Good sci-fi is about the present

@kellyjay said
I would say what he believes one way or another is meaningless, but reality isn’t shaped by what we like or dislike or what we find pleasant or distasteful.

You have dodged the central point of my analogy and how it undermines your notion of "faith".

@fmf said
You have dodged the central point of my analogy and how it undermines your notion of "faith".

Well, you may think what you will.

@kellyjay said
Well, you may think what you will.

We are talking to each other and you have bailed out.

@fmf said
We are talking to each other and you have bailed out.

And when I think you are just asking questions to be asking questions, I lose interest in the conversation. When I answer you, you blow me off or ignore what is said many times, making a conversation with you less than interesting.

@kellyjay said
When I answer you, you blow me off or ignore what is said many times, making a conversation with you less than interesting.

When you think you are answering my question, you are often not doing so.

@kellyjay said
Well, you may think what you will.

Here is what I offered in response to what I see as your sophistry about the definition of "faith":

Mr X comes to me and tells me his "faith" says my wife and children will be tortured in front of me, supernaturally, for 1,000,000 years if I don't believe what he believes which is that we are reincarnated as reptiles if we are bad in this life. That's his "faith".

If I find this not credible, would you say that the substance of MY "faith" is that my wife and children will NOT be tortured in front of me, supernaturally, for 1,000,000 years ?

What would you say is the central point of this analogy?

@fmf said
When you think you are answering my question, you are often not doing so.

That’s your opinion

@fmf said
Here is what I offered in response to what I see as your sophistry about the definition of "faith":

Mr X comes to me and tells me his "faith" says my wife and children will be tortured in front of me, supernaturally, for 1,000,000 years if I don't believe what he believes which is that we are reincarnated as reptiles if we are bad in this life. That's his "faith".

If I f ...[text shortened]... upernaturally, for 1,000,000 years ?

What would you say is the central point of this analogy?

You don’t like the idea of hell.

@kellyjay said
You don’t like the idea of hell.

I don't think it exists. And the more you talk about it - and the more I realize that you have no way of arguing that it is morally coherent - the less credible it seems.

@fmf said
I don't think it exists. And the more you talk about it - and the more I realize that you have no way of arguing that it is morally coherent - the less credible it seems.

Nothing about anyone telling you anything adds to or takes away the reality of it being real. Which is what I said earlier!

With respect to a morally having a moral rationale for Hell that would require a clear understanding of righteousness and goodness uncultured by our biases towards how everything should be looked at.

I trust God’s judgment and knowing what I know about just me, He is just, I am not. You believe what you will as do I.

@kellyjay said
With respect to a morally having a moral rationale for Hell that would require a clear understanding of righteousness and goodness uncultured by our biases towards how everything should be looked at.

This is not an argument that tackles the moral incoherence of punishing non-believers with neverending stupendous violence. Instead, this is just a declaration that you believe what you believe and I supposedly don't understand it.

@kellyjay said
I trust God’s judgment and knowing what I know about just me, He is just, I am not.

So, it is just because it is just. You trust God because you trust God. You know what you know because you know what you know. Hey presto, that's the moral incoherence of the doctrine rendered coherent.

-Removed-

My assessment is quite different.

I think FMF is simply incapable of understanding (or doesn’t like) the answers and so asks the same question over and over in hope of getting a spiritually dumbed-down answer that he can understand and like.

@fmf said
This is not an argument that tackles the moral incoherence of punishing non-believers with neverending stupendous violence. Instead, this is just a declaration that you believe what you believe and I supposedly don't understand it.

You have a point?