Can you prove Christianity is true through reason alone?

[iamme]

Originally Posted by MzAnnThrope

Just because a person can manufacture a comfort in response to a need does not mean that that comfort is an actual agent existing separate from the imagining of the sufferer. Human psychology can account for all kinds of imaginings that lend sufferers comfort. It just does not follow that because a comfort alleviates suffering that it is a divine agent--especially such an agent as a benevolent deity. It does not follow that having a need proves that a deity exists. One does not follow from the other.

...

not understanding what that has to do with anything i said, i just say, ok?

[Solus vistor]

Originally Posted by MzAnnThrope

Just because a person can manufacture a comfort in response to a need does not mean that that comfort is an actual agent existing separate from the imagining of the sufferer. Human psychology can account for all kinds of imaginings that lend sufferers comfort. It just does not follow that because a comfort alleviates suffering that it is a divine agent--especially such an agent as a benevolent deity. It does not follow that having a need proves that a deity exists. One does not follow from the other.

That is true. The ability to "manufacture comfort" is only one of the less important functions of religion, especially Christianity, but it does not imply that there does not exist Something independent of the sufferer's mind that is the Source of that comfort. Like Richard Dawkins' book on (his) God Delusion provides comfort to many atheists (or lapsed Christians) but would hardly convince a believer, but it does not imply that there is nothing worthwhile and "objectively valid" when Dawkins keeps to his field of evolutionary biology, where he is an expert.

[cpayne]

Originally Posted by MzAnnThrope

Just because a person can manufacture a comfort in response to a need does not mean that that comfort is an actual agent existing separate from the imagining of the sufferer. Human psychology can account for all kinds of imaginings that lend sufferers comfort. It just does not follow that because a comfort alleviates suffering that it is a divine agent--especially such an agent as a benevolent deity. It does not follow that having a need proves that a deity exists. One does not follow from the other.

Actually (not to pull the thread too far off course), I would turn this completely around. If I were an atheist, it would be a great comfort to me to think that there was no God Who would eventually judge my life.

In fact, I would cling to my (lack of) belief quite obstinately.

[Leela]

Originally Posted by cpayne

Actually (not to pull the thread too far off course), I would turn this completely around. If I were an atheist, it would be a great comfort to me to think that there was no God Who would eventually judge my life.

In fact, I would cling to my (lack of) belief quite obstinately.

Hi cpayne,

Are you saying that you worry that God will not think well of your life at the time of judgment? or that you would behave differently if you did not believe in God? If so, how would behave differently? Would you love your family less? Kick puppies? Steal your neighbors pornography? Vote for Democrats?

Best,
Leela

[warpspeedpetey]

Originally Posted by cpayne

Actually (not to pull the thread too far off course), I would turn this completely around. If I were an atheist, it would be a great comfort to me to think that there was no God Who would eventually judge my life.

In fact, I would cling to my (lack of) belief quite obstinately.

yeah, they keep talking about how they can behave morally with no G-d, but they dont mention that with no motivation other than the wish to avoid legal punishment, the world would devolve into a society of people getting away with what they can. a Machiavellian nightmare of everybody doing whatever they can short of punishment to satisfy their wills.

they also forget that millions of deaths occurred in the last century at the hands of officially, and actual atheistic regimes. those people were capable of acting morally, yet when given the chance, they didnt

the idea that atheism is as moral as theism, is completely washed away in the tide of innocent blood.

[iamme]

Originally Posted by warpspeedpetey

the idea that atheism is as moral as theism, is completely washed away in the tide of innocent blood.

the westboro chucrch is a church, therefore you must be just like all of them, hateful and cruel.
it totally works using your logic!

[warpspeedpetey]

Originally Posted by iamme

the westboro chucrch is a church, therefore you must be just like all of them, hateful and cruel.
it totally works using your logic!

i live 50 miles from those protestants, you dont need to tell me about them. i dont care for the manner in which they operate, but their idea, if one separates it from the disgusting manner in which they operate. is right

Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for homosexuality, Sarah, lots wife was turned into a pillar of salt for looking back as they were destroyed. she sympathized with homosexuals, and she to was destroyed with them.

thats westboros point, unfortunately they act in such a way as discredit whatever they say. thankfully they aint Catholics

further, my logic is not hateful and cruel, logic is entirely neutral in regard to those qualities.

right and wrong are not functions of feelings, feelings change moment to moment, emotion is a cruel mistress, one day you feel one way the next you dont.

logic is entirely free of that. thankfully

[iamme]

Originally Posted by warpspeedpetey

i live 50 miles from those protestants, you dont need to tell me about them. i dont care for the manner in which they operate, but their idea, if one separates it from the disgusting manner in which they operate. is right

Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for homosexuality, Sarah, lots wife was turned into a pillar of salt for looking back as they were destroyed. she sympathized with homosexuals, and she to was destroyed with them.

thats westboros point, unfortunately they act in such a way as discredit whatever they say. thankfully they aint Catholics

further, my logic is not hateful and cruel, logic is entirely neutral in regard to those qualities.

right and wrong are not functions of feelings, feelings change moment to moment, emotion is a cruel mistress, one day you feel one way the next you dont.

logic is entirely free of that. thankfully

wow.
i didnt know catholics were hatemongers...
until now.
well, maybe not all of them, but certainly some.

[warpspeedpetey]

Originally Posted by iamme

wow.
i didnt know catholics were hatemongers...
until now.
well, maybe not all of them, but certainly some.

i assume that you are saying i am a 'hatemonger'. if so, how am i being a hatemonger?

what, specifically, have i said that was hateful?

[iamme]

Originally Posted by warpspeedpetey

i assume that you are saying i am a 'hatemonger'. if so, how am i being a hatemonger?

what, specifically, have i said that was hateful?

i never said any such thing.
you inferred it. thats your thing, not mine.

[cpayne]

Originally Posted by iamme

i never said any such thing.
.

Not that I care too much about this particular argument, but yes, you did. Why back off from it now?

[cpayne]

Originally Posted by Leela

Hi cpayne,

Are you saying that you worry that God will not think well of your life at the time of judgment? or that you would behave differently if you did not believe in God? If so, how would behave differently? Would you love your family less? Kick puppies? Steal your neighbors pornography? Vote for Democrats?

Best,
Leela

I think what I was implying or stating is that, if I were an atheist, I would feel comfort in believing that I was accountable to absolutely no final authority except myself. How that would affect my behavior, I really don't know. I have a pretty good idea I would be a much worse person; it is my love for God and my trust in Him that makes me try every day to be more kind, more gentle, a better person--that I might be conformed to His image. I don't know if I would do that without this love and faith. How this belief actually affects atheists, I don't know. I'm sure most of them are decent enough.

What I was specifically reacting to was the assumption that Christians must be believers because they derive comfort from their beliefs. All I was pointing out was that that accusation goes both directions: Atheists derive comfort from their beliefs, too, even though they present themselves as noble and courageous souls up there in the icy winds of "reality," while believers are enjoying themselves in the comfy padded cells of belief.

[iamme]

Originally Posted by cpayne

Not that I care too much about this particular argument, but yes, you did. Why back off from it now?

no, i didnt say he was a hatemonger, he inferred it.
me saying he is a hatemonger would go something like this;
"you are a hatemonger."

however, their ideals are that homosexuals are destroying the country and should be sent away or killed (very nazi-esque) and that to punish america for allowing them to exist, he kills american soldiers. he thinks their ideas are right, in his EXACT words. so if he agrees with those sentiments, then i will happily inform him that hes a hatemonger, but as of yet, ive done no such thing.

[warpspeedpetey]

Originally Posted by iamme

no, i didnt say he was a hatemonger, he inferred it.
me saying he is a hatemonger would go something like this;
"you are a hatemonger."

funny, you quoted one of my posts and then implied i was a hate monger, now you seem to lack the courage to back up your implication.

however, their ideals are that homosexuals are destroying the country and should be sent away or killed (very nazi-esque) and that to punish america for allowing them to exist, he kills american soldiers.

as a Catholic i assure you, i want no one killed, not homosexuals, not soldiers, not innocent babies, i believe in a Culture of Life.

he thinks their ideas are right, in his EXACT words

yes, i explained exactly what i thought was right in their position. i quote

"Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for homosexuality, Sarah, lots wife was turned into a pillar of salt for looking back as they were destroyed. she sympathized with homosexuals, and she to was destroyed with them."

i dont suppose G-d kills innocent soldiers because homosexuals exist

i suppose that if we sympathize, and uphold homosexual behaviors, we cannot expect, the G-d who calls homosexuality an abomination, to look favorably on us. pretty simple.

so if he agrees with those sentiments, then i will happily inform him that hes a hatemonger, but as of yet, ive done no such thing.

[/quote]

i dont care for their methods, but their ideas about homosexualities effect on society are plainly there in the Bible for all to read. it is a matter of history, it cannot be reasonably denied.

but you might notice in post #52 i said you had to separate their ideas from their actions. they act crazy,and say crazy things in order to make the point that homosexual behavior is an abomination in the eyes of G-d.

if you dont believe me read your Bible

[pismopal]

Originally Posted by Leela

Hi cpayne,

Are you saying that you worry that God will not think well of your life at the time of judgment? or that you would behave differently if you did not believe in God? If so, how would behave differently? Would you love your family less? Kick puppies? Steal your neighbors pornography? Vote for Democrats?

Best,
Leela

Vote for democrats? What a cruel demonic, accusation..what kind of people do you think these are???