Philosophy Now Forum

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 2:47 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:16 pm Faith is simple ...

Would you like to explain what it is? Simply?

Simply? It's believing what God has said...

And it's belief of a level that it results in action and personal investment, not mere detached credence.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 3:29 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Sep 18, 2021 6:13 pm I'm still not quite seeing it. What do you mean by "inside" and "outside"? Maybe you could clear that up for me.

If you or anyone claims there is an entry point, then that suggests there is an 'inside' and an 'outside'... see?

Yes, I've got it now.

Yes, there is an inside and an outside. Not all people whom God created stand in relationship to Him.

Atheists, for example, choose not to. They are outside, and by adamant choice. Others have never thought about it. They are outside by lack of attention to it. Others choose other gods. They are outside by allegiance.

None of this is surprising, if God has a particular nature and identity.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Sep 18, 2021 4:53 pm The fact that people believe different things says nothing whatsoever about the truth itself.

It shows that your idea of a god and the 2,000-yr-story that you base all of your beliefs on, is but a blip in time that doesn't resonate consistently, nor was it shared or acknowledged, throughout Earth's or humankind's history.

Well, you'd have to be aware that it's been the dominant story for 2,00 years, if only from the fact that the Bible's the faraway bestseller every single year of its printing. It's so popular that they don't even include it in most "bestseller" lists. (5 billiion have been sold, according to Guinness; and even more printed and circulated in sections.) And you'd have to acknowledge that the Torah, the Old Testament, has been around for thousands of years before that. That's a pretty widely-available narrative and set of teachings -- THE most widely available one, in fact.

Whether particular sets of people believe in it or not is the matter of debate. Unless one happens to think that truth and majoritarianism are the same thing, there's no particular concern in the fact that some people continue to disbelieve. Even were it so, it could well be the truth, nonetheless.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 3:29 pm Why would any god be so static?

When did you decide that faithfulness was not a virtue?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:45 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 3:29 pm Why would any god be so static?

When did you decide that faithfulness was not a virtue?

Again, you distort... which is what makes you look like a liar for your beliefs.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:49 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:45 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 3:29 pm Why would any god be so static?

When did you decide that faithfulness was not a virtue?

Again, you distort... which is what makes you look like a liar for your beliefs.

I didn't distort. Faithfulness requires consistency. You use the word "static." Static means "to remain in a state," and faithfulnes is remaining in a state of reliability.

So let me put the question back to you: would you want God to be "unstatic," unfaithful and unreliable?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:58 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:49 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:45 pm
When did you decide that faithfulness was not a virtue?

Again, you distort... which is what makes you look like a liar for your beliefs.

I didn't distort. Faithfulness requires consistency. You use the word "static." Static means "to remain in a state," and faithfulnes is remaining in a state of reliability.

So let me put the question back to you: would you want God to be "unstatic," unfaithful and unreliable?

That is exactly what god appears to be.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:45 pm Yes, there is an inside and an outside.

None of this is surprising, if God has a particular nature and identity.

...according to man, and how man imagines/envisions his god to be reflected in himself and humans. All very obviously self-serving and small-minded.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:45 pm

Lacewing wrote:

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Sep 18, 2021 4:53 pm The fact that people believe different things says nothing whatsoever about the truth itself.

It shows that your idea of a god and the 2,000-yr-story that you base all of your beliefs on, is but a blip in time that doesn't resonate consistently, nor was it shared or acknowledged, throughout Earth's or humankind's history.

Well, you'd have to be aware that it's been the dominant story for 2,00 years

Humankind's other religions throughout history have been dominant stories for thousands of years too. Humans like to explain things and feel comforted/empowered by imagining/envisioning gods.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Sep 18, 2021 4:53 pm Unless one happens to think that truth and majoritarianism are the same thing, there's no particular concern in the fact that some people continue to disbelieve.

...or believe.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Sep 18, 2021 4:53 pm Even were it so, it could well be the truth, nonetheless.

Yet... it continually and consistently looks more like the limited and manipulated handiwork of man than of a god.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 5:19 pm ...All very obviously self-serving and small-minded.

Hardly.

"Self-serving" is the one thing one does not get to do, if God exists.

On the other hand, if one pretends He doesn't, then "self" is really all one has, or can have, to serve. With God gone, there's no good reason to serve anybody else.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:58 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:49 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:45 pm When did you decide that faithfulness was not a virtue?

Again, you distort... which is what makes you look like a liar for your beliefs.

I didn't distort. Faithfulness requires consistency. You use the word "static." Static means "to remain in a state," and faithfulnes is remaining in a state of reliability.

You convolute terms/ideas to support your beliefs, and then make absurd accusations as a result. Why do you represent your theism with such obvious lies?

Consistency is not the same as static. Consistency refers to steady and even, which can include growth. Static means unchanging, fixated, and non-evolving. Faithfulness refers to loyalty and trusting. How would it ever make sense for faithfulness to be fixated and non-evolving?

You took your dishonest nonsense even further by suggesting that I 'decided faithfulness is not a virtue'. Where is your honor for honest communication? These things you twist and make-up are so obvious and self-serving. It's very revealing that you go to such lengths... and that the supposed Christian morals (you refer to) would support that. You distort and lie more than any atheist I personally know.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:34 pm

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 2:47 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:16 pm Faith is simple ...

Would you like to explain what it is? Simply?

Simply? It's believing what God has said...

You do not equate, "belief," and, "faith," then?

You would not say believing other things is faith?

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 6:02 pm ...absurd accusations...

They're called "dictionary definitions." You'll get used to them one day.

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 6:14 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:34 pm

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 2:47 pm
Would you like to explain what it is? Simply?

Simply? It's believing what God has said...

You do not equate, "belief," and, "faith," then?

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Hebrew_Ro ... tion/Faith

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 5:25 pm "Self-serving" is the one thing one does not get to do, if God exists.

Ah, such righteous Christians! Never serving themselves! No distortions or lies! All because God exists!

You continually demonstrate otherwise. So you must be talking about some imaginary Christians (that you claim to be part of).

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 6:20 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 6:02 pm ...absurd accusations...

They're called "dictionary definitions." You'll get used to them one day.

I pointed out the distortion of your definitions. Check an actual dictionary, not the distorted one you consult in your head to validate your dishonesty and delusion.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 6:22 pm

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 6:14 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Sep 19, 2021 4:34 pm
Simply? It's believing what God has said...

You do not equate, "belief," and, "faith," then?

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Hebrew_Ro ... tion/Faith

The question is neither theological or etymological. You don't have to answer if you want to evade the obvious. I'm asking whether you equate belief and faith. If someone says they believe something is that faith. Of course that would contradict your statement that faith is believing what God has said.

So which is it? Is all believing faith, or only believing what God said faith? In your view, not the words of some commentary.