Choosing a faith

There are individuals who would look down on the sales clerk as a lessor being and as someone simply waiting on them. It is about not being prideful and not treating others as inferior beings. It is anything but narcissistic.

Ya, but you don't do it. You give the argument that you can find no evidence of a deity so therefore one doesn't exist. In general I remain unconvinced that God reaches out physically on an ongoing basis. I've heard the stories but I remain personally sceptical. However I do believe that God touches human hearts and minds and guides people to comfort or maybe even to heal people who are suffering with cancer or with other issues. You mean like the atheists on this forum who reject the idea of an outside intelligence but would change their views if they could be see solid scientific evidence of such a deity. I am very interested in the truth. I have essentially come to base my life on it. Incidentally that is just as true for anyone who rejects a deity. And that is what it seems that materialists do. If it can't be measured scientifically, it can't exist. If I feel led to help someone who needs it are you going to be able to measure that scientifically. I am not saying that God has no real world effect. I am saying that He works through the hearts and minds of humans and I would argue for in some degree in animal life as well. I'm simply saying that all of the complex processes that were required for life to evolve the way it has clearly requires a mind. The idea that it could by aw chance happen at every level of the myriad of processes, requires a leap of faith beyond anything I can muster. Of course there will always be those with sufficient hubris that they are unable to fathom a mind that much greater than their own. There you go again using lack of evidence as evidence. What about time prior to 13.7 billion years?

It isn't dramatic and it isn't hard. It is simply about giving of our own time, money or even pride in order to benefit some else. Yes you example would fall into that category. He asked the question of why bother with God if we can all do the loving thing anyway. I simply answered the question he asked. Another answer would be because I know myself and my Christian faith has led me to be a more decent person than I was before which does not make me more decent than my atheistic neighbour. Also i have found that I can do things, such as working for refugees that l that I can't do on my own outside of church.

If you had read what I've written previously you know that is not the case. I have argued repeatedly against that view, but so often it is those who are anti-Christian who believe that that is the point to the whole thing. (I am not saying that there aren't Christians who do see their faith as about punching their ticket to a better life.) We aren't judged on our good deeds, or our theology but on our hearts and minds, or the motivation for what we do. If one actually believes that it is about bettering our life in the next world, then it becomes selfish as opposed to being unselfish.Personally I think we have enough to deal with in this world that we don't need to worry about the next.

Hmmmm draw your own conclusions. If someone is led by God to help someone in need, what scientific evidence would that produce? Another area that produces no scientific evidence so you just discount it. It isn't that it is evidence that we are the result of an exterior intelligence but it is an example of another area in which science is unable to research.

Agreed And again, agreed I would agree treating others decently is a base line. Why isn't the base line the evolutionary base line of the survival of the fittest? That idea though has been more often than not ignored. Look at slavery for example, which was considered normal.
Also it is hardly unique to the Christian faith as I have said repeatedly, but you'll still carry on making that accusation.

I disagree. Sure for many that is probably true, and it is no doubt true that for those who reject Christianity that is what they think it's all about.Paul writes this in Ephesians 1. [quote] 9 he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ,
10 to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ.[/qs]Notice that he writes that it is for all things. I do agree that our lives here in this life will impact the life to come but it is about the renewal of the entire creation.I think that this is what Luther was trying to get away from by getting away from works and making it about God's grace. A graceful deity doesn't damn someone because they believed in the wrong doctrines. Again. it all boils down to having people with hearts and minds, that without thought of personal gain, desire to do the loving thing, and follow through on it to the best of their ability.

Why is there a difference? You're making up the rules as you go along.AbE Sorry, I missed this earlier. There is no physics involved. If you do something kind to someone who is impacted by that, and as a direct result is kind to someone else, is there any physics involved?

Cosmology examines the material and so far it seems that every time they find something new that it raises as many questions than answers at least in the case of QM.Maybe someday physicists will discover God's dimension. Who knows.

Ya, the way to debate is to have a vomiting emoji as great debating point. In the past I wound up doing political debates and I know enough to know that the debating to know that response was pathetic and hardly what you would expect from the owner and moderator of this forum. The put downs that Phat survives here over the years have been in horrendously poor taste, and often cruel, but he puts up with it. I agree that most here aren't like that but it is really disappointing to see it in Percy.

You guys have all sorts of theories of how empathy and altruism exist. Where is the physics in that.

Because you are just a participant I suppose means that you do have to follow the norms that a moderator would. I'd suggest that that post says more about you than it does about my views.I don't deny that the church has had numerous failings. It is made up of humans after all. There is certainly no perfect church, and many Christians have much to answer for, however there has been an enormous amount of good done by Christians as well. I have answered everything that I have been asked. I got that mocking response from you after being asked by Tangle what the point of being Christian was. So I answered the question as a statement of belief and that was your response. What kind of response would you expect to get from a Christian. I only have the Bible, the views of others, Christian or not, my observations of the world and personal experience. You say you're a theist. This is from Webster's.

quote:

---

belief in the existence of a god or gods
specifically : belief in the existence of one God viewed as the creative source of the human race and the world who transcends yet is immanent in the world

---

What is the evidence that has caused you to be a theist. How did your god create life. How is your god intervening now and did your god intervene in the evolutionary process? What is the nature of your god and what is his hope or purpose for our lives.

What is the real issue I'm avoiding. Is it lack of evidence?I have said several times that what I have is evidence is all subjective, and this is what I have. You claim that doesn't constitute evidence in your world, but it works for me.
1/ I have a written evidence in the Bible
2/ I have the fact that life and particularly sentient life exists
3/ I have the fact that we can distinguish good from evil
4/ I have life experience with the experience of love and hate, joy and sadness,
ugliness and beauty etc.I agree none of that is scientific and is rejected by pretty much everyone here. I also agree that it is not conclusive. That's fine but it is the answer I have for you wanting evidence and beyond that it is faith.Now then I posted this earlier and you chose to ignore. You take great delight in mocking other views but I have no recollection of you ever defending your own. How about an answer. You say you're a theist. This is from Webster's.

quote:

---

belief in the existence of a god or gods
specifically : belief in the existence of one God viewed as the creative source of the human race and the world who transcends yet is immanent in the world.

---

​

I get that but it is not my point. That statement is just a distraction. You stated that you ere a theist. Of course you don't know. I don't know that what I believe is correct or not. To say that your beliefs just spring from within is a meaningless cop out. If someone claims to be a theist or even a deist it does mean they believe at the very least in an external intelligence. It isn't a case of knowing but simply believing and that belief has to stem from life experience or from other influences. What is it that makes you believe in an external intelligence. It doesn't mean that you need hard or even soft evidence but something has caused you to believe that there is a higher intelligence. You say that you have faith that what you believe is true. Faith in what?You are happy to attack my beliefs and the beliefs of others, but you don't have the courage to tell us what it is you believe and why. Phat in particular gets mocked here all the time, and so did Faith for that matter. But they at least had the guts to stand up for what they believe.

I think I covered that in my last post Message 1796Thanks for the interesting reasonable response. Actually I think that a large percentage of the population is in that camp. In some ways I think that what you have done is taken scientific evidence as far as it can take us, at least at this time. I think that after that it is about philosophy and then theology and then whatever credence we assign to them.One thing maybe to consider is that people are telegenic. We look for meaning and purpose in both big and small ways in our lives. If we are the result of a creative intelligence we should at least consider that if, we are the result of that creative intelligence and we assign meaning and purpose to our lives, then we could consider that we should look at ourselves to discern that purpose.Of course the problem in doing that is that we can obviously see that there are many, and often conflicting views, about the purpose and meaning of people. This then goes back to my original point in this thread, which has gone a million miles off topic. I suggest that the foundational meaning and purpose of our lives is representative of the god we worship regardless of whether we assign a name or not to this creative intelligence.