1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

Can a person choose to believe in god?

Discussion in 'Fred's House of Pancakes' started by daniel, Jan 26, 2007.

Page 5 of 8
  1. Proco

    Proco Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    2,570
    172
    28
    Location:
    The Beautiful NJ Shore
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    III
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(airportkid @ Jan 30 2007, 02:27 PM) [snapback]382908[/snapback]</div>
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Jan 30 2007, 04:02 PM) [snapback]382975[/snapback]</div>
    People also die regardless of the advances of medical science. You could argue that if medical science saves a person, then it isn't their turn to go. Two people get afflicted with HIV/AIDS and follow the same battery of treatment. One lives for the next 20 years with no problems. The other only lives 5 years. Why? The advances in medical science were the same for the two. Theoretically it should have the same effect.

    You could also argue that, if your life is being stretched out on a machine, it's not your time yet.
     
    #81 Proco, Jan 30, 2007
  2. tripp

    tripp Which it's a 'ybrid, ain't it?

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    4,717
    79
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    I dont think that's what Airport kid is saying. He was objecting to the deterministic nature of the statement... and the learned helplessness that comes with that kind of thinking. I don't think that's what TJ meant though at first it came across that way to me.
     
    #82 tripp, Jan 30, 2007
  3. efusco

    efusco Moderator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    19,891
    1,192
    9
    Location:
    Nixa, MO
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Jan 30 2007, 03:02 PM) [snapback]382975[/snapback]</div>
    The problem, and where you're "wrong" is the word "slated" A clear predetermination term presuming that there is someone or something that determines when that time will be. Many of us don't accept that presumption, many who believe in God do.
     
    #83 efusco, Jan 30, 2007
  4. airportkid

    airportkid Will Fly For Food

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2005
    2,191
    538
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area CA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Jan 30 2007, 01:18 PM) [snapback]382986[/snapback]</div>
    "Slated" to go. "Time" to go. Both of those imply something PREdetermined.

    Tripp is correct - I object to the predeterministic slant.

    Yes, of course when biological machinery breaks down, wears out, gets damaged, you die. But HOW and WHEN that happens is neither knowable NOR predetermined, but we are very capable of making that WHEN happen much later in life than it used to. Our deaths are PREdetermined only in that death itself is inevitable. The HOW and WHEN, however, are increasingly in our grasp to control, and however we come to die, by accident, disease, old age or jealous lover is in NO sense remotely "Pre"determined.

    We say "his number came up" when a guy gets flattened by a bus, but it's bad rhetoric to do so, because his "number" wasn't "up" - he was careless, or the bus driver was careless, and if any of a hundred different factors had been different the guy would still be walking a healthy man. And we are, with our increasing knowledge and abilities, gaining control over more and more of those hundred different factors.

    Hope that clarifies -

    Mark Baird
    Alameda CA
     
    #84 airportkid, Jan 30, 2007
  5. efusco

    efusco Moderator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    19,891
    1,192
    9
    Location:
    Nixa, MO
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    I like that...if our "number was up", or we were "slated" to die at some predetermined point then we'd just rise dramaticly into the sky, or spontaneously combust (ala This is Spinal Tap) rather than experience the plethora of tragic and not so tragic ways that we die.
     
    #85 efusco, Jan 30, 2007
  6. grasshopper

    grasshopper Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    425
    2
    0
    Location:
    Myrtle Beach SC
    Buy the way, just who is Luther & Calvin?
     
    #86 grasshopper, Jan 30, 2007
  7. tripp

    tripp Which it's a 'ybrid, ain't it?

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    4,717
    79
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    They're a fashion design company. They specialize in other people's dirty laundry and mens bikini briefs. :p
     
    #87 tripp, Jan 30, 2007
  8. TJandGENESIS

    TJandGENESIS Are We Having Fun Yet?

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    5,299
    47
    0
    Location:
    ★Lewisville, part of the Metroplex, Dallas, in the
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Slated to die, time is up, bought the farm, whatever. What I meant, and still mean, is that when it's time to go, it's time to go.

    You can debate the terminology all you want. Bottom line, when you die, you die, and not one of us knows when that is.
     
    #88 TJandGENESIS, Jan 30, 2007
  9. tripp

    tripp Which it's a 'ybrid, ain't it?

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2005
    4,717
    79
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Jan 30 2007, 03:45 PM) [snapback]383030[/snapback]</div>
    Well it's starting to sound like we're all agreeing with each other on this point. Now we just need to work on the 150! other issues where we don't agree. :p
     
    #89 tripp, Jan 30, 2007
  10. huskers

    huskers Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2005
    2,543
    2,486
    0
    Location:
    Nebraska
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Advanced
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Jan 30 2007, 06:00 PM) [snapback]383039[/snapback]</div>
    One small step for man... :rolleyes:
     
    #90 huskers, Jan 30, 2007
  11. hyo silver

    hyo silver Awaaaaay

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    15,232
    1,563
    0
    Location:
    off into the sunset
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Jan 30 2007, 06:45 PM) [snapback]383030[/snapback]</div>
    Does God know? Is it He who decides when our time is up? Or is it predetermined?
     
    #91 hyo silver, Jan 30, 2007
  12. daniel

    daniel Cat Lovers Against the Bomb

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    14,487
    1,518
    0
    Location:
    Spokane, WA
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Jan 30 2007, 12:24 PM) [snapback]382951[/snapback]</div>
    I think it's a big step from the peculiar sensations connected with damage to certain parts of the brain, and a built-in propensity to religion.
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Jan 30 2007, 12:24 PM) [snapback]382951[/snapback]</div>
    I think the idea is something like this (but since i don't believe it myself, I may not have the assertions quite right):

    Adam disobeyed god. This was the first sin, since Eve didn't count, bieng "just" a woman. Original = first. Then, because god is a psychopathic control-freak, he decided that all of Adams descendants be held responsible for Adam's sin, and since he's god, he gets top do whatever he wants. But then god had a dissociative personality crisis (from which he has not yet recovered) and one of his three new personalities felt bad about condemning all of humanity to everlasting infinite torture on account of an apple, and by then his chosen people had come up with this idea of ritually dumping all their sins on a baby sheep and killing it, as an atonement for their own sins. So god, feeling guilty about all those people he sent to hell unjustly, comes to earth as a man, and says I am the baby sheep this year and you can kill me. Oh, and by the way, I'm coming back real soon to be king and put everything right. But of course he isn't really dead because he's god, so he gets up afterwards and has a meal with his pals and goes back to heaven, leaving everyone to argue whether he died for the sins of the people who've already gone to hell, or for the sins of people who won't be born for another 2,000 years yet.

    I hope this clarifies matters for you. It's basically a Passover thing. But he missed it by one day and the first three gospel writers missed it, but the fourth changed the date so it would seem okay, as long as you ignored the first three.

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Jan 30 2007, 12:24 PM) [snapback]382951[/snapback]</div>
    Agreed. But god gets to be nasty because he's god. See the Book of Job. When they said he was righteous and feared god, they weren't kidding. You can be as righteous as you please, but you still better fear god 'because he's one bad mutha.
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Jan 30 2007, 01:02 PM) [snapback]382975[/snapback]</div>
    Where we disagree is the word "slated."

    When you die you die. That statement is true, obvious, and trivial. But what you choose to do can, and often does, determine whether you die today, or in 45 years from now. Things like drunk driving, looking both ways, smoking, etc.

    The day of your death is not determined until it actually happens.
     
    #92 daniel, Jan 30, 2007
  13. fshagan

    fshagan Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2005
    1,766
    4
    0
    Location:
    Noneofyourbusiness, CA
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Jan 30 2007, 03:02 AM) [snapback]382710[/snapback]</div>
    You are right ... my statement is far too inclusive and paints anyone with left leaning ideals with a broad brush. That's not fair, so I'll have to come up with a way to express my displeasure without violating my ethical standards (i.e., not responding in kind), to which I've added not using such inclusive language.

    It would be a lot easier to respond in kind, of course, but I don't think that's helpful. Perhaps I will continue to point out the errors in the accusations against me in a more neutral way, without any editorial comment. Not sure yet, but thanks for pointing out the inconsistancy in my responses.
     
    #93 fshagan, Jan 31, 2007
  14. fshagan

    fshagan Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2005
    1,766
    4
    0
    Location:
    Noneofyourbusiness, CA
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    I'm at a trade show this week, so I have limited time, but wanted to issue my mea culpa and then also respond to some in your post here. I'll probably have to wait until I get home to continue in any depth.

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Jan 30 2007, 07:27 AM) [snapback]382780[/snapback]</div>
    Each of us views different things as contradictory, whereas others do not. I'l refer you to Tripp's mention of the research on the brain, and also the musings of folks like Richard Dawkins, where religion itself may be found to be "pre wired" or genetic ... either discovery fits right into a Calvinistic viewpoint.

    The other point I would make is that there is plenty of contradictory information on almost any subject; the contradictions only show that the knowledge is incomplete. and in most religious systems, there is a bit of mystery that, for some of us, provides much of the incentive to keep learning.


    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Jan 30 2007, 07:27 AM) [snapback]382780[/snapback]</div>
    Well, the four point Calvinists I mentioned earlier, those who do not accept the "Limited Atonement" principle, do indeed believe something very close to this. But it is a minority view in Calvinism. And by the way, no fair introducing a subject I am not qualified to even discuss ... the only exposure I have had is the study of Jefferson and his possible conversion to Unitarism late in life.


    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Jan 30 2007, 07:27 AM) [snapback]382780[/snapback]</div>
    This is the argument used by those who advocate taking children away from "theists" because they "brainwash" their children and therefore are engaging in child abuse. I assume you don't go that far with your belief, but let me know if you do ... I'd love to discuss this with someone capable of rational debate like you are.

    In my discussions with atheists and agnostics, they usually express the same kind of certainty about their beliefs, and the same "genesis" of them (i.e., from their first memories), that I do about my theism. I wasn't raised in a religious home at all, and became a Christian after a spiritual search in my early teens. I was the first in my family to do so. But my earliest memory or my beliefs are that I have always believed in God. My agnostic and atheist friends tell me the same thing: they never believed. Very few have stated that they believed in God, but were persuaded by debate or study otherwise.

    I always find the statements that religious belief is somehow due to inferior thought processes to be a bit smug and condescending; it makes the only smart people those who agree with the person who doesn't believe. But there are plenty of smart people who do, indeed, believe in God. Why must they be considered defective?
     
    #94 fshagan, Jan 31, 2007
  15. hyo silver

    hyo silver Awaaaaay

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    15,232
    1,563
    0
    Location:
    off into the sunset
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Jan 31 2007, 01:32 AM) [snapback]383164[/snapback]</div>
    Life just gets curiouser. :) I was raised in a Christian home, a preacher's kid no less, and I never really believed. I'm the first atheist in my family. Maybe I was born that way.
     
    #95 hyo silver, Jan 31, 2007
  16. Schmika

    Schmika New Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2005
    1,617
    2
    0
    Location:
    Xenia, OH
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Jan 30 2007, 09:19 PM) [snapback]383059[/snapback]</div>
    Daniel, you actually gave me a good chuckle over this. You can be a real funny guy!
     
    #96 Schmika, Jan 31, 2007
  17. daniel

    daniel Cat Lovers Against the Bomb

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2004
    14,487
    1,518
    0
    Location:
    Spokane, WA
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Jan 30 2007, 09:32 PM) [snapback]383164[/snapback]</div>
    Noted

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Jan 30 2007, 09:32 PM) [snapback]383164[/snapback]</div>
    Yes, but I'm not talking about the sometimes seemingly-contradictory information that results from incomplete data or from the failure to find an adequate explanation (e.g. some problems in geology before plate tectonics was discovered). I am talking about internal contradictions within a settled construct which is presented as all-encompassing and complete. Most religions claim that their explanations are absolute and immutable, and yet they are full of logical inconsistencies. Some Christian sects claim the Bible is literal and inerrant, and yet it contradicts itself all over the place. This is not a problem for you, because you recognize that the Bible was written by people who sometimes made mistakes and often spoke in allegories.

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Jan 30 2007, 09:32 PM) [snapback]383164[/snapback]</div>
    Unitarianism and universalism are very old ideas. In the very first years after the death of Jesus there were many many Christianities, and both unitarianism (the idea that god is one person and not three) and universalism (the idea that everyone goes to heaven in the end) were among them. Both ideas lost out in the battles that eventually established the present-day mainstream ideas, and both re-emerged in the early days of America (or perhaps earlier - I'm not sure on that point). In the early 60's the American Unitarian Church and the American Universalist Church merged to form the Unitarian Universalist Association. They had both already been very open-minded liberal religions, and with the formation of the UUA, all dogma was abandoned, in favor of a philosophy that every person must think for him/her-self and make up her/his own mind. Individual members of the UU believe whatever they believe. All the standard religions are represented, as well as paganism, atheism, and people who consider themselves spiritual but not religious.

    You would probably find the UU a stimulating place, though politically you would be in the minority. And welcomed, more because of, than in spite of, your minority political views, because UUs love to have intelligent discussion/debate with people of other opinions. The joke is that on any given subject, if you put 6 Unitarians in a room they'll have 7 different opinions.
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Jan 30 2007, 09:32 PM) [snapback]383164[/snapback]</div>
    It's a tempting idea, but one I resist.

    However, I do favor taking away the tax-exempt status of churches, and I strongly favor a requirement that children be taught critical thinking skills in school, over the objections of their parents if need be.

    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Jan 30 2007, 09:32 PM) [snapback]383164[/snapback]</div>
    I suspect that smugness is a universal human failing, from which I am not immune.
     
    #97 daniel, Jan 31, 2007
  18. grasshopper

    grasshopper Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    425
    2
    0
    Location:
    Myrtle Beach SC
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Jan 30 2007, 05:36 PM) [snapback]383028[/snapback]</div>

    Tripp, your a real trip!
     
    #98 grasshopper, Jan 31, 2007
  19. TJandGENESIS

    TJandGENESIS Are We Having Fun Yet?

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    5,299
    47
    0
    Location:
    ★Lewisville, part of the Metroplex, Dallas, in the
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Jan 31 2007, 12:14 PM) [snapback]383251[/snapback]</div>

    I agree. Churches are business's, after all, and should pay taxes. Then again, I think one should not deduct 'gifts' and the like from taxes. When you deduct some tax, another person has to pay it, some where down the line...but I digress.


    And I am one for critical thinking as well. Where you and I differ, is that I don't think it's 'brainwashing' to come to the conclusion that God is real, and that Christ is real...


    There was a report on NIGHTLINE last night about atheists signing, or saying, a pledge abut not believing in God or the Trinity...there is a link somewhere on their site to see the video, but I am pressed for time now, or I would share it, and ask your opinion...
     
    #99 TJandGENESIS, Jan 31, 2007
  20. airportkid

    airportkid Will Fly For Food

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2005
    2,191
    538
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area CA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Jan 31 2007, 12:03 PM) [snapback]383450[/snapback]</div>
    I'll third this. Churches benefit from gov't services every bit as much (if not more so) as the populace at large, and that's what the taxes pay for. If the church insists on retaining tax exempt status, then it should be billed every time it uses the court (whether as plaintiff or defendant), billed a general infrastructure maintenance charge, billed for police and fire protection, etc. Paying taxes would make all such invoicing unnecessary, of course.
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Jan 31 2007, 12:03 PM) [snapback]383450[/snapback]</div>
    I've never liked the term or concept of "brainwashing" - being made to believe something against your own natural reasoning process, if that's what it means. If by "brainwashing" one means mere persuasion (by propaganda, good logic, bad logic, deceit - the means aren't important) so that one's natural reasoning leads to the "brainwasher's" conclusion, then that isn't brainwashing, it's persuasion. One can certainly be deceived into believing something manifestly untrue, but I don't think anyone can be made to believe something opposed to where their natural reasoning would take them (with the information they have and their own tendency to self delusion taken into account). And if by "brainwashing" one means coercion, well, you can't coerce belief. Behavior, yes. Pretending to believe, yes. But not actual belief. Coercion is what you do when persuasion fails. But the coerced mind remains "unwashed" i.e. unconvinced at its core. So that leaves "brainwashing" as being led to believe something against innate reasoning, and that's just too internally contradictory for me to "believe" such a thing is possible.
    You can delude someone, but you can't "brainwash" them.
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Jan 31 2007, 12:03 PM) [snapback]383450[/snapback]</div>
    I subscribe to Free Inquiry and Skeptical Inquirer, two major magazines in the atheist sphere, and I can't recall anything about this kind of pledge, but doesn't mean some aethist group hasn't started one. My impression is that most atheists and free thinkers would find any kind of pledge unnecessary. A pledge is a statement of loyalty, with implications that the loyalty will override all other considerations, and that's the antithesis of free thought. If an atheist over time finds himself believing in god, it'll be because his reason leads him there, and while it may trouble him and his atheist friends, neither he nor his friends will feel he is being "disloyal" or breaking some pledge. What WON'T happen, by the way, is loss of friendship. This is one area, and I've said this before, where the church exposes one of its most vile, anti-human tenets: its intolerance of apostasy. An organization that can't tolerate apostasy NEEDS pledges.

    Mark Baird
    Alameda CA
     
    #100 airportkid, Jan 31, 2007
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 5 of 8