Would you buy a car, a house, a yacht on just the seller's

[Zzyzx]

.
Would you buy a car, a house, a yacht on just the seller's word (assuming you had access to necessary funds)?

Wouldn't you carefully check (or have checked) those items before paying substantial amounts of money? Of course you would, you're no fool – not gullible – not a rube who just fell off the pumpkin truck. Right?

Checking for truth and accuracy is wise before committing to a course of action or making significant decisions. Right?

If someone tells you he can walk on water you're not likely to believe that unless you can see it done without tricks. If someone tells you that he saw a person walking on water you are even less likely to believe (if you have a lick of sense). If an anonymous person claims that another anonymous person saw the trick "long ago and far away" it would seem as though that would be STRONGLY doubted – unless it was told in religion promotional literature and/or by prophets and priests.

Why set aside judgment and rational fact-checking in order to accept what is said by religion promoters or religious literature?

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 22 by OnceConvinced]

I spent a lot of time as a non-Christian being a secular nice guy. Letting others go first, sacrificing because that's what a man does. I got married too and should have pulled the pin after a year but I could handle it and she needed looking after.

And as my disappointments came my way I found myself getting bitter at the wasted time as well. Why be nice in a world where I should be more ruthless?

And so when Christianity was formally put to me I decided to honour the notions of goodness, justice and sacrifice that I believed in and I believe they are honoured best in knowing the creator sacrificed it all on the cross.

Heck let's face it being nice in an evolutionary world is either because you are a fool or you have to be nice to get by. Thinking otherwise is being taken for a scam.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 23 by Zzyzx]

It appears as though many who claim to be Jesus-Followers (including many preachers and prophets) pursue "vain" earthly rewards. Is that because they are "not REAL Christians?"

Nah, it's because they are real Christians.

Since the promise of "heaven" for "souls" in an "afterlife" cannot be shown to be anything more than imagination or wishful thinking, is it wise to attempt to "build treasures there" rather than in the real world we inhabit and that we KNOW exists?

Delayed gratification is a real enough concept. Do you not recognise its use in life?

Exactly WHAT "materialist traps that leave (me) in a cycle of poverty" am I (a Non-Theist / Non-Jesus-Believer) likely to fall for that you (a Jesus-Believer / follower) will NOT fall for?

I don't think my point is so difficult. Observe others if not yourself.

I would venture a guess that I am far less likely to fall for "materialist traps" or scams than you (generic term) religious people who demonstrate willingness to believe (fall for) ancient belief systems based upon testimonials about invisible, undetectable, supernatural entities and "miracles" and "divinity" and "resurrection" (that can only be "found" emotionally and cannot be distinguished from imagination or delusion).

The ascetic life is as big a scam as the material one. A materialist is at least honest in pursuing their needs whereas an ascetic seems to choose to be delusional in pretending they don't need material things.

When we adopt our belief system there is a metaphysical underpinning, this is the invisible, undetectable, supernatural entity. It cannot be distinguished from imagination or delusion and yet we all have it. For instance, the belief in cause and effect is one metaphysical belief we share (I hope). Some people who reject free will do so on the basis of their metaphysical belief in cause and effect.

Are Jesus-Followers immune from maxing out credit cards and paying interest?

No.

Tell that again to this Non-Theist who uses NO credit cards, owes NO money, pays NO interest. How, exactly, are my theistic friends superior in this regard (when almost all of them use credit cards, borrow money, pay interest -- and worry about bills)?

You know credit cards are just tools. I use them so long as I can pay them off. Heck given life there are times when it is still worth using them even if you can't see a way to pay them off. But I wouldn't reject the tool, just know how to use it and why you are using it.

Are you somehow not aware that Non-Christians also experience friendships, love, sound teaching, joy and hope? Christianity has no monopoly on such things (though many Christians seem to think they do have a monopoly -- and are ignorant of attractive alternatives).

I compared scams and results. There may be scams, apart from Christianity, where you find friends and so on.

Kindly detail that "irony" on your side of the fence.

Clownboat said: To be clear, we are talking about the Jesus from the Bible that has talking snakes and donkeys right? It's that Jesus that stops people from believing scams, right? Gotta love the irony.

He thinks that miracles indicate Christianity is a scam but Jesus stops people from believing in scams and finds that ironic.

Whereas for me, miracles leave my eyes wide open to the faith based nature of belief. So my irony was that the nature of my beliefs protects me from scams.

[Clownboat]

If person is not able to gene test is he really man, and can’t in any way know that he is not really woman, I think he is not guilty. However I think everyone could understand that rape is wrong, or that murder is wrong.

I was asking you these questions so that we could verify if you really knew how Jesus thinks like you had claimed previously.
Thanks for clarifying that though.

[Clownboat]

So now being partially female doesn't matter? Where is your consistancy? Does a vagina no longer make a man at least partially female (again, your words)?

Yes, real vagina can be accepted as reason to believe that person is woman.

On who's authority? Can you provide the source for this claim? I sure hope it's not you claiming to know what Jesus thinks. I assume we are done with that.?

This all seems so arbitrary. If your a man born with a vagina, then it is OK to be in a gay marriage even though I also make the claim that gay marriage is against what the god that created you approves of.

[Mudcat]

.
Would you buy a car, a house, a yacht on just the seller's word (assuming you had access to necessary funds)?
<snip>
Why set aside judgment and rational fact-checking in order to accept what is said by religion promoters or religious literature?

Hi Zzyzx,

I understand the sentiment of the OP, I think. I would offer a counter question.

Does a person have to eat a whole chocolate cake to know it's a good cake or could they arrive at the conclusion that it's a good cake by eating a slice?



My thinking is that Christianity is a bit more like the cake than buying a yacht. Speaking anecdotally, their came an experiential point in which I became a Christian. It was reception of grace and mercy surrounded by repentance and a faith in a fairly simple Gospel concept.

I see that as the good cake slice. Certainly lots of people accept the entirety of what ever denominational cake that is around as good and just leave it at that. While others scrutinize the remainder trying to determine what other slices are good and which ones aren't.

From my understanding, becoming a Christian... doesn't necessarily entail becoming a <insert sect here>, a Trinitarian, fundamentalist, liberal, inerrantist, infalliblist, etc...

I for one think it's prudent to take a look at that sort of thing and figure out what's what.

I think it's fair to be critical of religious promoters, but as I see it, my path to salvation was pretty much a one on one spiritual encounter with the Holy Spirit. Let me ask you, how would you go about scrutinizing the Holy Spirit?

Sseems a really different sort of task that scrutinizing a pastor, religious type leader, missionary, etc..

All the best,

Mudcat

[Zzyzx]

.

I spent a lot of time as a non-Christian being a secular nice guy. Letting others go first, sacrificing because that's what a man does. I got married too and should have pulled the pin after a year but I could handle it and she needed looking after.

There is a big difference between being "nice" and being a doormat that allows others to "walk all over." Marrying or staying married because "she needed looking after" doesn't seem like a wise decision (though it may be in some cases).

And as my disappointments came my way I found myself getting bitter at the wasted time as well. Why be nice in a world where I should be more ruthless?

Many of us know how to be considerate, thoughtful, mannerly, respectful BUT have boundaries that prevent anyone from taking advantage. For instance, I help people in many ways as long as they are deserving. However, as soon as there is any inkling that they are "users" or taking advantage that is the end of the help.

And so when Christianity was formally put to me I decided to honour the notions of goodness, justice and sacrifice that I believed in and I believe they are honoured best in knowing the creator sacrificed it all on the cross.

How did becoming Christian change anything? Did it impart better judgment about who and when to help? Did it make you feel more Christlike?

Heck let's face it being nice in an evolutionary world is either because you are a fool or you have to be nice to get by. Thinking otherwise is being taken for a scam.

I strongly disagree.

1) We all live in an "evolutionary" (evolving – changing) world and society
2) If one is a little beyond gullible or naive they can be nice without being a fool or a doormat
3) If one's objective in life is to "get by" perhaps they should rethink their priorities.
4) If believers can't imagine how to be nice / helpful / respectful without being fools, perhaps they would benefit by seeking advice from Non-Believers who know how that is done.

[Zzyzx]

.
Hi Mudcat,

Thanks for the reasoned, thoughtful reply

Does a person have to eat a whole chocolate cake to know it's a good cake or could they arrive at the conclusion that it's a good cake by eating a slice?

Okay, let's try on your "slice" idea.

My thinking is that Christianity is a bit more like the cake than buying a yacht. Speaking anecdotally, their came an experiential point in which I became a Christian. It was reception of grace and mercy surrounded by repentance and a faith in a fairly simple Gospel concept.

My "slice" appears to have been different from yours. I was raised by a devoutly Catholic mother and a nominally Catholic father – and went to Catholic school in early grades. However, I questioned and doubted the tall tales that nuns and priests told with a straight face and insisted that I "believe on faith" so I could "go to heaven" – and threatened all sorts of punishment in real life and in an "afterlife" if I disobeyed.

I didn't buy that line. In other words, the slice wasn't at all appealing. How many bad slices do you suggest trying in order to find one that is at least minimally acceptable?

I see that as the good cake slice. Certainly lots of people accept the entirety of what ever denominational cake that is around as good and just leave it at that. While others scrutinize the remainder trying to determine what other slices are good and which ones aren't.

After rejecting Catholicism I explored a few Protestant religions and found them to be even more unconvincing than RCC. Thus, a number of distasteful slices.

From my understanding, becoming a Christian... doesn't necessarily entail becoming a <insert sect here>, a Trinitarian, fundamentalist, liberal, inerrantist, infalliblist, etc...

I for one think it's prudent to take a look at that sort of thing and figure out what's what.

Many who HAVE taken a "look at that sort of thing" have figured out that it is imagination, fantasy, fiction, folklore, myth, legend or downright fraud. Should they set aside reasoning and simply accept indoctrination by one of the religious cults / denominations / sects?

I think it's fair to be critical of religious promoters, but as I see it, my path to salvation was pretty much a one on one spiritual encounter with the Holy Spirit. Let me ask you, how would you go about scrutinizing the Holy Spirit?

First, I would have to ask you what the heck we are talking about and ask you to define, describe, identify carefully and accurately what you ask me to scrutinize. Second, I would need to know if the subject is real or imaginary, Third, I would ask how to make that determination, fourth, I would ask where I can obtain verifiable information about the "holy spirit."

When I have asked similar questions in many past debates, the proponents / religionists have apparently drawn a blank – unable to provide any useable information about the "holy spirit" other than vague references in unverifiable religion promotional literature and unverifiable personal testimonials. Perhaps you can improve on that?

Seems a really different sort of task that scrutinizing a pastor, religious type leader, missionary, etc..

Perhaps; however, the pastor, leader, missionary can at least usually be identified as real and existing. The proposed "holy spirit" CANNOT be shown to exist outside imagination, religious fantasy, pious fraud, or creative folklore.

[OnceConvinced]

Heck let's face it being nice in an evolutionary world is either because you are a fool or you have to be nice to get by. Thinking otherwise is being taken for a scam.

For me being a nice guy isn't a choice. I just couldn't be a nasty guy. I couldn't be cruel. I couldn't live my life at the expense of the weak. It just wouldn't work for me. It's the way I have evolved I guess. I'd love to be meaner, I'd love to be more selfish, have less empathy and be less concerned about the wellbeing of others. I've actually gone to the other extreme, which means the thought of hurting anyone can sometimes be a detriment to me (see example of remaining in a marriage I should have got out of).

Sure, evolution isn't pretty, but then why should everything be pretty? Christians may think it should be pretty, but reality shows us it isn't. But just because we're nice, doesn't make us a fool. It's just the way we are and for most of us we can't change our natures. I guess thousands of years ago, most of us nice guys would have been killed off by the bad boys. It's a good thing that brains usually triumph over brawn.

[OnceConvinced]

Does a person have to eat a whole chocolate cake to know it's a good cake or could they arrive at the conclusion that it's a good cake by eating a slice?

My thinking is that Christianity is a bit more like the cake than buying a yacht. Speaking anecdotally, their came an experiential point in which I became a Christian. It was reception of grace and mercy surrounded by repentance and a faith in a fairly simple Gospel concept.
t

As a Christian, I was always taught that it was either the entire cake or nothing at all. You can't be lukewarm otherwise God will spit you out of his mouth. (Yes! It's God who will reject you, not the other way around). You have to jump into the pool, not just dip your toes into it.

So apparently if you want to be a true Christian you have to eat the entire cake, not just a slice. So imagine if you wanted to check out every cake. You wouldn't be able to just take a slice. You'd surely have to consume bulk amounts of cake.

[1213]

But if you educate them, then they have no excuse. They might reject your education. They might reject your God and then where do they end up? In Hell. You are just making things way worse for them. I know I would rather be ignorant and never have to be concerned with burning in hell than to be enlightened and then have to face it.

In your scenario, I cannot see Evangelism as a positive thing. I see it as a horrible thing, something that should be avoided at all costs.

Eternal life is for righteous, according to the Bible. I think person may be righteous even if he doesn’t have all knowledge. In my opinion lack of knowledge is no excuse for unrighteousness. If person rejects the teachings of Jesus, I think he shows that he is not righteous. And even if he would not have heard of those teachings, he still would have been unrighteous. (I have understood righteousness is more than knowledge or works. It is right understanding or attitude).

Gospel is good news, sins are forgiven. I think it is good to tell that to people. Those who are righteous accept it gladly, and those who are unrighteous, don’t accept it, because they love more evil than good. (They don’t accept forgiveness about something they think is not evil).

This is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their works were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the light, and doesn't come to the light, lest his works would be exposed. But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his works may be revealed, that they have been done in God."
John 3:19-21