Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

A Christian perspective of understanding

Options
12346

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    That is why I said "at least partially" in that quote though. The learning curve, for it is a curve I think not a linear scale, is one where when you learn the basics you get quite a ways up that curve, but then going beyond that it gets much steeper quite quickly.

    But when you learn the basics of how to interpret a scientific paper or statistical analysis you put yourself in a position that is, by what I have seen in the media over the last decade, well beyond even the people who call themselves "Science Journalists".

    Even a relatively simply book like Goldacres "Bad Science" is a read that can empower someone to read through most of the egregious nonsense that is written by people who consider themselves science journalists in fact. Let alone what we could produce with a well though out short module in an ongoing curriculum for children on scientific literacy.

    Is our species always going to defer to the knowledge of the man in the white coat proferring medication? Probably to some degree sure. But given a choice between absolute blind faith, and a populace making informed and educated guesses...... I will take the latter. Especially if producing the latter would not actually be all that difficult endeavor in the first place.


  • Options
    #153
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    Blah, blah, blah... God Particle
    For your reference, my understanding is it is not called the God Particle because the scientists believe in gods or any nonsense like that. Some of the scientists looking for it nicknamed it the "Goddamned Particle", because it was so hard to find. Clealry that would not work as a book title...

    Oh, and welcome back! Any chance of an update on this?


  • Options
    #154
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    Exactly, why all the fuss about the 'sacrifice' (read: temporary inconvenience) of his 'only son' when he could have magicked up as many sons as he wanted?

    As someone on boards once said (cannot remmeber who, if anyone does please remind me) "If I knew I would rise again 3 days later, I would die for my cat."

    MrP


  • Options
    #155
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    Faith is a choice. You can choose to believe in the absence of proof. The reason I choose to believe is because if true, then God is good, so much so that he gave everything (even his son) to the world for the salvation of souls. To put it another way, if true, God deserves our love and devotion. Hence, Christians give love and devotion, i.e. in case it is true. That is faith.

    This "reasoning" applies equally to any religion. If true, you should have faith in Christianity or Islam, or Scientology or any other religion you come up with (and if you don't have faith and they are true, then you are equally in big trouble). But that doesn't explain why you should have faith in the first place. It doesn't explain why you should have faith in one specific religion. It doesn't explain why you have faith that you aren't mistaking earthly issues with "gods mind".
    To put it in a context you might understand, lets say a family member needs an experimental new medication to have a chance of surviving an illness. This medication will cost you dearly. Maybe it will save the life of your loved one, maybe it will not. So you take a chance and buy the medicine. That is blind faith because you do not know if it will work or not.

    That would neither be blind nor would it be faith.
    It's not blind because I wouldn't buy the medicine if it didn't have any evidence that it might work.
    It's not faith because whilst I may hope it will work, I wouldn't have faith that it will work for the simple fact that it is an experimental medicine and only offers an unknown chance of working. I wouldn't assume it will work and not look for other possible treatments.

    Discussions on faith always bring in false equivalences. Notions that one persons believe without 100% evidence is the same as someone else's. But there are many many numbers between even 10% and 90%. Many many different types of evidence and reasoning make up those numbers. Missing 100% does not make those two numbers the same.


  • Options
    #156
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,294 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    It's unhelpful to conflate faith and trust, as some theists have done. They are different things.

    Trust is a rational response based upon tangible factors e.g. past actions, reputation, outside oversight and regulation, etc. Although human nature being what it is, there will be some intangibles and downright irrationals in there too - e.g. the whole "so-and-so didn't look like a nonce", as if someone looks trustworthy it means they are.

    Faith, from where I'm standing at least, has no rational basis at all and not a shred of evidence or anything else to commend it.

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    looksee
    Registered Users Posts: 28,214 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    I am about to make a decision that I have researched as far as I can and all I can do now is gamble. If I win, great, if I lose it will be an expensive gamble.

    I could argue that I have faith in what I have been told, I can argue that I trust that things will work out, but in the end its a gamble. A bit like deciding who to pin your eternal existence on. Having decided, you then have to stick with it and try and convince everyone else you are right to justify your own decision. I am not expecting an eternal existence so I am saved a lot of hassle.


  • Options
    #158
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,732 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    looksee wrote: »
    I am about to make a decision that I have researched as far as I can and all I can do now is gamble. If I win, great, if I lose it will be an expensive gamble.

    Science and rational thinking aside, sometimes we just take a punt. First time I'd an opportunity to go paragliding was pretty much that. Had a brief conversation with the instructor, reckoned he seemed as sound of mind as paragliding instructors get and just went for it. An unnecessary and potentially lethal gamble that ended up being one of the most memorable experiences of my life. Its not like any of us are going to survive life one way or the other ;)


  • Options
    #159
    Nick Park
    Registered Users Posts: 1,573 ✭✭✭Nick Park


    looksee wrote: »
    I am about to make a decision that I have researched as far as I can and all I can do now is gamble. If I win, great, if I lose it will be an expensive gamble.

    I made a decision that I researched as far as I could. It was a gamble. Thus far, I'm winning, because my life since I made that decision is immeasurably better than it was before.

    Ultimately, as regards what happens after this life, if I win then I win big. If I lose, then it won't cost me anything. ;)


  • Options
    #160
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    MrPudding wrote: »
    For your reference, my understanding is it is not called the God Particle because the scientists believe in gods or any nonsense like that. Some of the scientists looking for it nicknamed it the "Goddamned Particle", because it was so hard to find. Clealry that would not work as a book title...

    Oh, and welcome back! Any chance of an update on this?
    Yes lots of people (myself included) think the term God particle is inappropriate given that it`s absence rather than it`s existence would be required to make the existence of God rather more difficult to refute than in the past. After all, without the required mass of dark matter in the universe, how could the big bang be a repeatable event. The faithful however, are immune to such concerns as faith is independent of proof or the lack thereof.


  • Options
    #161
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    Yes lots of people (myself included) think the term God particle is inappropriate given that it`s absence rather than it`s existence would be required to make the existence of God rather more difficult to refute than in the past. After all, without the required mass of dark matter in the universe, how could the big bang be a repeatable event. The faithful however, are immune to such concerns as faith is independent of proof or the lack thereof.

    Awesome. So any update on the historical significance of October 30? It was a couple of weeks ago now, how long do you need to make something up?

    MrP


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    MrPudding wrote: »
    Awesome. So any update on the historical significance of October 30? It was a couple of weeks ago now, how long do you need to make something up?

    MrP
    The simple fact is we know not the day nor the hour but for the faithful, vigilance is important so possible milestones are always of interest. I do understand that the beliefs and rituals of faith may seem silly to the non believer but people of faith (Christians, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus etc) tend to be more successful in this life than the non believers in terms of health, wealth, happiness etc.

    As a Christian, I think the Christian world was highly successful when one considers the Americas, Australia and all Europe and Russia came under Christendom and any inroads by non Christian groups in the western world coincided with the growth of secularism and the slow demise of Christianity. In other words, the western world will regress in influence, power, prestige, as well as in the health and wealth of its citizens as Christianity retreats. Russia has learned where that ends so they have returned to Christianity in a big way.


  • Options
    #163
    pauldla
    Registered Users Posts: 2,247 ✭✭✭pauldla


    ^^^

    I think that's a 'no', Mr P.....


  • Options
    #164
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    The simple fact is we know not the day nor the hour but for the faithful, vigilance is important so possible milestones are always of interest. I do understand that the beliefs and rituals of faith may seem silly to the non believer but people of faith (Christians, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus etc) tend to be more successful in this life than the non believers in terms of health, wealth, happiness etc.

    As a Christian, I think the Christian world was highly successful when one considers the Americas, Australia and all Europe and Russia came under Christendom and any inroads by non Christian groups in the western world coincided with the growth of secularism and the slow demise of Christianity. In other words, the western world will regress in influence, power, prestige, as well as in the health and wealth of its citizens as Christianity retreats. Russia has learned where that ends so they have returned to Christianity in a big way.

    Ok, thanks for that pointless, irrelevant and nonsensical nonsense*. Any update on the historical significance of October 30?

    MrP



    * I know this is a tautology, but I wanted to stress that the post was not your basic common or garden nonsense. I mean seriously, it's like he is channeling Donald Trump.


  • Options
    #165
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,732 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    MrPudding wrote: »
    Ok, thanks for that pointless, irrelevant and nonsensical nonsense

    You're just not reading it right. The end was apparently nigh, in retrospect not actually nigh, but definitely will be nigh again at some point in the future. When exactly, we don't know. This makes religious people happy and generally better off than us poor heathens. Simples ;)


  • Options
    #166
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    smacl wrote: »
    Your just not reading it right. Then end was apparently nigh, in retrospect not actually nigh, but definitely will be nigh again at some point again in the future. When exactly, we don't know. This makes religious people happy and generally better off than us poor heathens. Simples ;)

    Ah ok, and each time that it is nigh, but actually isn't, that is ok because it keeps the faithful on their toes? A kind of, "Ah god, you big joker, you got me there!"

    Well, a saying comes to mind "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me over, and over, and over again, across a 2000 year period, with stuff that is not just nonsensical, but fractally nonsensical, shame on me."

    MrP


  • Options
    #167
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    MrPudding wrote: »
    Any update on the historical significance of October 30?
    October 30 is not what was significant but the number 17 is of significance. This is why October 30 had the potential of being of possible significance, coming 17 days after the centenary of the miracle of Fatima.

    Why is 17 significant? I think it was revealed to the visionaries at Fatima as being of significance and the Pope was shot at 17:00 on the feast day of Our Lady of Fatima (October 13th). This itself is remarkable as the gunman was a Muslim and a hired hit man for the Bulgarian Communists and he would have been completely unaware of the significance of October 13.

    Interestingly, the gunman did claim to have been told to shoot the Pope by Fatima, the daughter of Mohammad in a dream but the gunman was notoriously inconsistent, so it is difficult to know how much of his testimony was true.

    The third Fatima secret was revealed in two parts, the first of which referred to a Bishop in white, suffering greatly. The Pope is the Bishop of Rome and he was wearing white when he was shot.


  • Options
    #168
    GritBiscuit
    Registered Users Posts: 440 ✭✭GritBiscuit


    He was actually shot at 17.17...does that make it twice as significant or does your admission "he was completely unaware of it's significance" kinda answer itself?


  • Options
    #169
    looksee
    Registered Users Posts: 28,214 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    ^^^ I considered several responses to this post and then decided not to bother.

    Still, I can't see what it has to do with Christianity or keeping reality. Conspiracy theories might be a better fit.

    Edit - sorry GritBiscuit, not yours, the one above it.


  • Options
    #170
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    GritBiscuit wrote: »
    He was actually shot at 17.17...does that make it twice as significant or does your admission "he was completely unaware of it's significance" kinda answer itself?
    If you are correct, surely it is more significant. The fact that the gunman was unaware adds to the likelihood of intervention by supernatural forces. If he did not plan it that way, who did?


  • Options
    #171
    GritBiscuit
    Registered Users Posts: 440 ✭✭GritBiscuit


    I want whatever you are smoking.

    *dons tinfoil hat*


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users Posts: 16,130 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    If you are correct, surely it is more significant. The fact that the gunman was unaware adds to the likelihood of intervention by supernatural forces. If he did not plan it that way, who did?

    Why didn't he shoot the pope on the 17th?


  • Options
    #173
    pauldla
    Registered Users Posts: 2,247 ✭✭✭pauldla


    So, the number 17 is significant because of its significance. Also, Fatima. Have I missed anything?


  • Options
    #174
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    October 30 is not what was significant but the number 17 is of significance. This is why October 30 had the potential of being of possible significance, coming 17 days after the centenary of the miracle of Fatima.
    So to confirm: when you claimed it was significant, you were incorrect?

    If so, why were you incorrect? Why do you believe that your numerology stuff is accurate or useful or meaningful?

    How do you define "significant" and what were you expecting to happen on that date?


  • Options
    #175
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    October 30 is not what was significant but the number 17 is of significance. This is why October 30 had the potential of being of possible significance, coming 17 days after the centenary of the miracle of Fatima.

    Why is 17 significant? I think it was revealed to the visionaries at Fatima as being of significance and the Pope was shot at 17:00 on the feast day of Our Lady of Fatima (October 13th). This itself is remarkable as the gunman was a Muslim and a hired hit man for the Bulgarian Communists and he would have been completely unaware of the significance of October 13.

    Interestingly, the gunman did claim to have been told to shoot the Pope by Fatima, the daughter of Mohammad in a dream but the gunman was notoriously inconsistent, so it is difficult to know how much of his testimony was true.

    The third Fatima secret was revealed in two parts, the first of which referred to a Bishop in white, suffering greatly. The Pope is the Bishop of Rome and he was wearing white when he was shot.

    - Scene opens, MrPudding is logging onto his Mac, he goes to Boards.ie, the A&A forum and the Chrisitan perspective of understanding thread.

    - MrPudding reads the quite clearly inaccurately named realitykeeper's response to his last post.

    - MrPudding backs slowly away from the thread...

    - Fade to black.


  • Options
    #176
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    King Mob wrote: »
    So to confirm: when you claimed it was significant, you were incorrect?

    If so, why were you incorrect? Why do you believe that your numerology stuff is accurate or useful or meaningful?

    How do you define "significant" and what were you expecting to happen on that date?

    Not incorrect. After all, one can measure 17 in weeks, months and decades, and not just days. Also, who is to say the 30th was not of significance, I mean apart from Mary, Joseph and a few shepherds almost nobody was aware of the significance of the first Christmas, yet it was of great significance. That day just needed time for its significance to become apparent. Come to think of it, Herod and his advisers also knew but that was still a tiny minority.

    It did not take long for the significance to effect a lot of people because first born sons in the land of Israel were slaughtered within two years of the birth of Christ.


  • Options
    #177
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,732 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Possibly more suited to the Numerology, Crystal balls and Tea leaves forum. I struggle to see any relevance to A&A. Why post this here rather than on the Christianity forum where you might get some interest in Christian numerology?


  • Options
    #178
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    realitykeeper wrote: »
    Mortals have an immortal soul. Mortals are free to choose between good and evil. To know God is to love him because he has given humanity everything he has to give.

    Which god are we talking about here exactly?
    realitykeeper wrote:

    The simple fact is we know not the day nor the hour but for the faithful, vigilance is important so possible milestones are always of interest. I do understand that the beliefs and rituals of faith may seem silly to the non believer but people of faith (Christians, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus etc) tend to be more successful in this life than the non believers in terms of health, wealth, happiness etc.

    As a Christian, I think the Christian world was highly successful when one considers the Americas, Australia and all Europe and Russia came under Christendom and any inroads by non Christian groups in the western world coincided with the growth of secularism and the slow demise of Christianity. In other words, the western world will regress in influence, power, prestige, as well as in the health and wealth of its citizens as Christianity retreats. Russia has learned where that ends so they have returned to Christianity in a big way.

    So it's a case of the Christian god versus the other gods now?

    Or perhaps it really is a case of a bunch of people falling out over whose imaginary friend is the best?


  • Options
    #179
    realitykeeper
    Registered Users Posts: 4,138 ✭✭✭realitykeeper


    gozunda wrote: »
    Which god are we talking about here exactly?



    So it's a case of the Christian god versus the other gods now?

    Or perhaps it really is a case of a bunch of people falling out over whose imaginary friend is the best?
    In the qoute you referenced, I did not mention God once. I referred to faith as opposed to non faith and Christian faith as opposed to non Christian faith. Suffering tends to beset those who abandon God as Russia did for most of the twentieth century and Christianity does seem to be rather successful in the absence of militant secularism. It is wonderful to see the reemergence of Orthodoxy in Russia and of course the decline of the west is likely to resume with a vengeance when a leftist replaces Trump as the next US President.


  • Options
    #180
    spacecoyote
    Registered Users Posts: 8,484 ✭✭✭spacecoyote


    wait a minute guys...I just realised, its 2017. So every day of this year means trouble for us...and even worse, today is the 17th.

    How have we all been so naïve to ignore our impending doom :eek::eek:

    And reality keeper, how un-Christian of you to not warn us last December what we were in for


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    looksee
    Registered Users Posts: 28,214 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    In fact I think I have sorted it, it was August 17th when the mysteries of the universe were resolved https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/two-stars-slammed-into-each-other-and-solved-half-of-astronomys-problems-what-comes-next/


Advertisement