Bush week.

[primaryE]

Is it morally ethical for people of religious persuasions to convince others to accept their beliefs. What right do the religious have, to do this? Don't just say "It's the spirit that convinces people" Because then God wouldn't need you. Then there's the freewill argument, that God can't affect a person's will, but then you can.

Yes it's all very confusing.

 

[quatona]

Is it morally ethical for people of religious persuasions to convince others to accept their beliefs.

I like it when others offer me their ideas.
(The delivery can be sort of annoying at times, though.)

 

[possibletarian]

Is it morally ethical for people of religious persuasions to convince others to accept their beliefs. What right do the religious have, to do this? Don't just say "It's the spirit that convinces people" Because then God wouldn't need you. Then there's the freewill argument, that God can't affect a person's will, but then you can.

Yes it's all very confusing.

I think 'religious people' see it as their duty, in the particular case of Christians the duty to tell people about the gospel. I understand that from their point of view they are not only carrying out a Godly duty but in fact may be saving you from hell itself.

Now as an agnostic I don't really see any evidence or reason to believe either in a particular god or hell, but I do at least understand why they do it if they truly believe, so I'm not sure the question of morality comes into it.

I live in the U.K. where the church has much less say in day to day politics, Aside from the odd Jehovah's Witness who always leave right away when told you are not interested religion does not invade my life at all.

 

[Dave-W]

"Bush week"
Would that be George W Bush, or George H W Bush?

Is it morally ethical for people of religious persuasions to convince others to accept their beliefs. What right do the religious have, to do this?

I would say yes.
To go farther, I believe it is morally UNacceptable to NOT try to convince others.

If you saw a car full of people driving along; and you know the road is washed out ahead, meaning the car will plunge into the water and kill everyone, would it be morally acceptable to NOT warn them of what lies ahead?

Don't just say "It's the spirit that convinces people" Because then God wouldn't need you. Then there's the freewill argument, that God can't affect a person's will, but then you can.

It is not that God CANNOT affect people; it is the fact that God wants to partner with us in bringing about His agenda.

 

[SPF]

Is it morally ethical for people of religious persuasions to convince others to accept their beliefs. What right do the religious have, to do this?

It's interesting you feel this way. Penn, the famous atheist magician actually feels the exact opposite of you. He said that Christians who didn't witness with all their strength, and were willing to walk by people and not tell them, not plead with them to believe in Christ were selfish and terrible people.

Why? Simple, as Christians, we believe that in the end people are either going to end up living in the presence of God, or in a rather terrible place (hell). So for me to NOT engage with the people who aren't Christians is essentially me being terribly selfish and not loving or kind at all. If I really believe that my neighbor is going to end up in hell, how selfish and mean of a person do I have to be to not warn them?

If you saw some kids playing on train tracks and a train was racing towards them - would you not yell at them and warn them? Penn said it's the same thing for Christians who don't witness.

 

[Tolworth John]

Is it morally ethical for people of religious persuasions to convince others to accept their beliefs. What right do the religious have, to do this? Don't just say "It's the spirit that convinces people" Because then God wouldn't need you. Then there's the freewill argument, that God can't affect a person's will, but then you can.

Yes it's all very confusing.

Is it morally ethical for people of no religious belief to seek to convince others to renounce their belief?

Christians should be witnessing to their faith because Jesus commanded us to do so.

Muslims arn't bothered about witnessing, they are commanded to conquer and force unbelievers to believe.

What is the reason for atheists who seek to doaway with peoples belief?

 

[primaryE]

I like it when others offer me their ideas.
(The delivery can be sort of annoying at times, though.)

I would think that sharing other peoples ideas that are composed entirely from themselves, would be better than being converted by some theology that is trying to save you from the boogie monster.

 

[primaryE]

I think 'religious people' see it as their duty, in the particular case of Christians the duty to tell people about the gospel. I understand that from their point of view they are not only carrying out a Godly duty but in fact may be saving you from hell itself.

Now as an agnostic I don't really see any evidence or reason to believe either in a particular god or hell, but I do at least understand why they do it if they truly believe, so I'm not sure the question of morality comes into it.

I live in the U.K. where the church has much less say in day to day politics, Aside from the odd Jehovah's Witness who always leave right away when told you are not interested religion does not invade my life at all.

Mind control is one moral implication.

 

[primaryE]

"Bush week"
Would that be George W Bush, or George H W Bush?


I would say yes.
To go farther, I believe it is morally UNacceptable to NOT try to convince others.

If you saw a car full of people driving along; and you know the road is washed out ahead, meaning the car will plunge into the water and kill everyone, would it be morally acceptable to NOT warn them of what lies ahead?

It is not that God CANNOT affect people; it is the fact that God wants to partner with us in bringing about His agenda.

The problem is, and with most religions these days. That the threat is imagined, not actual.

 

[primaryE]

It's interesting you feel this way. Penn, the famous atheist magician actually feels the exact opposite of you. He said that Christians who didn't witness with all their strength, and were willing to walk by people and not tell them, not plead with them to believe in Christ were selfish and terrible people.

Why? Simple, as Christians, we believe that in the end people are either going to end up living in the presence of God, or in a rather terrible place (hell). So for me to NOT engage with the people who aren't Christians is essentially me being terribly selfish and not loving or kind at all. If I really believe that my neighbor is going to end up in hell, how selfish and mean of a person do I have to be to not warn them?

If you saw some kids playing on train tracks and a train was racing towards them - would you not yell at them and warn them? Penn said it's the same thing for Christians who don't witness.

As much as I respect penn and others like him, he could be mistaken.

 

[primaryE]

Is it morally ethical for people of no religious belief to seek to convince others to renounce their belief?

Christians should be witnessing to their faith because Jesus commanded us to do so.

Muslims arn't bothered about witnessing, they are commanded to conquer and force unbelievers to believe.

What is the reason for atheists who seek to doaway with peoples belief?

Yes, if that type of belief is proven to harm that person and others. Religious folks don't use evidence when it comes down to convincing other's of their beliefs.

 

[quatona]

I would think that sharing other peoples ideas that are composed entirely from themselves, would be better than being converted by some theology that is trying to save you from the boogie monster.

Why sure: Some ideas are more interesting than others.

 

[Dave-W]

The problem is, and with most religions these days. That the threat is imagined, not actual.

How can you be sure that it is imagined?

 

[quatona]

How can you be sure that it is imagined?

I can´t. The first question, however, would be: "How can they be sure it´s not imagined?".

 

[primaryE]

How can you be sure that it is imagined?

Because there's no evidence of hell, angels, demons or heaven. No evidence at all, therefore it's imagined.

 

[primaryE]

Why sure: Some ideas are more interesting than others.

They sure are, especially the one's that end in block busters.

 

[Dave-W]

Because there's no evidence of hell, angels, demons or heaven.

You mean - no evidence that you would accept as valid.

I have heard the screams of those dying saying they are descending into flames. I have also been face to face with someone demonized several times.

 

[primaryE]

You mean - no evidence that you would accept as valid.

I have heard the screams of those dying saying they are descending into flames. I have also been face to face with someone demonized several times.

You're lying, which is very human. Welcome to life!

 

[Dave-W]

You're lying, which is very human. Welcome to life!

Like I said - nothing that you would accept.

But I would question you, on what basis do you "know" that I said would be lying? (which I am NOT btw)

=============================

Did you happen to read the article on CNN last weekend about the clinical psychologist who is now the "go-to guy" for Catholic exorcists?

A man of science confronts demonic possession - CNN

I suppose you think they are all lying too.

 

[primaryE]

Like I said - nothing that you would accept.

But I would question you, on what basis do you "know" that I said would be lying. (which I am NOT btw)

Because you're human, and defending a belief that gives you peace about your mortality.