What would you lose if Christianity were not true?

[SkyWriting]

Demonstrably false. You have plenty of nonbelievers who can tell you they're perfectly happy with their lives.

I am perfectly happy if I drink too much. But that doesn't change the poison a bit. I am still harming my body and wasting my time gifted me. Drug addicts use drugs to improve their lives and relieve pain. It helps them be happy.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Beliefs that cannot be or aren't justified cannot be held with integrity.

ETA: The preceding was, ahem, preceded by a full paragraph after quoting @InterestedAtheist. I lost that; sorry. If I have time later, I'll update.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I kind of assumed you would start a thread on it so as not to derail a current one.

Uh, no. I've placed it just where it fits best, and I've made the necessary [EDIT] to that thread so that it is now fully suitable to fitting that task.......................so carry on, IA, "Let's Take a Leap" together!

 

[InterestedAtheist]

I am perfectly happy if I drink too much. But that doesn't change the poison a bit. I am still harming my body and wasting my time gifted me. Drug addicts use drugs to improve their lives and relieve pain. It helps them be happy.

Plenty of atheists will tell you that they are happy in a healthy way. And their lifestyles can attest to it.
Of course, you can say they're mistaken, lying or deluded. But then it's nothing more than your unsubstantiated assertion, which carries no weight whatsoever.

 

[eleos1954]

It's like saying that if you do not believe in Santa, you are going to miss out on all of his presents.

Yeah ... and of course there are those saying we are the planet of the apes ;o)

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Uh, no. I've placed it just where it fits best, and I've made the necessary [EDIT] to that thread so that it is now fully suitable to fitting that task.......................so carry on, IA, "Let's Take a Leap" together!

These threads are getting quite bulky, Philo. I'm keeping up with people by checking my alerts. Please could you give me a link to the post you've started off in?
Looking forward to reading it, but I'm afraid it's bed time again here, so there will be a delay.
Goodnight!

 

[Halbhh]

the point about hand washing stands. You are the one bent on not seeing that Jesus was clearly wrong there. His disciples ate with unwashed hands and Jesus condones the practice instead of telling those people that washing hands often is a very good idea. I bet you wash your hands before eating, cause you know better.

especially considering Jesus ate laying down presumably on the floor.



point is, no sane Christian follows the teachings on giving up own wealth and giving to everyone who asks.


This idea of loving others as your self is meaningless. You will always take care of your self and family before taking care of neighbors and their kids. Let’s be real here. Jesus’ teachings are worthless.

All I can do here is politely tell you you've got the passage completely wrong in how you guess at the meaning. (it's not even slightly about hand washing in any way, and no doubt at all in my mind that often the disciples did wash their hands, as convenient (when water was available) and needed at at times (when hands seemed to need it in their own view) -- so I'm merely trying to give you a chance to wonder if you missed something, which is about as much as I can do here I'm guessing. Unless you have a sense there is more, I'm just wasting time to talk about it.)

Also I suggested you test -- test -- the outcome of doing "love your neighbor" -- actually do it and find out what happens.

If you can, because it's somewhat of an emotional risk to begin any relationship, trying to be that well disposed to someone you've barely met isn't necessarily easy. But the key is to actually try to love them right off the bat -- then see what happens.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

These threads are getting quite bulky, Philo. I'm keeping up with people by checking my alerts. Please could you give me a link to the post you've started off in?
Looking forward to reading it, but I'm afraid it's bed time again here, so there will be a delay.
Goodnight!

Sure, I'd be glad to. Here's the latest post I've made in my other, recently Retro-fitted OP thread:

[EDIT] The praxis of making a Leap of Faith ...

 

[BigV]

All I can do here is politely tell you you've got the passage completely wrong in how you guess at the meaning.

And I politely point you to the actual text, where 'unwashed hands' is explicitly mentioned!

Mark 7:1

It's amazing you don't see that text literally but love your neighbor IS literal?

 

[BigV]

Yeah ... and of course there are those saying we are the planet of the apes ;o)

We are a planet of primates, many of whom think that because they have learned to read one ancient book (albeit with questionable interpretations), they can ignore all others that disagree with it.

 

[eleos1954]

We are a planet of primates, many of whom think that because they have learned to read one ancient book (albeit with questionable interpretations), they can ignore all others that disagree with it.

That's the nature of mankind .... we question everything ... scientists don't agree among themselves either ... fact is ... creation or evolution are both theories and there are various "interpretations" (theories) put forth regarding our beginning.

Fact is .... they are all theories.

 

[Halbhh]

And I politely point you to the actual text, where 'unwashed hands' is explicitly mentioned!

Mark 7:1

It's amazing you don't see that text literally but love your neighbor IS literal?

I've no doubt the disciples might wash their hands when needed, when water was available.

To get the meaning of this Mark chapter 7 passage -- verses 1 through 23, all -- adopt a radically different attitude.

Think to yourself that you don't yet know what Jesus is conveying, and try to truly listen. That's humble to do.

Mark 7 NIV

 

[BigV]

I've no doubt the disciples might wash their hands when needed, when water was available.

To get the meaning of this Mark chapter 7 passage -- verses 1 through 23, all -- adopt a radically different attitude.

Think to yourself that you don't yet know what Jesus is conveying, and try to truly listen. That's humble to do.

Of course, Mark 7 talks about ceremonial washing, that was part of Old Testament teaching, btw, that Jesus, who came to 'fulfil', instead just explains away.

Note also, that in the context of explaining what defiles a person, Jesus overrules all Old Testament dietary laws.

But that's beside the point. In that case, disciples were eating with unwashed hands, and Jesus doesn't say that washing hands before eating is a good idea.

Think about it. He could have said that washing or not washing hands has nothing to do with defilement that comes from within, but still, washing hands is a very good idea for hygenic reasons!

Jesus doesn't advise this at all. And you are simply trying to save Jesus from the terrible advice he has left the people with. Imagine how many people could have been helped if Jesus simply said that washing hands is a very good idea before eating and after bathroom.

But alas.

 

[BigV]

That's the nature of mankind .... we question everything ... scientists don't agree among themselves either ... fact is ... creation or evolution are both theories and there are various "interpretations" (theories) put forth regarding our beginning.

Fact is .... they are all theories.

Religious people KNOW! there is a God. Religious people laugh at evolution because their book says that God created everything. Bible says it and it settles it. Scientists question, but there are no mysteries for the religious.

Doubt is a good thing, except if you are religious, because then doubt is of the devil.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Religious people KNOW! there is a God. Religious people laugh at evolution because their book says that God created everything. Bible says it and it settles it. Scientists question, but there are no mysteries for the religious.

Well, please don't speak for ALL of the religious here. You're kind of getting ahead of yourself.

I don't assert that I "know" from within some Correspondence Theory of Knowledge, and I definitely don't laugh at the Theory of Evolution.

Doubt is a good thing, except if you are religious, because then doubt is of the devil.

No, unbelief is the opposite of belief and faith. Doubt is simply a human complexity that has various shades to it; some of it disturbs faith, some of it instead spurs a response seeking understanding. So, maybe think about expanding and revising your philosophical assumptions in all of this, BigV.

 

[eleos1954]

Religious people KNOW! there is a God. Religious people laugh at evolution because their book says that God created everything. Bible says it and it settles it. Scientists question, but there are no mysteries for the religious.

Doubt is a good thing, except if you are religious, because then doubt is of the devil.

Atheists are tied to the material/physical ... those of faith are tied to the spiritual.

At one time I was an atheist ... until I really studied the bible for myself, rather than just gleaming on to bits and pieces of what people had/have to say about it. The bible is centered on relationships and is not a science book and was never intended to be.

Both science and christians agree whatever happened ... started in the cosmos ... so the this turned into that debate (on earth) is really a moot point. Nobody will ever know everything about the universe .... it's too vast ... so will always be theoretical.

They are both theories ... and people choose what they believe for various "reasons".

Science is a very good thing and am glad it is pursued ... no one has indisputable answers. Regardless whether creation or evolution none have all the answers to the mystery of life.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Beliefs that cannot be or aren't justified cannot be held with integrity.
ETA: The preceding was, ahem, preceded by a full paragraph after quoting @InterestedAtheist. I lost that; sorry. If I have time later, I'll update.

The update may or may not be worth it, but here is an approximation of what I wrote and lost:

So I suppose the answer to "What did you sell your faith for?" is "intellectual integrity."

This. Very much this.

The end of my Christian life was preceded by a decade long attempt to form a coherent theology that accounted for reality as I perceived it while maintaining Christianity in a recognizable way.

At some point, though I didn't articulate it this way until later, I recognized what for me is a fundamental axiom of thought: All axioms are inductive -- including this one.

What I mean is that we adopt things as axioms because those are things that we've experienced as being true.

The axioms that were required for me to be a Christian lacked that inductive-ness. For me, there is no experience of Jesus being real, right here, right now; there is no experience of this person being 100% divine and 100% human; there is no experience of trinity, heaven, hell, nor of any god at all. Any experience I may have thought I had was a "one-off". One cannot adduce the truth a proposed axiom from a one-off. Induction doesn't work that way.

Without this induction, belief in a proposed axiom is not justified.

(This, then, was the last sentence.)

Beliefs that cannot be or aren't justified cannot be held with integrity.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

The update may or may not be worth it, but here is an approximation of what I wrote and lost:

This. Very much this.

The end of my Christian life was preceded by a decade long attempt to form a coherent theology that accounted for reality as I perceived it while maintaining Christianity in a recognizable way.

At some point, though I didn't articulate it this way until later, I recognized what for me is a fundamental axiom of thought: All axioms are inductive -- including this one.

What I mean is that we adopt things as axioms because those are things that we've experienced as being true.

The axioms that were required for me to be a Christian lacked that inductive-ness. For me, there is no experience of Jesus being real, right here, right now; there is no experience of this person being 100% divine and 100% human; there is no experience of trinity, heaven, hell, nor of any god at all. Any experience I may have thought I had was a "one-off". One cannot adduce the truth a proposed axiom from a one-off. Induction doesn't work that way.

Without this induction, belief in a proposed axiom is not justified.

(This, then, was the last sentence.)

Thank you for taking the trouble to reconstruct that, Tinker!

 

[Halbhh]

Of course, Mark 7 talks about ceremonial washing, that was part of Old Testament teaching, btw, that Jesus, who came to 'fulfil', instead just explains away.

Note also, that in the context of explaining what defiles a person, Jesus overrules all Old Testament dietary laws.

But that's beside the point. In that case, disciples were eating with unwashed hands, and Jesus doesn't say that washing hands before eating is a good idea.

Think about it. He could have said that washing or not washing hands has nothing to do with defilement that comes from within, but still, washing hands is a very good idea for hygenic reasons!

Jesus doesn't advise this at all. And you are simply trying to save Jesus from the terrible advice he has left the people with. Imagine how many people could have been helped if Jesus simply said that washing hands is a very good idea before eating and after bathroom.

But alas.

He is talking about something far more important than the made-up customs (the particular one here actually not one from God to begin with also, not the ceremonial washing God did specify, but instead their own invented tradition -- read the passage.)

But getting hung up on the hand washing thing is blinding you, it appears. Or something else is blinding you. One thing that blinds people is thinking they already know all a passage is about, and that blinds them, prevents comprehension. You could undo that, by taking a radically different attitude -- to think you don't already know all that it is about. It's more good to do than you might expect. Einstein was humble, for example. It's a classic virtue. It's good for anyone.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Kenny, you're getting yourself wound up all over nothing.
No, it's not all an Evil Atheist Conspiracy.

You misunderstand, If I ever was wound up, I'd most certainly be over it now, Atheists have always made my point very clear....old news. Do you know the definition of conspiracy? It doesn't fit here at all, I'm talking the few individuals I see here and there that just so happen to be doing the same things for the same reasons without input from others...something very telling BTW. I didn't see where you answered my question on you two styling the original question?

Then you tell me, why do Atheists come here, and do as they do? Why do they care what we believe? It's very clear some Atheists would prefer we go away. Why are they so bothered by the idea of something that they know doesn't exist?

I've always concluded if they can get others to not believe there's a God, they can get rid of that pesky little place we call Hell, and rest a bit easier in the fact there is nothing beyond here. I mean they are already at a huge disadvantage trying to explain creation without a God, so, trying to deny him with that constantly looming, it must be very hard. But again, you explain it.

Insecurity? Only in your own mind, Kenny.

No, in yours, it's the only thing that explains what some do so often here.