A call for good samaritans

[Solo]

Solo - where I have difficutly with your analogy (and please understand it is with your analogy, not necessarily with what you are attempting to convey)
is that you have not provided reason as to why Jesus should be the 'fireperson to follow out".

What would make you follow a man with a fire suit, flashlight, and oxygen tank out of a burning building instead of a drunk or a blind man?

 

[Rick W]

Solo - where I have difficutly with your analogy (and please understand it is with your analogy, not necessarily with what you are attempting to convey)
is that you have not provided reason as to why Jesus should be the 'fireperson to follow out".

He was sent by the Fire Chief. The fireman is His Son.
;-)

 

[Guest]

Solo - in your analogy you have already discounted the other people as being able to get you out of the burning buildling - and as such you have set up your analogy to express that. While I realize that you already believe in Jesus Christ, to the person with no belief how are they able to recognize Jesus as the only capable fireperson?

Again - to a follower of another belief system or no-belief system - there could be multiple firepersons trying to rescue them.

You have not made the case as to why YOUR fireperson should be the one to follow.

Again - please understand that I understand what you are attempting to communicate, I just believe the analogy is faulty.

 

[Solo]

Solo - in your analogy you have already discounted the other people as being able to get you out of the burning buildling - and as such you have set up your analogy to express that. While I realize that you already believe in Jesus Christ, to the person with no belief how are they able to recognize Jesus as the only capable fireperson?

Again - to a follower of another belief system or no-belief system - there could be multiple firepersons trying to rescue them.

You have not made the case as to why YOUR fireperson should be the one to follow.

Again - please understand that I understand what you are attempting to communicate, I just believe the analogy is faulty.

Answer the question, What would make you follow a man with a fire suit, flashlight, and oxygen tank out of a burning building instead of a drunk or a blind man?

 

[Rick W]

Again - please understand that I understand what you are attempting to communicate, ...

Then the analogy was successful. And I'm quite sure peace4all understood also.



It still comes down to faith anyhow. If proof then no faith.
Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.



1) One doesn't need to be saved anyway. Faith that no works are neccessary.

2) One can save himself/herself. Faith in oneself to do the works.

3) One cannot save himself/herself. Faith in another that the work is already done.

 

[christian_soldier]

Whose are you? Whom do you serve?

I do not remember saying that the "divine does not exists". Rather, I stated that as I understood this discussion was to the question if the divine did exist or not.

Seeking to explain one's existence might very well lead to a conclusion that that question "Does the divine exist?"

 

[peace4all]

in response.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ncCNwbb5Jc

A nice video by Jake. An Atheist.

 

[Solo]

A person does not believe in fire insurance because there is absolutely no way that a fire can or will ever burn the building that this person lives in. This person has never seen a building burn down, but has heard from others that it happens. People continually tell him that he should get fire insurance because his building could burn down, but since his unbelief does not support this belief he does not get fire insurance. This person does not care if others have fire insurance as long as they do not push their fire insurance on him.

One day lightning hits this person's building and it burns to the ground destroying all that the person has ever had or will have; and there is no fire insurance to save this person from this great loss. There is absolutely nothing that this person can do but weep and gnash his teeth because all that he had or hoped for was gone.

The fact of the matter is that it is very important to seek the truth as opposed to not for the end result will be forever.

 

[peace4all]

Thats only if your house is made of flamable materials.

 

[TanNinety]

in response.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ncCNwbb5Jc

A nice video by Jake. An Atheist.

I am not sure what I was supposed to absorb from that video. Could you clarify if you are a strong atheist or weak? The reason why I have asked you if you as an atheist who at the end of the day believes in "There is no God" as your core statement of belief is to figure out if you were a strong atheist.

Strong atheism makes a positive statement of belief. It takes a 'leap of faith' to be a strong atheist because you are taking the step to say "There is no God" based on personal evidence and subjective proof.

You seem to want to take a non-faith based stance. Atheism is not non-faith based, agnosticism is. The core statements made by both atheism and theism are based on faith. This faith is based on evidence or lack there of.

It does not matter if you are a strong atheist or a weak atheist, at the end of the day you have not enough proof to say "there is no God", but you accept this as your core statement of belief which is based on faith.

May be the confusion arises as you are thinking that you do not need to produce any proof of the non-existence of God. This is a common mistake made by many atheists (I have been guilty of it myself). Atheism is not based only on "verifying" the evidence provided by theism and rejecting of it. Atheism is based on providing it's own evidence for the non-existence of God. So far you haven't produced such evidence. What you have to offer is your belief and your faith at the end of the day.

Are you assuming that atheism is non-faith based and that you do not require to show evidence that God does not exist?

 

[TanNinety]

peace4all, may be this will help me clear things up a bit.

Let’s say that I said president X is a very good president and provide evidence Y for it.
You claim that president X is not a very good president. You cannot prove your position true by simply refuting evidence Y. You have to provide positive evidence Z to back up your claim of why he is not a good president. If you do not have evidence Z against president X then you are taking the leap of faith in making your claim that president X is not a very good president.

Now, you refuting/ignoring/refusing the evidence for theism does not make you an atheist. To be an atheist you have to take that leap of faith in claiming that X is not true without having your evidence Z. To think that an atheist does not need to provide evidence for “there is no Godâ€Â, objectively is being dishonest with yourself. It means that you are saying that I believe in something that I do not feel the necessity to prove. That my friend is faith, it is just not religious, but it is faith nonetheless.

 

[Gabbylittleangel]

Hi peace4all,

I would like to make two suggestions.

First, pick up a copy of "More Than a Carpenter" by Josh McDowell. You can get one for five bucks, and they are available on Amazon, or BAM, or just about any good book store. It is an easy read ~ you can read the whole thing in one or two evenings. But it is hard to put down. It challenges you to account for who Jesus is. Either He is who He said He is, or He isn't.

(*edit*
I found a link that gives you a look at a chapter ~ten pages~
http://www.ohiou.edu/~chialpha/pdf/MORE ... PENTER.pdf)


Suggestion Two: Ask God to prove Himself to you. However, please do it with the attitude that if God is real that you want to believe it, not with the 'silly rules' attitude. Ask yourself, "If God is real, do I want to believe it?"

 

[christian_soldier]

Suggestion Two: Ask God to prove Himself to you. However, please do it with the attitude that if God is real that you want to believe it, not with the 'silly rules' attitude. Ask yourself, "If God is real, do I want to believe it?"

Disbelief is generally self-imposed denial. Creation screams out Designer, Truth shouts conviction, but once one answers the call, then they are required to give up the selfishness of carnal pursuits.

It is a small price to pay for the assurance of Eternal Salvation, but, to many, looms before them as a mountain of debt.

 

[Solo]

Hi peace4all,

I would like to make two suggestions.

First, pick up a copy of "More Than a Carpenter" by Josh McDowell. You can get one for five bucks, and they are available on Amazon, or BAM, or just about any good book store. It is an easy read ~ you can read the whole thing in one or two evenings. But it is hard to put down. It challenges you to account for who Jesus is. Either He is who He said He is, or He isn't.

(*edit*
I found a link that gives you a look at a chapter ~ten pages~
http://www.ohiou.edu/~chialpha/pdf/MORE ... PENTER.pdf)


Suggestion Two: Ask God to prove Himself to you. However, please do it with the attitude that if God is real that you want to believe it, not with the 'silly rules' attitude. Ask yourself, "If God is real, do I want to believe it?"

My twelve year old son began reading More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell this week. He was born again when he was seven years old.

 

[peace4all]

wow uhh.. lots of things to respond to.

First off. I consider myself a mediumish atheist. Where, Yes, I still can turn, but it is very unlikely, because I have seen so much evidence that religion is false.

I sort of see the president analogy, however. It seems that instead I am taking the "Im not going to vote" way out.'
Or I can look at it, that I can disprove and shoot down all the evidence y about president X, and then President A, doesn't make me do some of the things that president X is going to force me to, and I like that.

When I was younger and searching more for religion, I went with my aunt to a Catholic Church, and I asked God to show me he was real, because thats what my aunt said would show me how to have faith.

Well. Nothing special happened so.

I will see about the book, however I am extremly poor at college


Did I miss anything else from anyone?

 

[christian_soldier]

Not to be offensive, peace, but you seem to be about as wishy-washy as they come.

:roll:

Oh, and you did not respond to the issue of having to discriminate because God hates people. Please provide a reference.

 

[TanNinety]

I sort of see the president analogy, however. It seems that instead I am taking the "Im not going to vote" way out.'
Or I can look at it, that I can disprove and shoot down all the evidence y about president X, and then President A, doesn't make me do some of the things that president X is going to force me to, and I like that.

“I’m not going to vote†= “I am not going to say there is a God or there isn’t a God†= Agnosticism.

You are obviously not taking that ‘way out’ because you have already voted on “there isn’t a Godâ€Â.

Again, by simply disproving president X’s evidence you haven’t provided that president A is superior or is a plausible solution. You still have to provide evidence for your president A that he is objectively good and provide evidence B for him that I can examine.

So far you haven’t provided enough evidence for your president A but simply have shown that you choose president A over X and somehow I have to believe that you have made a more objective choice that does not involve a leap of faith.

Can you show how your president A doesn’t involve a leap of faith? You are special pleading your case. You ask for evidence to prove theism but you never produce any for your atheism. I repeat, atheism is simply not verifying and refuting the evidence of theism.

 

[Veritas]

Wow, alot has been said here since I last checked.

And yes, TanNinety, you've followed up on what I was trying to get peace4all to realize. I hope peace4all does now.

peace4all wrote:
Because then I have to follow what I see as silly rules, and I have to hate and discrimate against people that this "God" doesn't like.

Not sure what you see as silly rules. Just so you know, I don't feel like I "have" to follow any rules. If I didn't "want" to try to live like Jesus, I wouldn't

I think it's too bad that you think that we hate and discriminate against people, or that you think God doesn't like people.

There is the old concept of love the sinner and hate the sin. This is what I believe we are to do. This is what I believe God does. Not all of us, (Sorry Calvinists, I don't want to debate this right now), believe God has doomed certain people. Many Christians believe God truly loves everyone. I do. People just have the freedom to say "No" to God.

Simply put, I believe God loves peace4all very much

Now we are sort of getting back to the Original Post ;)

 

[Guest]

[quoteThere is the old concept of love the sinner and hate the sin. This is what I believe we are to do. This is what I believe God does. Not all of us, (Sorry Calvinists, I don't want to debate this right now), believe God has doomed certain people. Many Christians believe God truly loves everyone. I do. People just have the freedom to say "No" to God. [/quote]

"love the sinner" is a nice catch phrase, but all to often in Christian circles it is not practiced. Oh, don't get me wrong, we say it enough times, we want to believe that we live that out - but do we really?

Gandhi once said that he would have become a Christian, if it wasn't for Christians.

 

[Solo]

Gandhi once said that he would have become a Christian, if it wasn't for Christians.

I am not sure that Gandhi's excuse is going to stand up while God judges him. The truth is that Gandhi rejected Jesus Christ.