Christian Discussion Thread III

[Ardoki]

WTF
There was talk of Orthodox holding an Ecumenical Synod and now Orthodox are throwing away 2000 years of Tradition and surrendering to Papal Infallibility

We're doing no such thing.

First of all, the forthcoming 2016 pan-Orthodox "Great and Holy Synod" is not claiming "Ecumenical" status.

Secondly, as is common in some Catholic circles, the linked article is more than a little over-optimistic about the possibility of reunion between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches, while also making the common mistake of placing too much emphasis on the role of the Ecumenical Patriarch within the Orthodox Church.

Catholic newspaper The Tablet has a firmer grasp of the situation.





And some of the rest of you might want to leave off the whole tapdancing around the trollnaming rule thing. To avoid any appearance of bias on my part, I've raised it with other members of the moderation team rather than act directly on it myself, but let's assume for the time being that it's not something we're not necessarily going to view with unmitigated pleasure.

Comrade Moderator. Should I start a separate thread asking people why they believe in their gods? Or should I not?

[Ardoki]

Perhaps he was just scared of the sadistic torture basement? I have read parts of the bible, but I find it sadistic and horrible. I have also read a lot of the Koran, which was actually a lot more child friendly and nice.

His reason was that he found everything in the Bible to be true and that it applied to all aspects of his own life.

How did he know it was all true? The stuff there apparently happened many hundreds of years before he was born.

[Bunkeranlage]

C.S. Lewis, in Mere Christianity, says that he originally read the Bible to disprove it. He ended up converting.

Perhaps he was just scared of the sadistic torture basement? I have read parts of the bible, but I find it sadistic and horrible. I have also read a lot of the Koran, which was actually a lot more child friendly and nice.

Perhaps you should read the whole Bible.It makes lots of sense when you do.
Also, isn't atheism a hard position to uphold? To say that there is absolutely 0% chance that God exists would be to claim omniscience in this field of knowledge, since there's always a possibility that He exists, whether you believe in Him or not.

[Neoconstantius]

Perhaps he was just scared of the sadistic torture basement? I have read parts of the bible, but I find it sadistic and horrible. I have also read a lot of the Koran, which was actually a lot more child friendly and nice.

Perhaps you should read the whole Bible.It makes lots of sense when you do.
Also, isn't atheism a hard position to uphold? To say that there is absolutely 0% chance that God exists would be to claim omniscience in this field of knowledge, since there's always a possibility that He exists, whether you believe in Him or not.

Which is exactly why that in the absence of faith, agnosticism is the only rational position to hold.

[Ardoki]

Perhaps he was just scared of the sadistic torture basement? I have read parts of the bible, but I find it sadistic and horrible. I have also read a lot of the Koran, which was actually a lot more child friendly and nice.

Perhaps you should read the whole Bible.It makes lots of sense when you do.
Also, isn't atheism a hard position to uphold? To say that there is absolutely 0% chance that God exists would be to claim omniscience in this field of knowledge, since there's always a possibility that He exists, whether you believe in Him or not.

Then there is also a possibility that the Kraken exists, or Zeus, or Isis. I automatically refuse to believe in something which there is no proof that it exists.

[Ardoki]

Perhaps you should read the whole Bible.It makes lots of sense when you do.
Also, isn't atheism a hard position to uphold? To say that there is absolutely 0% chance that God exists would be to claim omniscience in this field of knowledge, since there's always a possibility that He exists, whether you believe in Him or not.

Which is exactly why that in the absence of faith, agnosticism is the only rational position to hold.

Are you agnostic towards goblins? Or do you not believe in them?

[Constantinopolis]

Well, NSG polls can only have 10 options, and although Methodism is a large denomination, it is smaller than the nine denominations/categories that are on the poll (the 10th option being, of course, "other").

I see...

Actually, I just checked the numbers, and I stand corrected. Methodism has about 80 million adherents. At least one of the categories on the poll ("Restorationist") is smaller than that, having only about 25 million adherents.

The non-denominational category is probably smaller than Methodism, too.

So Methodism really should be one of the options on the poll. Maybe we can have it as an option in the Christian Discussion Thread IV.

[Senyosu]

Perhaps you should read the whole Bible.It makes lots of sense when you do.
Also, isn't atheism a hard position to uphold? To say that there is absolutely 0% chance that God exists would be to claim omniscience in this field of knowledge, since there's always a possibility that He exists, whether you believe in Him or not.

Which is exactly why that in the absence of faith, agnosticism is the only rational position to hold.

Or you can just create your own moral code that you and you alone follow.

Hey, it's working for me. Also, Orthodoxy seems very tsundere.

[Distruzio]

A better way to approach this question is with less of a sense of superiority (as evidenced in your last sentence, [y]ou may as well believe in unicorns and leprechauns...) and more of a sense of actual curiosity. This could be manifested by asking, "Hey NSG Christians! Why do you believe in your God?"

I can't speak for the other Christians. But I'd be more than happy to respond if you are actually curious. If you just want to shout that you're smarter than me, however....

I am actually curious. I just wanted to give a reason for me not believing in any god.

So... the question was not based on actual curiosity about belief but, rather, to be used as a springboard for a monologue about you?

What evidence would you accept?

Evidence, as long as it actually proves the Abrahamic god exists.

That's not what I asked. I asked what evidence would you accept?

A man saying, "I'm God"?

A picture of Jesus on toast?

A miracle?

Divine intervention?

Like... what evidence?

[The Archregimancy]

Comrade Moderator. Should I start a separate thread asking people why they believe in their gods? Or should I not?

A general "why do you believe in your god(s)?" discussion would likely best be taken to a separate thread.

[Othelos]

Maybe you should try something different, experience what the world has to offer.

I have looked at religions an I think that they are silly. However I want to know what makes people believe those things, however people here are quite rude.

Maybe instead of asking people online, you should attend a religious service and see for yourself.

[Neoconstantius]

Which is exactly why that in the absence of faith, agnosticism is the only rational position to hold.

Are you agnostic towards goblins? Or do you not believe in them?

I don't believe in them, but I can't say with absolute certainty that they do not exist, because I am not omniscient. Hence, I am agnostic toward them.

[Bunkeranlage]

His reason was that he found everything in the Bible to be true and that it applied to all aspects of his own life.

How did he know it was all true? The stuff there apparently happened many hundreds of years before he was born.

Jesus is an actual historical figure. Bertrand Russell obviously didn't do his research before writing Why I am not a Christian. There are reams and reams of evidence supporting the existence and acts of Jesus.

[Constantinopolis]

I automatically refuse to believe in something which there is no proof that it exists.

Do you believe in extra-terrestrial civilizations? Large numbers of atheists do, in spite of the complete lack of evidence for their existence.

[Ardoki]

Comrade Moderator. Should I start a separate thread asking people why they believe in their gods? Or should I not?

A general "why do you believe in your god(s)?" discussion would likely best be taken to a separate thread.

Okay. Is there one of those threads already in existence?

[Distruzio]

Perhaps he was just scared of the sadistic torture basement? I have read parts of the bible, but I find it sadistic and horrible. I have also read a lot of the Koran, which was actually a lot more child friendly and nice.

Well... the thing about the Bible many Protestants and atheists tend to forget... Christianity ain't in there.

[Ardoki]

I automatically refuse to believe in something which there is no proof that it exists.

Do you believe in extra-terrestrial civilizations?

I believe that they are highly likely to exist. However I cannot be certain.

Due to the size of the universe, it would be logical to suspect that there is a high chance of other intelligent lifeforms evolving somewhere else in this vast universe.

[The Archregimancy]

I see...

Actually, I just checked the numbers, and I stand corrected. Methodism has about 80 million adherents. At least one of the categories on the poll ("Restorationist") is smaller than that, having only about 25 million adherents.

The non-denominational category is probably smaller than Methodism, too.

So Methodism really should be one of the options on the poll. Maybe we can have it as an option in the Christian Discussion Thread IV.

Depending on who starts v. IV, I'd argue for accommodating the Methodists by dropping out the non-denominationals rather than the Restorationists.

After all, we wouldn't want to spare ourselves another tiresome argument over whether the Restorationists are really Christian or not, would we?

[Neoconstantius]

Do you believe in extra-terrestrial civilizations?

I believe that they are highly likely to exist. However I cannot be certain.

Due to the size of the universe, it would be logical to suspect that there is a high chance of other intelligent lifeforms evolving somewhere else in this vast universe.

So you are agnostic towards extraterrestrial civilizations, then?

[Bunkeranlage]

Perhaps he was just scared of the sadistic torture basement? I have read parts of the bible, but I find it sadistic and horrible. I have also read a lot of the Koran, which was actually a lot more child friendly and nice.

Well... the thing about the Bible many Protestants and atheists tend to forget... Christianity ain't in there.

Not in where?

[The Archregimancy]

A general "why do you believe in your god(s)?" discussion would likely best be taken to a separate thread.

Okay. Is there one of those threads already in existence?

Almost certainly; the real question is whether there's a recent thread on that topic that's less than a month old. If there is, revive it; if not, feel free to start a new one.

[Ardoki]

Are you agnostic towards goblins? Or do you not believe in them?

I don't believe in them, but I can't say with absolute certainty that they do not exist, because I am not omniscient. Hence, I am agnostic toward them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_of_theistic_probability

[Ardoki]

Okay. Is there one of those threads already in existence?

Almost certainly; the real question is whether there's a recent thread on that topic that's less than a month old. If there is, revive it; if not, feel free to start a new one.

Okay, thanks.

Sorry guys for using this thread inappropriately.

[Bunkeranlage]

I don't believe in them, but I can't say with absolute certainty that they do not exist, because I am not omniscient. Hence, I am agnostic toward them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_of_theistic_probability

On that scale, I'd rate myself a de facto theist.

[The Archregimancy]

Jesus is an actual historical figure. Bertrand Russell obviously didn't do his research before writing Why I am not a Christian. There are reams and reams of evidence supporting the existence and acts of Jesus.

I've also recently warned people off turning this into a historical Jesus thread - though there's no reason why we can't have yet another thread on the latter topic.

I do appreciate the subject is broadly germane, but there's almost no way of discussing it without the subject becoming the primary topic of discussion for several pages, at which point it becomes an inadvertent threadjack.


(For the record, while I'm reasonably comfortable gently nudging people to avoid threadjacks here, I try and leave formal rulings over potentially actionable behaviour in the thread to colleagues to try and avoid any appearance of bias on my part)