Made a bus journey this morning with rain bucketing it down outside. Looking out the window i observed there were 4 (*5) types of pedestrians out and about:
1. 'The Forward Planning.' The clever chap with the umbrella.
2. 'The Shelter Dodger.' The person taking temporary refuge in a shop.
3. 'The Improviser.' The lady holding the carrier bag over her head.
4. 'The Shrugger.' The chap nonchalantly walking along.
(*5 - 'The Home Stayer.' Never attempted the journey).
From this i mused there were 4 (*5) ways people dealt with a problem/challenge. The Forward Planner anticipated the problem and took measures to lessen the impact on their journey and make it more bearable. The Shelter Dodger looked for temporary sanctuary from a problem and was prepared to wait it out, while the Improviser would take advantage of whatever was at hand and press on regardless. The Shrugger also pressed on regardless but simply accepted what the heavens threw at him. (*The Home Stayer chose not to confront a problem and allowed it to inhibit progress).
Still on the bus, i further extrapolated that people confronted the meaning of life and creation in a similar manner:
1. The Theist is our Forward Planner. For the journey of life to be bearable they adhere to the belief that there is a God, that salvation awaits the Godly soul.
2. The Shelter Dodger takes refuge, comfort and protection in the beliefs of others, though is likely to abandon that belief when life is good.
3. The Improviser on the other hand is likely to change religions throughout their life to suit whatever problems life was throwing at them at a given time.
4. And of course in the Shrugger we have our friend the atheist, accepting the world the way it is and simply making the best of things.
(*5. The Home Stayer never confronts the meaning of life, seeking distraction in box sets and economy chocolate).
Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke Still on the bus, i further extrapolated that people confronted the meaning of life and creation in a similar manner:
I disagree with your conclusions. Surely it is the atheist that checks the facts and knows it will rain, whereas the theist just stubbornly refuses to see the rain, or stands there in the rain praying for clear skies.
And what about you protected from the rain by the scientific invention called a bus? Or the people who stayed at home because they did not have a good reason to be out and about?
The problem I have with this kind of analogy is that you can read into it whatever you like - the sole purpose of the analogy is to suggest to your audience that you have reasons to back up what you are reading into it. 'See, it is true for people in the rain, so it must be true for whatever I tell you!'.
Originally posted by twhitehead I disagree with your conclusions. Surely it is the atheist that checks the facts and knows it will rain, whereas the theist just stubbornly refuses to see the rain, or stands there in the rain praying for clear skies.
And what about you protected from the rain by the scientific invention called a bus? Or the people who stayed at home because they did not have a good reason to be out and about?
Hey, they were conclusions reached on a bus containing screaming children and a man with purple hair, so allowances should be made. 😉
And in the first sentence i did say 'pedestrians.' (For analogy purposes please assume the Home Stayer cancelled their intended journey when they saw the rain).
*Edit. - Theists 'forward plan' in regards to the eternal soul. Athiests (myself included) don't do this. I also saw the umbrella as symbolic of a theist carrying something to protect them from the harshness of reality, which the atheist accepts the rain for what it is and tolerates getting wet.
Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke *Edit. - Theists 'forward plan' in regards to the eternal soul. Athiests (myself included) don't do this.
That may be true for you, but it isn't true for me. I am no less of a forward planner than a theist, I simply don't invent imaginary impossible plans. I actually take an umbrella. A theist would be out there armed with his prayer for sunshine. Guess which of us will be dry.
Do you consider people who read their star signs in the papers better planners than you too?
Originally posted by twhitehead That may be true for you, but it isn't true for me. I am no less of a forward planner than a theist, I simply don't invent imaginary impossible plans. I actually take an umbrella. A theist would be out there armed with his prayer for sunshine. Guess which of us will be dry.
Do you consider people who read their star signs in the papers better planners than you too?
*Please note i edited my previous edit before reading your last message:
'I also saw the umbrella as symbolic of a theist carrying something to protect them from the harshness of reality, while the atheist accepts the rain for what it is and tolerates getting wet.'
I actually said 'atheists don't forward plan for the eternal soul'. Are you saying this statement doesn't include you? I certainly didn't say 'atheists don't forward plan.'
Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke I actually said 'atheists don't forward plan for the eternal soul'. Are you saying this statement doesn't include you? I certainly didn't say 'atheists don't forward plan.'
Yes, the difference is not in the forward planning but in the belief in an eternal soul. I still say it is the theist who will be out there with an imaginary umbrella replacement because they have forward planned with respect to an imaginary world. The atheist will not simply accept getting soaked (depending on the temperature etc I suppose) but would use an umbrella. A better analogy might be to ask who goes to the doctor when they are sick and who goes to see a priest and pray?
Originally posted by twhitehead Yes, the difference is not in the forward planning but in the belief in an eternal soul. I still say it is the theist who will be out there with an imaginary umbrella replacement because they have forward planned with respect to an imaginary world. The atheist will not simply accept getting soaked (depending on the temperature etc I suppose) but would use ...[text shortened]... might be to ask who goes to the doctor when they are sick and who goes to see a priest and pray?
Yes, i agree for the most part.
For the purpose of my given analogy though, i liked the idea of the atheist being the Shrugger, and the Christian the Forward Planner, especially in regards to eternity. (This does not mean of course atheists are incapable of forward planning).
Originally posted by twhitehead Yes, the difference is not in the forward planning but in the belief in an eternal soul. I still say it is the theist who will be out there with an imaginary umbrella replacement because they have forward planned with respect to an imaginary world. The atheist will not simply accept getting soaked (depending on the temperature etc I suppose) but would use ...[text shortened]... might be to ask who goes to the doctor when they are sick and who goes to see a priest and pray?
No, that's a horrible analogy. I go to the doctor when I need to. I am a diabetic and now use an insulin pump, aka 'modern technology'. You always present theists as simply not knowing any better. Except that we DO 'know better'. I see an appropriate professional whenever my aim exceeds my grasp. But I am not so stupid as you think I am to see a priest when I am ill, just as I don't consult a roofer when my car malfunctions.
Originally posted by twhitehead In other words, you talk the talk but don't walk the walk.
Easy for you to say since you don't know what the walk is!
The Christian "walk" is antithetical to anything you can imagine beyond the limited scope of your purely materialistic/scientific perspective.
The Christian "walk" is along a predetermined path designed by God away from the broad way that leads to death that so many are on.
The Christian "walk" is the life of freedom from the penalty of sin, which is death, and the liberty in Christ which is by the grace of God through faith.
Originally posted by josephw You don't know it. You can only bash it.
Sorry, but anyone who claims to hold secrets that they do not wish to disclose should simply shut up about them. I too can easily claim to have secret knowledge that I am not going to tell you, but what is the point if we cant discuss it? I think you are lying, but since its all a secret, I can't prove that and you can't disprove it.
Musings on a bus
24 Oct '15 14:333 edits
Back to Top