Originally posted by FreakyKBHThis is the situation as originally stated:
The girl from the wrong side of the tracks (again) represents death to the boy. She isn't saying 'come love me,' she is saying 'come join me in death.'
Boy meets girl from wrong side of the tracks.
Boy mustn't love girl, yet boy cannot help himself.
Boy eschews his side of the tracks to pursue girl on wrong side of the tracks, to disastrous results: boy loses everything valuable only to end with value-less girl.
Then you start talking about how she represents death to the boy. Sorry, but I don't see how you make that connection. Or how you expect anyone else to make that connection.
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettNot true.
It is not a profession of faith at all. Because it produces tangible, quantifiable results. "Faith" is belief in something for which there is a complete lack of evidence.
There is ample evidence that everything in existence exists. Therefore, faith is in that which is.
For example: God loves rwingett. rwingett knows God loves him because God said so. rwingett has faith in the God that loves him.
Faith is believing in something you know is true to be true.
Faith isn't in something you don't know exists. That would be stupid!
Originally posted by rwingett"Promoting egalitarianism is a righteous enterprise"
It is not a profession of faith at all. Because it produces tangible, quantifiable results. "Faith" is belief in something for which there is a complete lack of evidence.
- Any strongly held belief produces tangible quantifiable results of some sort. There are some very tangible results of highly erroneous terrorist's beliefs.
- Egalitarianism is a belief, a good and validly arguable one, but nevertheless a belief like any other. Particularly when described as "righteous".
"Faith" can be defined in various ways. Another is a "faith" is simply a set of beliefs.
You are (happily) promoting the set of righteous beliefs about egalitarianism.
The point about the "lack of evidence" aspect appears to be a side issue, but I understand that was probably what you were getting at. I just thought describing egalitarianism as not a form of belief was incorrect.
Originally posted by TaomanThat any strongly held belief produces tangible, quantifiable results of some sort is hardly to the point. If it demonstrably produces the expected results, then it is a justified, true belief. If the expected results are untestable, or unknowable, then it falls into the realm of faith. That greater egalitarianism produces more just (and therefore more righteous) societies is a testable hypothesis. The belief would be warranted by the available evidence. On the contrary, the belief that you're going to heaven when you die (for example) is not testable, and therefore requires faith to sustain it.
"Promoting egalitarianism is a righteous enterprise"
- Any strongly held belief produces tangible quantifiable results of some sort. There are some very tangible results of highly erroneous terrorist's beliefs.
- Egalitarianism is a belief, a good and validly arguable one, but nevertheless a belief like any other. Particularly when described as "righte ...[text shortened]... g at. I just thought describing egalitarianism as not a form of belief was incorrect.
But all that is an aside to the point I was alluding to. Namely that Christians have gotten it all wrong. Jesus wasn't talking about an afterlife in heaven. He was talking about social justice (and righteous egalitarianism) on this earth, in this lifetime.
Originally posted by josephwFaith is believing something you cannot know is true. If you could prove something to be true then it would be an established fact and there would be no room for faith.
Not true.
There is ample evidence that everything in existence exists. Therefore, faith is in that which is.
For example: God loves rwingett. rwingett knows God loves him because God said so. rwingett has faith in the God that loves him.
Faith is believing in something you know is true to be true.
Faith isn't in something you don't know exists. That would be stupid!
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettOk, I comprehend where you are coming from, and your meaning of "faith". Enough of that. And yes, I agree that Jesus was likely more as you describe him, from my reading of the New Testament. And that a lot of fundamentalist Christian beliefs are simplistic, dualistic and naive.
That any strongly held belief produces tangible, quantifiable results of some sort is hardly to the point. If it demonstrably produces the expected results, then it is a justified, true belief. If the expected results are untestable, or unknowable, then it falls into the realm of faith. That greater egalitarianism produces more just (and there s talking about social justice (and righteous egalitarianism) on this earth, in this lifetime.
Tathagata used to refuse to enter into such speculations of the after-life to most reports. However he shared his own experience of the nature of existence that philosophically (and quantum scientifically) is at least highly regarded by the non-simplistic and the non-naive. While it can be taken a long way down the path of logic, finally it becomes inexpressible or definable, and thus unprovable except experientially in an "inner" manner.
Do you allow for that which is knowable but not provable? The subject of the OP is a case in point I think - true love. I don't think you can verbally or logically prove true love. Only through its action is it finally defined. That is as it appears at present to me.
Originally posted by TaomanI suppose that love is subjectively real, but not objectively. Who am I to say whether you have "true love" for someone? Unless your actions are inconsistent with what I understand "true love" to be.
Ok, I comprehend where you are coming from, and your meaning of "faith". Enough of that. And yes, I agree that Jesus was likely more as you describe him, from my reading of the New Testament. And that a lot of fundamentalist Christian beliefs are simplistic, dualistic and naive.
Tathagata used to refuse to enter into such speculations of the after-life to ...[text shortened]... ove. Only through its action is it finally defined. That is as it appears at present to me.