Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
This is what I mean: why he believes what he believes is arbitrary by his own words. If at any point he used any kind reason or evidence to come to any conclusion on anything then he is a hypocrite.Well, obviously he chose which authority was authoritative by taking the word of another authority. Reason is for chumps. Trust me, I'm an authority on the topic.
You are misrepresenting humanism. It isn't some form of epistemological skepticism.
eudaimonia,
Mark
If so, how do you value and apply the "doubt"?
Why did you choose the authority of Christianity over say Islam or any other religion?
If so, how do you value and apply the "doubt"?
So you were effectively commanded to.I didn't choose Christianity. Jesus called and I could not but answer. There was no weighing of evidence, I simply fell in love with God.
So you were effectively commanded to.
Other people obviously have not had that calling. Why should they assume by faith that what you believe in is authoritative?
Great!Sorry, you misunderstand me. There is no "should". They either will or they will not. Your heart is either drawn to faith, and the true faith (that does not contradict the nature of faith), or it is not.
So it isn't anyone's fault that they don't believe - they're just "not drawn" to faith.
Sorry, you misunderstand me. There is no "should". They either will or they will not. Your heart is either drawn to faith, and the true faith (that does not contradict the nature of faith), or it is not.
But it wouldn't be my fault. I'd have just been born without the "heart" for faith.
So now there is some distinction between faith and true faith? Interesting. How do you know when it's true faith? By yet more faith?
How is it a fault of my character? If I was born with this nature how can I be held accountable for having this nature?The fault is intrinsic to your nature; you would be "bad seed" (using the vine and tree analogy). The heart does not weigh evidence, it responds or it does not, but the responding or not is still a fault in your character for you to bear the repercussions of.
Actually every argument I've seen you make here has been "word games" or semantics. Especially in the way you seem to use the word faith.No distinction at all; just the difference between faith and that which claims to be faith but which contradicts faith. Clearly your interest is in making smart alec, but empty, comments by playing word games, rather than make an effort to understand anything that doesn't resemble linguistic babyfood.
How is it a fault of my character? If I was born with this nature how can I be held accountable for having this nature?
Actually every argument I've seen you make here has been "word games" or semantics. Especially in the way you seem to use the word faith.
At any rate what faith contradicts faith might I ask?
Not really, no. "Infinite love" is not the only possible basis for a non-nihilistic ethics.
eudaimonia,
Mark
If I was born with it how can I be responsible for it?If you think that you are not to be held responsible for the content of your heart, you are very much mistaken.
You're confusing humanism with (what you think is) empiricism.If you are asking which religions contradict faith, the answer is all of them except Christianity. Not that you care so long as we avoid the subject - that being that humanism is based on a contradiction.
This part is true: I am against faith (though not my heart, my head is).Any chance of getting back to that? Actually, dont bother. You are a humanist, your heart is against faith, and I will leave you to it.
The fault is intrinsic to your nature; you would be "bad seed" (using the vine and tree analogy). The heart does not weigh evidence, it responds or it does not, but the responding or not is still a fault in your character for you to bear the repercussions of.
No distinction at all; just the difference between faith and that which claims to be faith but which contradicts faith. Clearly your interest is in making smart alec, but empty, comments by playing word games, rather than make an effort to understand anything that doesn't resemble linguistic babyfood.
..Which shows just how ignorant you are....
You can interpret it that way.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?