I think that examining how dogmatically one holds faith is very important. This comes as a response to a statement made by Moegreche regarding faith. I think his post sums up a lot of common arguments, so let's take a look:
''We believe what is presented before us. Now, maybe later on we get evidence that is incompatible with our belief and then we can assess whether or not to abandon that belief. I think it's hard to fault someone who was raised in a religious environment and counts certain experiences as God's love for them. It's what their environment surrounds them with, so their belief is completely understandable (to me, at least).''
I was talking to my brother the other day (who is devoutly Greek Orthodox) and I stumbled on a question I htought would be interesting: ''If someone had a time machine and could take you back to 33 AD and showed you that Jesus' ressurection took place, would you stop believing in Christ?'' Keep in mind that the resurrection is the cornerstone to the salvation described in Christianity. Unsurprising to me, he replied he didn't know what he would do (he has very good reasons for believing, trust me), but for others who haven't been through the experiences he has, I'm wondering whether your response would be similar, which would make me question why exactly you believe in Christianity in the first place.
So the question I ask, is what point of logical, or objective proof must one reach to fundamentally change another's faith/belief where applicable (whether it be Christian, Muslim, agnostic, atheist etc.)? Or are there too many irrational emotions involved in this part of human decision making?
Other than merely answering those questions, I would like everyone to state their faith and what the threshold of it would be. I will start.
I am an agnostic atheist. It would take objective proof of the existence of a deity to convince me. Scientific inconsistencies and gaps in human knowledge about the origins of the universe really don't annoy me, as practically everything in this universe within the realm of human knowledge has been explained using scientific method, and the things which haven't been explained are being worked on.
2. I was once a true Christian, science has given me much more.
I couldn't agree more, I was christian 'till i was 7. Now, the only belief i capitalize is Pastafarianism/Atheism, because i respect both of these beliefs, as in their open minded view on the world. And yes, Religions give you a lot to think about. Science also gives a lot to think about. Now what's the difference? Science can be proven. ~
But it would be worth having a second look at if given the light of the most incredible aspect of it being true.
We could just ask the big cheese himself whether or not it was true. A much simpler solution than going on treasure hunts for non existent archaological evidence.
So if you're going to say new testament is what to follow for this God you do also have to take into account the old.
For Christians it is the teachings of Christ that take precedence. The god in the OT is regarded and described differently from Christ's father in the NT. Of course there's still stuff Christians take from the OT, but it's not all valid. Equally Muslims accept the OT and NT but take Mohemmed's word as the final one.
As for general atheist/theist discussions about hell etc., you guys have gone so far off topic you need a plane ticket back. Let me help you. The question I posed was:
''For atheists, would you worship this newly proven diety. Why/why not?
For theists, would you still continue to be practicing Christians/Muslims/Jews etc. and by practicing I mean go to church, abide by your faiths principles etc? Why/why not?''
We could just ask the big cheese himself whether or not it was true. A much simpler solution than going on treasure hunts for non existent archaological evidence.
Yes we could, and what if it did turn out to be true? Would you want to follow that God?
''For atheists, would you worship this newly proven diety. Why/why not?
As I've said before it all depends on what this deity is like and even if he/she/it would even want worship.
Yes we could, and what if it did turn out to be true? Would you want to follow that God?
Not particularly, but I'd do it anyway. If the god from the OT is the real deal, I'd worship the hell out of him so as to avoid an eternity of fiery torment. If a bit idolator caused him to slay millions, I don't think he'd look too kindly on my decadent lifestyle. It would be like removing the wager from Pascal's wager. It would be folly not to follow it through.
Not particularly, but I'd do it anyway. If the god from the OT is the real deal, I'd worship the hell out of him so as to avoid an eternity of fiery torment. If a bit idolator caused him to slay millions, I don't think he'd look too kindly on my decadent lifestyle. It would be like removing the wager from Pascal's wager. It would be folly not to follow it through.
That reminds me of someone... What was his name? I know it means "Wolf" and its German, but I can't remember the specifics...
Anyway, he is the same as him. Why would you want to warship from fear?
P.S According to the Bible there are some things just to hard for god to do, such as defeat iron chariots. It would be easy to take over the Biblical god with tanks. REVOLUTION!
That reminds me of someone... What was his name? I know it means "Wolf" and its German, but I can't remember the specifics...
Please don't tell me that was a sarcastic joke comparing god to Hitler. You do know that would be the same god the Jews worship? Neither funny nor clever.
According to the Bible there are some things just to hard for god to do, such as defeat iron chariots. It would be easy to take over the Biblical god with tanks. REVOLUTION!
Until he opened a giant chasm underneath you and then closed it back up...or destroyed them any other way he felt like....
