Do you feel it is important to share your views on faith or atheism?

[gingerdodger]

This is a genuine question, I am not asking to promote a faith vs atheism debate as we have plenty of those.

My question is whether people feel that it is part of their faith to share those beliefs with others? How far do you take this and how do you approach it? Similarly for those who are atheist, do you feel it is important to share your opinions and in what ways do you do this?

I know some faith groups see this as absaloutely fundamental to their faith whilst others are more relaxed. I also see that those who do not believe in God(s) also often wish to share their opinions widely. It interests me to think about what this achieves in terms of sharing opinions, understanding of each other etc.

From my point of view I strive to be open about my faith, I like to listen to other's perspectives as this makes me think (providing they are listening, I tend to bow out when it starts to feel adversarial and not inquisitorial). I don't feel compelled to actively knock on doors (metaphorically or otherwise) to share my faith but rather subscribe to the view that I hope my approach to life and openness about faith allows me to discuss my faith openly and honestly. I do believe actions speak louder than words and the best form of 'preaching' is to live Christian values of love (not saying I am good at this).

[capsium]

You're not being an evangelistic atheist are you head?

[capsium]

You admit that there is no discernable difference between the goodness of people regardless of faith

I said you cannot extrapolate, compare individuals, make generalisations. Faith affects people differently, they have different starting points when coming to faith. How could you expect to generalise?

But whatever you think, head you have no need to justify yourself to me. Added to this none of your arguments, concerning the unprovable, shakes my faith, as it is faith. I know that, due to the nature of faith, in involves believing in stuff that is not proven.

[capsium]

Of course the random sample wont be as good.

If the sample is truly random it might or might not be as good. This is the nature of being random. You cannot extrapolate the likelihood.

You are equating a lack of reason to believe with personal rejection

It is a rejection, of sort,s since it is well known that any belief requires faith. This is the nature of belief. I do not think I would be that outrageous in saying there will be some things you believe (until they are dis proven at least but then you cannot disprove God).

[headinhands]

I would query why would anyone expect/want to be/be able to be (in unity) with God in Heaven, if they did not believe in Him or Heaven?

You are equating a lack of reason to believe with personal rejection. I would love there to be unicorns but sadly there is no evidence of such creatures. If at a later date they do turn out to exist then was my disbelief a personal reaction of unicorns or merely non-belief due to lack of adequate reason to believe. Would a unicorn have reason to feel aggrieved that I didn't believe it existed? That said there are way too many logical flaws with the whole Christian thing for it to be possible such as the whole NT claims and so on.

[headinhands]

It is impossible to determine. Since we are all individuals, coming from different starting points and with different strengths and weaknesses.

but think of it as thus, using your own analogy of the singers, one coached and one not, and that they're both fantastic right? Now extrapolate that over 7 billion people. I assume the coaching in your analogy was church/god right? Imagine you put together two choirs, one comprised of random people you had plucked off the street and the other choir consisted of people who were professional singers. Which one is going to be better. If both are equally good why bother with coaching? Of course the random sample wont be as good. this highlights the flaw in your reasoning. You admit that there is no discernable difference between the goodness of people regardless of faith, but you have to do some pretty fancy illogical mental pirouetting to explain why both groups display the same level of humanity if one of the groups is really in direct contact with a super being.

[capsium]

^Sorry that should be Faith without works is dead. We receive Grace though Faith.

[capsium]

^going.Typo.

[capsium]

But gong on from this, I would query why would anyone expect/want to be/be able to be (in unity) with God in Heaven, if they did not believe in Him or Heaven?

[capsium]

So, if we can only serve one god, and you admit that Christians are pretty much as materialistic as non-theists then just as many Christians are serving mammon as non?

It is impossible to determine. Since we are all individuals, coming from different starting points and with different strengths and weaknesses.

Will the non-theists that are serving god god without knowing get a reward? Will the Christians serving mammon get a nasty surprise at the pearly gates?

Complex question, as I'm sure you know (being an ex Christian). There are different theologies of this within different denominations and it is something I could understand better myself. I believe in God's Grace, we are saved by His Grace and not our own works. Although Grace without works is dead.

The point of the singer analogy is that it illustrates how two people can come from different starting points in terms of singing and whilst voice coaching has helped improve one it is uncertain whether voice coaching would improve the other's singing. This is similar to attempting to compare behaviour of the theist and non-theist and attempting to make a generalisation regarding theist or non-theists being better behaved.

[headinhands]

Sorry what's the point you're making with the singer? I don't understand the analogy.

[headinhands]

So, if we can only serve one god, and you admit that Christians are pretty much as materialistic as non-theists then just as many Christians are serving mammon as non? Will the non-theists that are serving god god without knowing get a reward? Will the Christians serving mammon get a nasty surprise at the pearly gates?

[headinhands]

But you were the one who brought up the distinction between worshipping god and mammon as part of your Christian belief, yet you admit it's futile to compare. So it's a pretty pointless belief then? And an entirely unfair one to boot.

[capsium]

Except I don't think any of us have reached our full potentials, in all things, yet.

[capsium]

And then, the interesting question,

Q: Could voice coaching help the naturally fantastic singer?

You cannot tell. She may get even better or she may have reached her full potential.

[capsium]

An analogy for illustration would be:

There is one fantastic singer that is a natural and has not been taught. There is another (equally) fantastic singer that was not previously that good but became fantastic through intensive voice coaching.

Q: Which is the best singer?

Neither they are both fantastic.

Q: Did the voice coaching help at all then?

It helped the singer that became fantastic but only after voice coaching.

[capsium]

you admit there's no evidence for non-theists being more materialistic than yourself why would you expect anyone to believe that was the case? Apart from it not being a particularly nice thing to assume about non-theists it's also an entirely groundless belief isn't?

As I thought I had inferred, I don't expect anyone to believe that non-theists are more materialistic than theists. As I have said I do not believe this myself, because I believe we are all individuals, so it is futile to attempt to compare or generalize.

[headinhands]

You're right about science not providing enough answers, that's why it's still looking. And it sure as eggs has provided a lot more of the right answers than any other fact seeking method I've encountered. I know there's A LOT of questions that science can't answer but I refuse to shove anything in that void for the simple wont of an explanation.

[headinhands]

So if there's absolutely no way to demonstrate it and you admit there's no evidence for non-theists being more materialistic than yourself why would you expect anyone to believe that was the case? Apart from it not being a particularly nice thing to assume about non-theists it's also an entirely groundless belief isn't?

[capsium]

I actually think it quite terrifying when people do seriously attempt to judge people's potential based on their current qualities - there are so many variables and there is so much they can get badly wrong.

[capsium]

It is one reasons why science does not provide enough answers for me....

[capsium]

Okay give me an example of how you might be demonstrably less concerned about something than any non-theist

This cannot be demonstrated in anything meaningful way, like in a science experiment, since I cannot eliminate the variables and there are too many.

[headinhands]

Okay give me an example of how you might be demonstrably less concerned about something than any non-theist. See, unless you can actually use real life examples it's all just wordage.

[capsium]

head there is no average theist or non theist. We are all individuals.

[capsium]

In which case why would Jesus use an illustration that was neither fair of true because we can see it's not a clear cut case of Christians=good and non-theist=Selfish narcissistic asshole

It is about acknowledging fallibility. Christians should be in a process where they continue to learn more about what is good/ Godly and begin to emulate Christ. This is why people might talk of growing in Christ. Studying the Bible and the life of Christ provides opportunity for this learning to take place. If you don't ever examine and question what is good and Godly you may never acknowledge where you have gone wrong and repent of it and improve. However we all start at different starting points, have different strengths and weaknesses, so comparing one person against another is irrelevant.

[headinhands]

Give me an example of how you are demonstrably less concerned about something material than your average non-theist.