View Poll Results: What do you believe the future will bring in the long run? A world...

Voters
28. You may not vote on this poll
  • where truth and justice prevail.

    4 14.29%
  • that is better, but still no permanent world peace.

    6 21.43%
  • that is essentially the same.

    6 21.43%
  • that is worse than ever.

    12 42.86%
+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 25 FirstFirst 123456789101116 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 363

Thread: World Peace--Is It Possible?

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan
    I believe that the larger risk is the one you are taking. If my belief is wrong, I have perhaps wasted my life. If your disbelief is wrong, you have perhaps wasted your eternity.
    I don’t believe that the extent of my inaction will affect my eternal destiny if I have one. I would rather follow some of His wisdom perfectly than try to follow all of His wisdom imperfectly. If my inactions are wrong then at least I played it safe and I believe He will understand that my hesitance was intended for the benefit of mankind. If your actions are wrong you have affected the lives of countless other people and impeded the progress of mankind just so that you can possibly get into heaven if it exists and if you understood His meaning. I see much less risk to both myself and mankind by playing it safe. As my fifth grade teacher used to tell us “If you don’t know the answer don’t just guess.”

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan
    The world has far more to fear from atheist religions and atheist doctrines than from Christianity.
    I see your point but I disagree. Your example of Stalin was a good one. There were obviously some shortcomings in his beliefs (feel free to laugh at my understatement). We all recognize this because his ideas and actions are well documented and we can see where the faults lie. We can learn a lot from his mistakes and we can take precautions to ensure that they never happen again. Compare that to any of the various Holy wars. Neither side is right nor can they be reasoned with because their “truths” cannot be verified or rationalized. There is no way to stop them and nothing that we can learn from those events other than the destructive nature of unsubstantiated beliefs. When people make logical mistakes we can see them in advance and possibly prevent them, learn from them, learn how to prevent them in the future and mankind makes progress. When religious people make mistakes there is no resolution that can be made and no progress that can happen. Humans are going to make mistakes no matter what belief system they rely on. The cost of mistakes is where the big difference lies.

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan
    You talk about a rational person. Who is that? Is it someone who agrees with you on issues?
    No it is somebody who can convince me when I am wrong. Whether or not I listen to that person or understand them depends on my own human limitations but if I am rational I will take their words into consideration before I take any actions based on my beliefs. A rational person always considers the possibility that they may be wrong and acts accordingly. An irrational person (what I previously called weak-minded) will act impulsively without adequate justification or sufficient information. I don’t mean to imply that such people are necessarily religious but I believe it is that mindset that can affect people’s judgment. Without the crutch of religion people would have fewer alternatives to logic.

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan
    However, the path of reason that leads one to accepting the words of another, say, Jesus Christ, are verifiable. What is revealed after faith is not directly verifiable, although it must be consistent with the other tenets of the faith, and it cannot contradict true reason, although it does transcend it.
    More John Patrick talk. Perhaps this is a Catholic thing. Just because the path to religion is a logical progression does not mean that anything pursuant to that is logical. That is a formal fallacy called the fallacy of necessity. Once you make that “leap” into faith all bets are off and the rules of reason no longer apply. Do religious people not splits eights because they will probably lose both hands? It sounds logical and there is evidence to support it but the conclusion is not correct. That is where philosophy can show the fallacy behind religion.

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan
    If something is a revealed truth, it is not verifiable.
    Does this statement not perfectly exemplify the difference between faith and reason? How does one tell the difference between a revealed truth and a revealed lie? Does the devil not take other forms and reveal things to humans? If neither can be verified or validated how can someone have any confidence that their decision is the right one? How do we know that Mohhamed received his message from an angel and not a fallen angel? What if someone misunderstands a revealed truth? With no way to validate it there is no hope for that person to see their mistakes. All hope for human understanding and progress is lost.

    The reasoning you describe above is vulnerable to a logical fallacy called the converse error. Here’s how it works:

    All revealed truths are not directly verifiable.
    My belief is unverifiable.
    Therefore my belief is a revealed truth.

    Whether or not a belief is consistent with the other tenets of the faith is a subjective matter and is probably not difficult to get around. The situation you describe makes it fairly easy to create truth wherever someone chooses to see it. An unverified belief system like this makes religion an easy target for devious minds whereas such tampering could not slip past a rational philosophy. As I mentioned before philosophy is more transparent and has built in liability that religion does not.

    Also your support of revealed truths by the fact that they are not contradicting true reason is not valid. That is the negative proof fallacy. Just because there is no proof that something is false does not make it true. Already I’ve uncovered three logical fallacies that appear in religion and we haven’t even quoted any scripture yet!

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan
    Don't exclude any portion of the Bible. The trick is to only read it for the spiritual truth it contains. As a religious book, don't pay attention to the history, the culture, the genealogies, the local practices, etc., etc. It is fairly easy to focus on what God is saying, and ignore the writers' opinions and biases, the customs of the day, the peculiar perspective of ancient people, etc.
    Then why is all that extraneous stuff in there? If it is in our best interest to keep His church free from error why do we allow so much irrelevant and misleading material to remain? What is the reasoning behind that decision? It’s just another weakness in the system and another vulnerability for self-serving people to exploit.

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan
    Religion does not encourage people to make decisions based on unsubstantiated and possibly inaccurate information…I can think of no act that I have ever performed based on my religion that I consider irrational.
    I’m glad to hear that, especially with all of the opinions being tossed around this forum.

    “Homosexuality is a learned, deviant behavior. I see no reason for the state to encourage homosexuality by extending benefits to those so engaged.”

    “The worst homosexual has the ability to refrain from homosexual practice. Maybe they won't succeed perfectly, but their struggle against the practice is healthy in and of itself.”

    “From the point of view that homosexuality is a crime against God and nature, the use of the term "fag" is no more demeaning than the use of the term "crook" to describe a felon.”


    None of those comments have any factual or logical basis. I am glad to know that you have not taken any actions based on those opinions. You are more rational than most I have met.

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan
    Mythology? Maybe to you, but not to me. Christ existed. His teachings and public life were documented. Numerous writings and traditions were passed down these past two thousand years, which testify to and amplify these teachings. My reason says it is not mythology. I believe enough validation exists to warrant belief in Christ.
    I do not deny the existence of Jesus or the authenticity of the bible. As you pointed out there is a good deal of evidence and I have no reason to doubt any of it. I also do not deny the existence of God although I have no reason to believe that he exists based on the evidence I have seen. However as a rational person I accept the fact that my opinion in this matter could possibly be wrong. I do not believe in Him but I cannot deny Him either. Even though I do not believe in Him I still consider Him and factor his views in all of my decisions. I like to consider every conceivable factor before I make an important decision. That is another virtue that many religions do not nurture.
    Truth demands knowledge. Deceit demands faith.

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ccibball50
    95% of all statistics are made up.

    There's one for thought.
    How much of the bible is made up? There’s one for thought.
    Truth demands knowledge. Deceit demands faith.

  3. #78
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nazgul View Post
    How much of the bible is made up? There’s one for thought.
    How much of it do you think is made up? And why?

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    posting from Bethesda, MD
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nazgul View Post
    I don’t believe that the extent of my inaction will affect my eternal destiny if I have one. I would rather follow some of His wisdom perfectly than try to follow all of His wisdom imperfectly. If my inactions are wrong then at least I played it safe and I believe He will understand that my hesitance was intended for the benefit of mankind. If your actions are wrong you have affected the lives of countless other people and impeded the progress of mankind just so that you can possibly get into heaven if it exists and if you understood His meaning. I see much less risk to both myself and mankind by playing it safe. As my fifth grade teacher used to tell us “If you don’t know the answer don’t just guess.”
    I don't believe just so I can get into heaven. I believe because for me there is no other way I can live my life. I believe that Jesus is who He said He was, the Son of God. I believe because I have no choice. Reason led me to believe in Jesus and the truth that He taught. It would be irrational, impossible for me deny my belief.

    It upsets me that most critics harp on the evils of Christianity but never give equal time to the humanitarian good that is done in the name of Christianity? Doesn't suit their case? Is that all this is about? Winning a case?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nazgul View Post
    I see your point but I disagree. Your example of Stalin was a good one. There were obviously some shortcomings in his beliefs (feel free to laugh at my understatement). We all recognize this because his ideas and actions are well documented and we can see where the faults lie. We can learn a lot from his mistakes and we can take precautions to ensure that they never happen again. Compare that to any of the various Holy wars. Neither side is right nor can they be reasoned with because their “truths” cannot be verified or rationalized. There is no way to stop them and nothing that we can learn from those events other than the destructive nature of unsubstantiated beliefs. When people make logical mistakes we can see them in advance and possibly prevent them, learn from them, learn how to prevent them in the future and mankind makes progress. When religious people make mistakes there is no resolution that can be made and no progress that can happen. Humans are going to make mistakes no matter what belief system they rely on. The cost of mistakes is where the big difference lies.
    All the holy wars? So the Crusades were simply a holy war? It had nothing to do with Muslims taking over lands that were not theirs? Had the Holy Roman Empire been secular, there still would have been a response to Muslim aggression, but probably more timely. Most wars have not been holy wars as a matter of fact. How many of this past centuries' wars have been holy wars? Why do you need to reach back hundreds of years to support your argument, when they are not even relevant in today's world? A fight with fanatical Muslims has nothing to do with holy war on our part, nothing whatsoever. If they strike us, we will strike them back, regardless of their religious motivation or lack thereof.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nazgul View Post
    No it is somebody who can convince me when I am wrong. Whether or not I listen to that person or understand them depends on my own human limitations but if I am rational I will take their words into consideration before I take any actions based on my beliefs. A rational person always considers the possibility that they may be wrong and acts accordingly. An irrational person (what I previously called weak-minded) will act impulsively without adequate justification or sufficient information. I don’t mean to imply that such people are necessarily religious but I believe it is that mindset that can affect people’s judgment. Without the crutch of religion people would have fewer alternatives to logic.
    My religion has nothing to do with my ability to make rational decisions. If logic dictates that the right course is against my religion, I will abandon my religion. The fact is, it doesn't and I won't. I fear anyone in a decisionmaking position who cannot see that God exists. That doesn't even take faith--it is self evident. I certainly don't trust my fate to someone ignores the obvious, including those scientists who are so buried in their theoretical world of hypotheses, they cannot see the real world or recognize the signature of its author.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nazgul View Post
    More John Patrick talk. Perhaps this is a Catholic thing. Just because the path to religion is a logical progression does not mean that anything pursuant to that is logical. That is a formal fallacy called the fallacy of necessity. Once you make that “leap” into faith all bets are off and the rules of reason no longer apply. Do religious people not splits eights because they will probably lose both hands? It sounds logical and there is evidence to support it but the conclusion is not correct. That is where philosophy can show the fallacy behind religion.
    It would be irrational and illogical not to make the leap of faith. The evidence is overwhelming. You need to revisit it with an open mind.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nazgul View Post
    Does this statement not perfectly exemplify the difference between faith and reason? How does one tell the difference between a revealed truth and a revealed lie? Does the devil not take other forms and reveal things to humans? If neither can be verified or validated how can someone have any confidence that their decision is the right one? How do we know that Mohhamed received his message from an angel and not a fallen angel? What if someone misunderstands a revealed truth? With no way to validate it there is no hope for that person to see their mistakes. All hope for human understanding and progress is lost.
    Study the record and your own reason will lead you to believe that Jesus is who He said he was, the Son of God. There is no danger of His words being a lie. Your reason will tell you that. You need to revisit the record with an open mind. You apparently missed something.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nazgul View Post
    The reasoning you describe above is vulnerable to a logical fallacy called the converse error. Here’s how it works:

    All revealed truths are not directly verifiable.
    My belief is unverifiable.
    Therefore my belief is a revealed truth.
    Wrong again. Belief in this case is in a person. Reason leads you there. What He taught may be scientifically unverifiable, but it will be eminently verifiable in your heart. The belief is in a person and it is backed up by ample evidence for the most fastidious mind. It follows that once you have established your belief in Him, you will accept His teachings into your heart as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nazgul View Post
    Whether or not a belief is consistent with the other tenets of the faith is a subjective matter and is probably not difficult to get around. The situation you describe makes it fairly easy to create truth wherever someone chooses to see it. An unverified belief system like this makes religion an easy target for devious minds whereas such tampering could not slip past a rational philosophy. As I mentioned before philosophy is more transparent and has built in liability that religion does not.
    You are kidding yourself. Rational philosophy is not verifiable. I have philosophy, morality and spirituality all wrapped up in one, and it comes through a person who is trustworthy and true and can be verified by your faculty of reason. The evidence is there, but a closed mind will never see it. Once you see it, you too will believe. Give it another try.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nazgul View Post
    Also your support of revealed truths by the fact that they are not contradicting true reason is not valid. That is the negative proof fallacy. Just because there is no proof that something is false does not make it true. Already I’ve uncovered three logical fallacies that appear in religion and we haven’t even quoted any scripture yet!
    It it true because reason leads to the conclusion that the person, Jesus Christ is true, and it follows that His words are true. The evidence is there, but if one are more bent on destroying it than weighing it, he may miss it. If you have been there, done that, you must have missed something. Go back and try again. Often the case is that the person does not want to be bound by the restrictions that truth places on human thought and action. They reject truth because they want a freer lifestyle. Truth is absolute. It does not allow for individual preferences.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nazgul View Post
    Then why is all that extraneous stuff in there? If it is in our best interest to keep His church free from error why do we allow so much irrelevant and misleading material to remain? What is the reasoning behind that decision? It’s just another weakness in the system and another vulnerability for self-serving people to exploit.
    If it were a dictated tome, there would be nothing extraneous. As it is, it is authored by many at different times. Our job in keeping it free from error is incidental, since Jesus promised that it would be kept free of error by His Holy Spirit presiding over the church. Human safeguards alone would never be adequate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nazgul View Post
    I’m glad to hear that, especially with all of the opinions being tossed around this forum.

    “Homosexuality is a learned, deviant behavior. I see no reason for the state to encourage homosexuality by extending benefits to those so engaged.”

    “The worst homosexual has the ability to refrain from homosexual practice. Maybe they won't succeed perfectly, but their struggle against the practice is healthy in and of itself.”

    “From the point of view that homosexuality is a crime against God and nature, the use of the term "fag" is no more demeaning than the use of the term "crook" to describe a felon.”


    None of those comments have any factual or logical basis. I am glad to know that you have not taken any actions based on those opinions. You are more rational than most I have met.
    I do believe that homosexual practice is immoral and intrinsically evil. I do not believe that being homosexual, that is, being attracted to members of the same sex, is at all immoral.Likewise, I do believe that killing is immoral, except when incidental in trying to save life (self defense), but being tempted to kill is not immoral.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nazgul View Post
    I do not deny the existence of Jesus or the authenticity of the bible. As you pointed out there is a good deal of evidence and I have no reason to doubt any of it. I also do not deny the existence of God although I have no reason to believe that he exists based on the evidence I have seen. However as a rational person I accept the fact that my opinion in this matter could possibly be wrong. I do not believe in Him but I cannot deny Him either. Even though I do not believe in Him I still consider Him and factor his views in all of my decisions. I like to consider every conceivable factor before I make an important decision. That is another virtue that many religions do not nurture.
    If you do not deny the existence of Jesus, you are closer to Christianity than you might think. Now, you may have to decide whether he was a truthful or a liar.
    Aslan 11/1/90 - 6/15/10 Stormy 1/22/95 -8/23/10
    “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church,
    but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”
    Bishop Fulton J. Sheen

    “It takes a very long time to become young.” Pablo Picasso

  5. #80
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moo321 View Post
    How much of it do you think is made up? And why?
    It all depends on what you mean by "made up."

    I don't believe it comes from God any more than I believe the Archangel Gabriel dictated the Koran to Mohammad. What we today call "the Bible" is a mix of Jewish culture and mythology and history of the times surrounding the life of Jesus, his disciples, and the subsequent destruction of the Temple.

    It is also the most reliable guide to human nature ever written. Every weakness we have is detailed in there. Ever been cruel, boastful, dishonest, cowardly, selfish, jealous or hateful? Read the Bible and see what it begets. Even an atheist would have to agree.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Third base
    Posts
    11,322

    Default Mysterious

    Quote Originally Posted by Automatic Monkey View Post
    It all depends on what you mean by "made up."

    I don't believe it comes from God any more than I believe the Archangel Gabriel dictated the Koran to Mohammad. What we today call "the Bible" is a mix of Jewish culture and mythology and history of the times surrounding the life of Jesus, his disciples, and the subsequent destruction of the Temple.

    It is also the most reliable guide to human nature ever written. Every weakness we have is detailed in there. Ever been cruel, boastful, dishonest, cowardly, selfish, jealous or hateful? Read the Bible and see what it begets. Even an atheist would have to agree.
    The meaning of this discussion here now becomes clearer. 14 votes have been counted. So why is it that of the tens of thousands of visitors weekly (of various religions) to the ZZ, only 14 decide to vote? One of life's many, many mysteries.
    Dogma schmogma

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    posting from Bethesda, MD
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Katweezel View Post
    The meaning of this discussion here now becomes clearer. 14 votes have been counted. So why is it that of the tens of thousands of visitors weekly (of various religions) to the ZZ, only 14 decide to vote? One of life's many, many mysteries.
    The most votes we ever got on a poll was 51, and that poll was open for months. I'm talking about, "Is America becoming a fascist state?"

    I'd imagine that each person is counted each and every time they visit the thread. The numbers of visitors is misleading.
    Aslan 11/1/90 - 6/15/10 Stormy 1/22/95 -8/23/10
    “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church,
    but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”
    Bishop Fulton J. Sheen

    “It takes a very long time to become young.” Pablo Picasso

  8. #83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan View Post
    The most votes we ever got on a poll was 51, and that poll was open for months. I'm talking about, "Is America becoming a fascist state?"

    I'd imagine that each person is counted each and every time they visit the thread. The numbers of visitors is misleading.
    No the # of visitors is correct - but we had to delete about a 1000
    'NO' votes along the way from our secret blackbox control panel. zg
    "The dogs bark but the caravan moves on."
    .....................The Zengrifter Interview (PDF) |
    The Zengrifter / James Grosjean Reputation Debate
    -----------------------------------------
    “Truth, like gold, is obtained not by growth, but by washing away all that is not gold.” — Leo Tolstoy........
    "Is everything a conspiracy? No, just the important stuff." ZG

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Aslan, I feel like we are speaking two different languages. We are using the same words but the meanings are very different. This confusion is causing a lot of misunderstanding for both of us. I pointed out several of your fallacies and your recent post contains several more. Either you don’t understand logic or you are twisting it to suit your needs. You are still trying to convince me that 2+2=5. I cannot deny that your beliefs may be right but I can conclude that they are not rational or valid based on what you have told me. I’m afraid this discussion cannot continue if we cannot agree on the basic definitions of our terms. I sincerely appreciate the time you spent explaining your thoughts to me and I am glad that my thoughts were openly received by you. Unfortunately this has ended just as I had predicted based on my previous experiences.
    Truth demands knowledge. Deceit demands faith.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    posting from Bethesda, MD
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nazgul View Post
    Aslan, I feel like we are speaking two different languages. We are using the same words but the meanings are very different. This confusion is causing a lot of misunderstanding for both of us. I pointed out several of your fallacies and your recent post contains several more. Either you don’t understand logic or you are twisting it to suit your needs. You are still trying to convince me that 2+2=5. I cannot deny that your beliefs may be right but I can conclude that they are not rational or valid based on what you have told me. I’m afraid this discussion cannot continue if we cannot agree on the basic definitions of our terms. I sincerely appreciate the time you spent explaining your thoughts to me and I am glad that my thoughts were openly received by you. Unfortunately this has ended just as I had predicted based on my previous experiences.

    Don't be quick to pass it off as my lack of logic.

    Once I got to the point of believing based on the evidence that Jesus was a real person, I had to decide whether he was charlatan or not. I concluded from the evidence recorded in the gospels and epistles that he was not a fake or a liar. The rest falls into place. You may have read the same things and concluded differently. My faith is based on evidence, and apparently your disbelief is based on the same evidence.

    I had no vested interest in believing, as I had tried living as an atheist. Life had no meaning in that attempt. It caused me to return and examine the Christian claims. There is evidence that others who persist in atheism have the same problem with meaning. For example, Sartre, for whom things just are. Existence without meaning. No wonder he wrote Nausea. I'm sure he searched but never found the truth of the scriptures. I don't know why.

    I'm being as honest as I can be.
    Aslan 11/1/90 - 6/15/10 Stormy 1/22/95 -8/23/10
    “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church,
    but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”
    Bishop Fulton J. Sheen

    “It takes a very long time to become young.” Pablo Picasso

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Third base
    Posts
    11,322

    Default Award medals

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan View Post
    The most votes we ever got on a poll was 51, and that poll was open for months. I'm talking about, "Is America becoming a fascist state?"

    I'd imagine that each person is counted each and every time they visit the thread. The numbers of visitors is misleading.
    Aslan, I noticed some other Plato/Socrates type voted the same as me, thus making number 2 almost a favourite. My bet is on #2.

    I also noticed you avoided - as you seem to be making a habit of - my main question. I realize you have far more important subjects to devote time to; however, wasn't this one of your polls? Now if it was, then those few voters who bothered voting surely deserve your full attention. You didn't offer any explanation as to the low numbers of voters, considering the high numbers of visitors; which as I write, counts well into the hundreds of thousands. (Need an auditor for real accuracy here.)

    Instead, you leave it to zg to offer vague notions of black boxes in control rooms which seem to be contolled by organized crime. So I ask again Aslan, do you have any explanation for the low voter numbers?

    PS I have another suggestion you may consider before your next hare-brained poll gets under way. If each voter in this current poll were to receive a medal with your billiard balls imprinted on it, perhaps the award may encourage more voters next poll.
    Dogma schmogma

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    posting from Bethesda, MD
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Katweezel View Post
    Aslan, I noticed some other Plato/Socrates type voted the same as me, thus making number 2 almost a favourite. My bet is on #2.

    I also noticed you avoided - as you seem to be making a habit of - my main question. I realize you have far more important subjects to devote time to; however, wasn't this one of your polls? Now if it was, then those few voters who bothered voting surely deserve your full attention. You didn't offer any explanation as to the low numbers of voters, considering the high numbers of visitors; which as I write, counts well into the hundreds of thousands. (Need an auditor for real accuracy here.)

    Instead, you leave it to zg to offer vague notions of black boxes in control rooms which seem to be contolled by organized crime. So I ask again Aslan, do you have any explanation for the low voter numbers?

    PS I have another suggestion you may consider before your next hare-brained poll gets under way. If each voter in this current poll were to receive a medal with your billiard balls imprinted on it, perhaps the award may encourage more voters next poll.
    I see there were 666 views and 85 replies. If all 15 respondents to the poll looked at each of the replies, that would be 1,275 views. We only had 666 views, so I don't see the problem. How did you come up with hundreds of thousands of visitors? Do you mean to the Forum? Many of those might not be aware of the poll, or if they saw the title, simply were not interested in hte subject of world peace.

    If the poll is hare-brained, what does that make you as respondent to a hare-brained poll? This is a rhetorical question.
    Aslan 11/1/90 - 6/15/10 Stormy 1/22/95 -8/23/10
    “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church,
    but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”
    Bishop Fulton J. Sheen

    “It takes a very long time to become young.” Pablo Picasso

  13. #88
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan View Post
    I am talking about spiritual truths, not predictions of events to come or which have already come. If you're using the Bible as a crystal ball, I think you have the wrong idea. Number one, the prophecies are so fuzzy that scholars cannot decide whether they were referring to something long past or something yet to come. Number two, there is evidence that some prophecies were written after the fact as a means of bolstering the faith of the people in past times of trial or persecution. Number three, the purpose of the Bible is to provide spiritual guidance to those who believe, not a road map to the future, except in general and often cryptic terms. Number four, while some things validate the writings in the Bible, Christianity is called a religious faith for a reason--the truth of its tenets are a matter of belief, not verifiable fact. There would be no need for faith if everything were verifiable. I do agree that reason leads one to faith, but I would not hang my hat on the accuracy of Biblical prophecy--it's too ambiguous an area IMHO.

    PS--In a later post it occurred to me that there is one prophecy in particular that might be a good "general" verification of the Christian faith. That prophecy is that one day the Jews will be converted.
    I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers, so that you will not become wise (in) your own estimation: a hardening has come upon Israel in part, until the full number of the Gentiles comes in, and thus all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The deliverer will come out of Zion, he will turn away godlessness from Jacob; and this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins." Romans 11:25-27 (New American Bible)
    I was referring mostly to prophecies that had been fulfilled.

    In particular things like Daniel's prophecies about the rise and fall of ancient empires, predicted centuries in advance.

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Third base
    Posts
    11,322

    Default 1000 X 1000 = agenda

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan View Post
    I see there were 666 views and 85 replies. If all 15 respondents to the poll looked at each of the replies, that would be 1,275 views. We only had 666 views, so I don't see the problem. How did you come up with hundreds of thousands of visitors? Do you mean to the Forum? Many of those might not be aware of the poll, or if they saw the title, simply were not interested in hte subject of world peace.

    If the poll is hare-brained, what does that make you as respondent to a hare-brained poll? This is a rhetorical question.
    Which needs a rhetorical answer and so I first needed to know exactly what that means. In my 23-y-o son's old high school dictionary it says thus: "1 adj. A rhetorical question is one which is asked in order to make a statement rather than to get an answer."
    2 "Rhetorical language is intended to be grand and impressive."

    You cagey bugger; but I understand perfectly. Your POLL was rhetorical! (2.)

    There is that 666 figure again. Are you trying to bait the vast numbers of people who read this board and who don't for a minute believe any of the superstitious, fearful satanic or devilish dogma for which christians are renowned; (and which shares top billing with the other stars of the Cshow?) We will not be baited, is one of our mottos. (We have more than one motto.)

    As this is the second time you have recently mentioned THAT number, - once would be 1000/1 against, twice would make it 1000 X 1000 or thereabouts = 1,000,000/1 against it being random double selection. As I just demonstrated to an auditor who understands figures better than anyone, those odds make it obvious it is a bait, and therefore, you have an agenda.

    I may have exhaggerated slightly with my hundreds of thousands. If so, I apologise for that too. And yes, I recognize when a hare-brained poll is intentionally constructed with vague, imprecise, confusing questions obviously deliberately aimed at only hare-brained voters. That was why I could not resist voting for Plato's box: #2.
    Dogma schmogma

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moo321 View Post
    I was referring mostly to prophecies that had been fulfilled.

    In particular things like Daniel's prophecies about the rise and fall of ancient empires, predicted centuries in advance.
    You are kidding right? Its easy to make prophecies come true when the books are written many years after the fact. Daniel was said to have lived in the 6th century BC during the time of the Babylonian exile and the Persian kingdom. Scholars are unified in thinking however, that the book was not produced until much later. For one thing the book was written in Aramaic and in a late form of Hebrew, suggesting a much later date. More importantly the book's symbolism is directed, in no small part, against Antiochus Epiphanes and his repressive measures against the jews. And so the book is normally dated to the mid 2nd century BC, almost 400 years later. It is clearly easier to have visions of prophecy and apocalypse come true no matter what the interpretation when it is written after the fact. As a matter of fact all the prophecies of the bible are written in such a way. Revelation may be slightly different, but it is highly misunderstood by most casual readers whats going on there anyway. One thing I will tell you is, it was written about the times of the author, not about some future hundreds or even thousands of years later. It wasn't until the prophecies did not come true that they amended it to mean distant future.

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Nobel peace prize awarded to Barack Obama
    By zengrifter in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: September 28th, 2012, 08:01 PM
  2. Obama defends US wars as he accepts peace prize
    By zengrifter in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: January 1st, 2010, 03:20 AM
  3. Israel threatens to quit peace talks over UN war crimes vote
    By zengrifter in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 139
    Last Post: November 1st, 2009, 01:56 AM
  4. Adi Da: Not-Two IS Peace
    By zengrifter in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: December 7th, 2007, 06:15 PM
  5. Global Orgasm for Peace
    By zengrifter in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: November 24th, 2006, 11:51 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts