Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Faith: Vice or Virtue?

  1. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    34
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    ...but, if that employer does scam you...then you are just a sucker, right? Or is having done the work without eventually gaining the promised reward still virtuous?
    You do face the possibility of being scammed and not getting your money. It would suck, but it certainly doesn't make you the sucker. It makes the other person dishonest and criminal (depending on the arrangement). However, that doesn't mean that Faith is bad, it means that it was misplaced. Therefore you learn and grow, which is still a good thing. Additionally you have the reward of having done the work and done it right. If you didn't get what you were promised as a result, that's not a result of Faith being a bad principle.

    The only alternative is to assume that being lazy is a virtue because you don't do anything.

    The principle of Faith is still a good thing and virtuous. It gives rise to hope that things can and will be better. Lack of faith leads to despair. It's not coincidental that mankind (religious or otherwise) has defined faith as a positive aspect of ones life.

  2. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    34
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeKerriii View Post
    It is hard to have a discussion about imaginary characters, There is no evidence of any of the 5000 or so gods that human worship or have worshiped. Provided credible physical evidence , other than the circular reference of the bible, and I will listen, Why do you believe in something that is not supported by evidence? What makes Christ more credible than Shiva?
    It's not hard to have a discussion about God (Christ). You happen to disagree that he is real, I don't. That doesn't mean we can't discuss Him. By saying you can't have a discussion means you can't have a discussion about thousands of other fictional topics. Yet we have libraries full of fictional works.

    You are only will to discuss the "physical evidence" as you see it, and only so long as it fits your definition of what is acceptable.

    You ask me, "Why do you believe in something that is not supported by evidence?" And I respond with because to me there is plenty of evidence. Humans, this planet, to me seem plenty evident of creation. At a minimum it gives rise to the possibility that something greater than myself has a hand in it. A most it gives credibility to God as the supreme creator.

    It seems to me that many people on this board (not necessarily you specifically) have a tendency to want to call those of Faith "close-minded." It's funny because I'm the one willing to accept something more than what I see in black and white. I'm the one will to entertain new ideas and principles that I might not understand fully.

    However, if you want to have a civil discussion, I'm all for it.

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    965
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Matai View Post
    It's not hard to have a discussion about God (Christ). You happen to disagree that he is real, I don't. That doesn't mean we can't discuss Him. By saying you can't have a discussion means you can't have a discussion about thousands of other fictional topics. Yet we have libraries full of fictional works.

    You are only will to discuss the "physical evidence" as you see it, and only so long as it fits your definition of what is acceptable.

    You ask me, "Why do you believe in something that is not supported by evidence?" And I respond with because to me there is plenty of evidence. Humans, this planet, to me seem plenty evident of creation. At a minimum it gives rise to the possibility that something greater than myself has a hand in it. A most it gives credibility to God as the supreme creator.

    It seems to me that many people on this board (not necessarily you specifically) have a tendency to want to call those of Faith "close-minded." It's funny because I'm the one willing to accept something more than what I see in black and white. I'm the one will to entertain new ideas and principles that I might not understand fully.

    However, if you want to have a civil discussion, I'm all for it.
    I believe that accepting faith as the answer precludes you from looking for real answers, Your use of God with a capitol G the term God(Christ) shows an attachment not to a creator of the Universe but with being a specific creator myth that is true. Humans believe in thousands of gods, I find no reason to think that one of them is somehow more valid than the others.

    I have no trouble with discussion fiction as fiction, but when people make moral and intellectual decisions based on the pinions of a fiction character it raises my eyebrows, and if those people have power it frightens me a bit. We have both Muslims and Christians, today using god as an excuse for committing major crimes so I'm not a big fan of such a convenient excuse to be violent.

    The problem, with Pascal's wager is that it is not an either/or but a single choice among thousands of possible answers.

  4. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    34
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeKerriii View Post
    I believe that accepting faith as the answer precludes you from looking for real answers, Your use of God with a capitol G the term God(Christ) shows an attachment not to a creator of the Universe but with being a specific creator myth that is true. Humans believe in thousands of gods, I find no reason to think that one of them is somehow more valid than the others.
    I’m a Christian and I believe in God and that Christ is the creator (hence the term God (Christ)). While Humankind does believe in thousands of Gods, I am not well versed in all of them and so can’t speak to their particular beliefs. While you may not find a valid reason to accept one over the others, many people do. I have mine and others theirs. We all find some reason to cling to our faith. While the particulars are different it seems to me that either a majority of the planet is insane (based on % of people who believe in God of some sort) or there is something to this religion thing.

    And what “real” answers am I not looking for or accepting?

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeKerriii View Post
    I have no trouble with discussion fiction as fiction, but when people make moral and intellectual decisions based on the pinions of a fiction character it raises my eyebrows, and if those people have power it frightens me a bit. We have both Muslims and Christians, today using god as an excuse for committing major crimes so I'm not a big fan of such a convenient excuse to be violent.
    As stated above, it seems to me that the majority of the planet believe in God (after some fashion). What astounds me is that despite all this “proof” that He is “fictional” millions of people still seem to find enough “credible evidence” to believe in Him. People still find God in modern times and He hasn’t been relegated to a place of non-existence or non-relevance. You choose not to believe, but quite honestly you find yourself in a minority position by so doing. Either the 1% (or whatever it is for non-believers as a whole) is right and everyone is wrong, or vice versa. Remember when the earth was flat? We just don’t have the capability yet of proving God exists (or doesn’t). At this point it’s purely conjecture and I’ll take the 99% (Billions of witnesses) who claim He exists over the few who say He can’t be true.

    You claim I make (or those like me) moral and intellectual decisions based on a fictional character and yet I wonder at those who can’t accept what billions of people claim to be true. Makes me wonder who is more grounded.

    Just because someone has religion and uses it to commit violence only makes Religion (God) a “convenient excuse.” That’s just like blaming the Gun for killing people instead of the person who pulls the trigger, or the spoon/fork for making people fat. I tend to blame the person who utilizes the tool (religion, fork/spoon, gun) as opposed to the tool itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeKerriii View Post
    The problem, with Pascal's wager is that it is not an either/or but a single choice among thousands of possible answers.
    Can’t disagree with that. Doesn’t mean I’m not going to be doing my best to find the answers just in case. I figure I can cover my butt. Besides, I don’t view living in accordance with my religion as having any “finite losses” (such as luxury, etc.).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •