Originally posted by lemon limeWell I get a certain amount of stick from people here (who are still Christians) for telling the truth about my loss of Christian faith ~ they resort to all manner of projections and pronouncements about me lying now and/or lying in the past etc. etc. ad nauseam.
Originally posted by josephw
It's not a sin to say you don't believe in God.
[b]Is this a common belief among Christians?
In your opinion is it better to tell the truth about what you believe, or is it better to lie about what you believe?[/b]
My question was to josephw and was: "Is this [It's not a sin to say you don't believe in God] a common belief among Christians?". And the reason I asked it is because there are several Christian regulars here who believe that 'not believing in God' is punished by an eternity of burning torture ~ but if this punishment is not for "sin", then what is it for?
Originally posted by FMFWell I get a certain amount of stick from people here (who are still Christians) for telling the truth about my loss of Christian faith ~ they resort to all manner of projections and pronouncements about me lying now and/or lying in the past etc. etc. ad nauseam.
Well I get a certain amount of stick from people here (who are still Christians) for telling the truth about my loss of Christian faith ~ they resort to all manner of projections and pronouncements about me lying now and/or lying in the past etc. etc. ad nauseam.
My question was to josephw and was: "Is this [It's not a sin to say you don't believe in God] a ...[text shortened]... y an eternity of burning torture ~ but if this punishment is not for "sin", then what is it for?
That can happen if you're being less that forthright with the people you talk to. For example, you ask a lot of questions but won't answer questions asked of you. Why is that?
If (as you said) you had been a Christian for almost 30 years, then it's difficult for me to believe you wouldn't understand why it's not a sin to say you don't believe in God if it just so happens to be true. Your question was very strange, because it seems to imply it's better to say you believe in God even if it's not true.
This is why so many people here are probably inclined to believe you were mouthing the right words and going through the correct motions for nearly 30 years... I imagine you thought you were doing what was expected of you, but expected of you by whom? Your family or the other people in your church? But forget about any of them, how did God himself fit into this picture? How important was he to you, or was he just one small piece of that puzzle?
I don't know you, all I know is what I read here... so if i'm dead wrong about this then don't worry about it. And since you don't believe God is watching, you literally have nothing to worry about. Unless of course you're wrong and there is a God who is always paying attention.
Originally posted by lemon limeI think the way I am forthright sometimes rubs people up the wrong way here sometimes. I do answer questions every bit as much as I answer them. And when I answer them in a forthright way, it can also rub people up the wrong way. People can rarely accuse me of not sharing what I think even if they sometimes pretend that I haven't responded head on.
That can happen if you're being less that forthright with the people you talk to. For example, you ask a lot of questions but won't answer questions asked of you. Why is that?
Originally posted by lemon limeMy question was posed to josephw because I wanted to see what his answer is, and I still do. Nothing in my question to him implies that I think it's better to lie about these things.
If (as you said) you had been a Christian for almost 30 years, then it's difficult for me to believe you wouldn't understand why it's not a sin to say you don't believe in God if it just so happens to be true. Your question was very strange, because it seems to imply it's better to say you believe in God even if it's not true.
1 edit
Originally posted by lemon limePeople can make what they want of my lost faith. I am just sharing my experience, like others do here.
This is why so many people here are probably inclined to believe you were mouthing the right words and going through the correct motions for nearly 30 years... I imagine you thought you were doing what was expected of you, but expected of you by whom? Your family or the other people in your church? But forget about any of them, how did God himself fit into this picture? How important was he to you, or was he just one small piece of that puzzle?
edit: off to see a man about a dog for a few hours.
Originally posted by FMFPutting all of that aside, the main issue I have with you is trust. I don't trust you because of all the little gotcha games you like to play. You're playing one with me right now over at the Eden thread... you're trying to get me to say something you can use against me. I've seen you do this with other people, and you've tried doing this with me a few other times as well.
I think the way I am forthright sometimes rubs people up the wrong way here sometimes. I do answer questions every bit as much as I answer them. And when I answer them in a forthright way, it can also rub people up the wrong way. People can rarely accuse me of not sharing what I think even if they sometimes pretend that I haven't responded head on.
So it's difficult for me to believe you ever were an honest and decent person when I see how you go about playing people... or was this part of your complete makeover, your transformation from devoted 'Christian' to worldly player?
Originally posted by lemon limePutting all of that aside, the main issue I have with you is trust. I don't trust you because of all the little gotcha games you like to play. You're playing one with me right now over at the Eden thread... you're trying to get me to say something you can use against me. I've seen you do this with other people, and you've tried doing this with me a few other times as well.
So it's difficult for me to believe you ever were an honest and decent person when I see how you go about playing people... or was this part of your complete makeover, your transformation from devoted 'Christian' to worldly player?
I find it very interesting how several religionists here engage me and the things they choose to say instead of addressing my opinions and viewpoints.
Originally posted by lemon limeSonship kept accusing me of the same thing, but when challenged on it, he failed to substantiate the claim.
That can happen if you're being less that forthright with the people you talk to. For example, you ask a lot of questions but won't answer questions asked of you. Why is that?
Lets see if you can do better. Please state a question that FMF has refused to answer and lets see if he continues to refuse to answer.
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFOn the contrary, on the Eden thread I was trying to tie you down on whether you think Genesis has got it right having already stated that I think it may well be right as a metaphor. There is no Gotcha there at all.
You're playing one with me right now over at the Eden thread... you're trying to get me to say something you can use against me.
Originally posted by FMFOriginally posted by josephw
Is this a common belief among Christians?
It's not a sin to say you don't believe in God.
FMF
"Is this a common belief among Christians?"
Is what a common belief? That it isn't a sin to SAY one doesn't believe in God, or to NOT believe in God?
Let's be honest. Do Christians commonly agree on all points of doctrine? Not in my experience they don't.
Should Christians agree on all points of doctrine? I think technically they should, but in practice not very likely.
According to Jesus a man will be judged for every word that he speaks. So technically, speaking out the denial of the existence of God could be considered a sin, or at least as a result of sin being master of the man and not The Lord.
Then again, if one differentiates between speaking and action, one might give way to speaking in certain circumstances without it being blatantly sin. God decides because God knows the heart and motive behind every thought, word and deed. I think the real sin of it isn't so much in the saying of it as it is in the believing.
I don't find anything in the Bible that says anything about God judging a person about, or for what they think. But thoughts become words and words are acted upon.
Originally posted by FMFHe is sadly mistaken. As time goes by the more I realise JosephW knows the Bible very little indeed.
Is the notion that God does not judge people in terms of what they think a common belief among Christians?
The Bible has loads of comdemnations for those who just think evil things, who have evil sinful thoughts, have evil intentions etc.
Originally posted by bbarrWell, to be honest, after reading your's and Twhitehead's exchanges, I don't see how anything either of you said has anything to do with morality.
True, the content of moral theories does not derive from philosophical deduction. Unlike logic, moral philosophy is not a deductive enterprise. If anything, it's an abductive enterprise that works from our deepest held commitments and most intransigent intuitions. But it certainly doesn't follow from this that a causal explanation of those commitments and in ...[text shortened]... by us; it must hew to our nature as rational, social agents that act under the idea of freedom.
I think all you did was give a report on the state of the debate about morality as an academic and philosophical conundrum.
Personally, I like to keep it simple. Morality is really nothing more than a word used to describe the difference between what is good conduct and bad. If conduct is good, then it is moral.
For me, the real dilemma, when discussing morality, isn't about what is good or evil, but rather where morality exists.
What I mean by that is this; morality existed before there was a universe. Man didn't develop a code of conduct on his own through time as a consequence of evolution, and then impose that code on and in man's inventions.
That's like putting the cart before the horse.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI don't think you're actually disagreeing with me. Sure, understanding the causal explanations of our commitments and intuitions may help provide us with the ability to overcome them, but it doesn't bear on whether we should try to overcome them, keep them or change them. This later question is a normative one; it concerns what we ought to do. Evolutionary considerations are silent on normative questions.
I strongly disagree. I think that recognizing thing evolutionary roots of our intuitions allows us in many cases to overcome those intuitions.
[b]If anything, it's an abductive enterprise that works from our deepest held commitments and most intransigent intuitions.
I disagree. I personally find moral philosophy to be an exercise of studying our i ...[text shortened]... low them than pure intuition. And also, trying to find ways to reconcile conflicting intuitions.[/b]
I'm not sure what to make of your second disagreement. As somebody who studied, wrote and taught moral philosophy for a decade, I can only tell you how it actually proceeds in practice. And, again, I'm not sure that what you're saying conflicts with anything I said above. If you do, I'm interested where you think we differ.