are damaging faith (a belief). You can't damage a belief. You can have an effect that alters a belief that may has result in personal actions that will damage something... but it's not a consequences of any single belief. The network of belief are extremely complex today. There a plenty of people who are bigots and racists, yet their beliefs are not damaging to society because these are constrained by other sets of beliefs.

Somethings are simply outside the physical and material realm. That doesn't mean they aren't real, and it doesn't mean belief in God is the same as falling for a scam.

How so? If they are outside of physical and material realm... that means that you have to imagine them, right? It's obviously not something that you can see. So, how do you know that these things exist, if they are outside of material and physical realm and you have to imagine how they work?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

It's not my job to get you to take the Bible seriously. Obviously I can't make that decision for you. I can only make that decision for myself, and I have.

Actually, given that they are your claims, yes, you have the burden of proof for them.

 

[amariselle]

My question earlier wasn't rhetorical either. That didn't stop you from dodging it by claiming it was rhetorical.

It was, because you yourself say you were a Christian. So, are you honestly claiming you don't know why Christians believe that an "erosion" of faith is a terrible thing?

 

[amariselle]

Then go ahead. Right now. Choose to believe that there is a unicorn in your backyard at this very moment.

Just a respectful suggestion; you might want to stop demanding people believe certain things. I told you, I have chosen not to believe in unicorns. I already made my choice.

Except when it comes to unicorns in backyards apparently.

Again, and this is the last time I'll say it. I have freely chosen NOT to believe in unicorns.

Quite frankly, comparing faith in God to faith in a unicorn is absurd in any case. When was the last time someone was tortured and killed for believing in a unicorn?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

It was, because you yourself say you were a Christian. So, are you honestly claiming you don't know why Christians believe that an "erosion" of faith is a terrible thing?

I'm not asking about what Christians think in general. I'm asking you what you think. In what way is that rhetorical? I can't read your mind. I don't know what your thoughts are regarding faith. I have my suspicions though. For instance, I suspect that you consider faith to be a virtue. But if I assume that is your position when it isn't then you'd accuse me of creating a strawman. The entire point of asking is to avoid a situation in which you accuse me of misrepresenting your views. Instead of simply outlining what you think on that matter, you've been persistently evasive.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Just a respectful suggestion; you might want to stop demanding people believe certain things. I told you, I have chosen not to believe in unicorns. I already made my choice.

You can't do it, which demonstrates my point.