|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Imagine there's no heaven (nor hell, nor anything after you're dead)
|
Anesti
Apprentice
# 18259
|
Posted
I don't don't believe one can explain Paul's martydom as an act of a fatalist convinced that the World was going to end shortly.
Getting decapitated would have been horrific, painful and terrifying. He was the only one of the 12 not to have known Jesus while he walked amongst us.
I have often found Paul the hardest to come to terms with, but he did what he did and without him, Christianity may never have reached so many.
I am no theoligian, I hasten to add.
It is not my field.
But he did give us 1 Corinthians 13.
Posts: 19 | From: Verona | Registered: Oct 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
Paul was a tent- maker, wasn't he? He continued to work at the same time as evangelising and building up the early Church. An example church ministers today are copying, where the church administration hasn't got the money to pay them.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jemima the 9th:
For me, the idea that she's still somehow out there somewhere (and yes I understand this is Platonic rather than Christian)
I'm sorry about your mum, but (1) still being out there somewhere is a Christian doctrine and (2) there needn't be an either/or dividing Platonic (in at least some aspects) and Christian.
--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity
Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jemima the 9th:
My sister, who would probably identify as spiritual but not religious, firmly believes in heaven, and believes that mum is there. She talks to her all the time. For me, the idea that she's still somehow out there somewhere (and yes I understand this is Platonic rather than Christian) and yet I can't be close to, or communicate with her, is much worse than the idea of her just being gone.
I find it interesting how many non-religious people seem to be rather attracted to the idea of an afterlife. In fact, it's been said that in popular culture the notion of heaven has broken free from its Christian moorings, and doesn't have a great deal to do with going to meet Jesus.
It would be ironic if Christians retreated from the idea of an afterlife while non-religious people were increasingly engaging with it.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
SvitlanaV2:I find it interesting how many non-religious people seem to be rather attracted to the idea of an afterlife.
I meet more non-(institutionally) religious people attracted to reincarnation than to the afterlife.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Philip Charles
Ship's cutler
# 618
|
Posted
i don't like Paul's analogy of a race because it is competitive. If I get the prize the other competitors don't. The impression I get of Paul as I read his letters is that he is has a driven personality - which was needed at that time and place. But it is not me.
A friend of mine (who was one of my evangelists) said after a life or death crisis "if there is no life after death it is all for the best, because God can be trusted". A far cry from the the common folk belief in heaven which includes the hope that God is not present.
--------------------
There are 10 kinds of people. Those who understand binary and those who don't.
Posts: 89 | From: Dunedin, NZ | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Philip Charles:
i don't like Paul's analogy of a race because it is competitive. If I get the prize the other competitors don't. The impression I get of Paul as I read his letters is that he is has a driven personality - which was needed at that time and place. But it is not me.
Yes.
I think he would have done well in any field today. He was a good speaker and motivator and able to pick up on the latest trends and turn them to his advantage.
But the idea of life, or the Christian life, as a competition in order to win some (pretty much unknown, untested and unrealistic) prize is not good imo.
I wonder what Jesus would have thought of such theology?
It reminds me far too much of the zealous islamists who will do absolutely anything in order to get their 72 virgins in the afterlife.
I think we need to work with what we have in order to live our lives and care for others as best we can.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
To Philip Charles and Boogie, can I re-echo what I wrote yesterday about the running of the race? It is in no way a competition:
quote:
It says run 'in such a way (as to win the prize)...' It means that we are to put as much intentionality, dedication and commitment into our Christian living - it mirrors the dedication of the athletes who run to win. We must show that same drive. We don't get a prize; that's just a metaphor. How can it be literal? If it were there would only be one person in heaven, the one person who won the race.
We just told to run like winners!
On that point alone, whenever I watch the Olympics or other athletic contests, I always feel sorry for the bloke who is obviously going to come last in the face of such strong opposition. And yet he still takes part, he still faces the knowledge he is not going to win, and yet he still trains, he still races and he still runs 'so as to win.' That's our example. I will never be a Booth or a Bonhoeffer; I'll never be half as good as some of the faithful people in my congregation, but I still run as if to win.
What would Jesus say? Well he did use some pretty vigourous and exclusive analogies. The one about the broad and narrow way, for example, does certainly say that we have to be intentional about following him.
And he does say that we should ask, seek and knock - the original being 'keep on asking, keep on seeking, keep on knocking.'
And then, there is that quite strange saying of Jesus:
quote:
Luke 16:16New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
16 “The law and the prophets were in effect until John came; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is proclaimed, and everyone tries to enter it by force.[a]
Footnotes:
Luke 16:16 Or everyone is strongly urged to enter it
In other words, Jesus is saying that effort needs to be made, determination, positive and proactive faith.
Some, many of us - Shipmates included - do have personal circumstances that mean faith is difficult and they have to 'exercise faith' in a deliberate manner under challenging circumstances - is that not in the same field as running the race, fighting the good fight, getting out of the boat, stooping to enter the strait (restricted) gate, taking up a cross, etc, etc - and all manner of descriptive and vivid metaphors for the Christian life?
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
Jesus did say "Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for you souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light."
Stop rushing, stop racing, stop battling. God is in the still small voice, giving His comfort.
Jesus neither raced nor fought. He took his time, he rested when he needed to. He loved and taught in a new way - a way which so enraged the people of his day that they killed him for it.
I really dislike the fact that much of Christianity has joined the rat race.
![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Jesus did say "Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for you souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light."
Stop rushing, stop racing, stop battling. God is in the still small voice, giving His comfort.
Jesus neither raced nor fought. He took his time, he rested when he needed to. He loved and taught in a new way - a way which so enraged the people of his day that they killed him for it.
I really dislike the fact that much of Christianity has joined the rat race.
Huh?
The yoke is easy and the burden is light because the alternative - a life of sin and separation from God - is hard and heavy. The wages of sin is death doesn't just mean the afterlife. It means the real world consequences too. The things in the world that seem easy at the time - cheating, lying, avoiding reality through abuse of substances - never really are in the long term.
To interpret this to mean that being a Christian is easy in an absolute rather than a relative sense is an unusual leap.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
Point is, races are a poor analogy for some.
Paul was conversant with Greek culture and athleticism. Jesus was more prone to agricultural analogies.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
I really can't get my head around the idea that there's just nothing at all, only extinction at death. It goes against everything I've ever believed or felt.
It would make life completely pointless and random. There would be no point in believing in God, no point in bothering with a code of ethics, you might just as well live for the moment and get as much as you could out of life, and everyone you meet. You're never going to experience the glory that is God in the afterlife, there will be no reunions with your family and friends, nothing at all. The only thing you can do is concentrate on the here and now and try to postpone the inevitable snuffing out of the candle for as long as possible. How grim is that for a world view?
No wonder people are afraid of death. For me personally death would simply be stepping out of a body, as Kahlil Gibran puts it so beautifully, "A moment of rest upon the wind, and another woman shall bear me". You continue, but in a different form. Having that taken away is to take away the purpose of life and hope along with it.
I don't understand this way of thinking at all. Specifically the belief that life without an afterlife is pointless. You may as well say that it's pointless to eat a meal because after a while the food will all be absorbed and you'll be hungry again. Or that it's pointless to try and save someones life because eventually they are going to die.
Actually that last point is a good example. If there is a afterlife then isn't there less reason to save someones life because you are merely postponing their trip to heaven and conversely if there isn't an afterlife then there's more reason to save someones life as it's the only one they have.
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Point is, races are a poor analogy for some.
Probably because they limit their view of a race to the Olympic 100m finals. It could just as well be the London Marathon, where some people run it with ease and some like this war veteran take days. All are cheered on as they cross the line nonetheless.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Point is, races are a poor analogy for some.
Probably because they limit their view of a race to the Olympic 100m finals. It could just as well be the London Marathon, where some people run it with ease and some like this war veteran take days. All are cheered on as they cross the line nonetheless.
It's still a poor analogy. Marathons take between two and six hours. There's practice and training, but a lot of rest too, but the Christian life has no rest: it's full-time, for all-time, albeit in different ways at different times. Not like a race at all.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
It's still a poor analogy. Marathons take between two and six hours. There's practice and training, but a lot of rest too, but the Christian life has no rest: it's full-time, for all-time, albeit in different ways at different times. Not like a race at all.
And a harvest only lasts for a few weeks. A wedding feast only lasts for a few hours. There are lots of time bound metaphors in the New Testament so I'm not clear that this in itself is a valid criticism of the race metaphor.
I get that people don't like the analogy, but it's a valid and ancient one for the Christian life. I'm simply defending its use and trying to get an understanding of why some people feel it's so inappropriate. I'm not attempting to force it on others.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
I'm simply defending its use and trying to get an understanding of why some people feel it's so inappropriate.
I think it's inappropriate because working for a 'prize' at the end of a 'race' is not giving or loving - it's a selfish reason to do good.
Far better to live as if this is the only life to be had for us all. (Which could end up to be so, of course)
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
I'm simply defending its use and trying to get an understanding of why some people feel it's so inappropriate.
I think it's inappropriate because working for a 'prize' at the end of a 'race' is not giving or loving - it's a selfish reason to do good.
Far better to live as if this is the only life to be had for us all. (Which could end up to be so, of course)
*sigh* I wonder how many times I am going to having reoeat this: We are NOT running to win a prize, we are running 'so as' to win a prize - ie, in the same manner of determination and persistence.
Jesus said, "No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God."
It's an analogy with a similar meaning - a life of direction and consistent, persistent effort. Or are you going to say that you don't like that analogy either.
It has two points in its favour as far as you are concerned: It's spoken by Jesus and it's an agricultural analogy.
Against: it seems to have an end point that must be worked towards AND it's something one does by one's self. Neither is it 'giving or loving.'
You choose.
[ 29. October 2014, 11:06: Message edited by: Mudfrog ]
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I think it's inappropriate because working for a 'prize' at the end of a 'race' is not giving or loving - it's a selfish reason to do good.
Again - this is only one type of race. Most of the people running the London Marathon raise money for charity, which is the only prize they receive at the end of it. It's still a race.
I feel like people who don't like the analogy are purposely restricting the definition of "race" for their own purposes.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot :
I don't understand this way of thinking at all. Specifically the belief that life without an afterlife is pointless. You may as well say that it's pointless to eat a meal because after a while the food will all be absorbed and you'll be hungry again. Or that it's pointless to try and save someones life because eventually they are going to die.
I agree. Equally the reincarnation version Gibran suggests could seem equally pointless: you live, die and are reborn to live and die and be reborn again to .... It only makes sense if life is worth living in its own right. And since you don't remember past lives, doesn't it only work if a single life is worth living?
And is anyone in Heaven going to ask God "So, what's the point of Heaven". If it's enough without it having a further purpose, why shouldn't this life be? And if there is an ultimate purpose to Heaven, what purpose is that and so on.
Purposes have to stop somewhere (like races ...).
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I agree with George as well. The solution is found all around you - there are tons of people who don't believe in an after-life, and they carry on breathing, eating, loving, raising kids, following hobbies, arguing about ideas, or whatever.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
I guess a number of shipmates have been to a humanist funeral.
What were your impressions?
The first one I went to, I thought was actually quite lovely as far as what was said went; The Humanist officiant was pleasant, sympathetic and kind. The tributes from family and friends were warm, heartfelt and sometimes humourous.
But I felt I was in a closed room with no open window - there was no 'relief', no hope.
It literally was 'all over'; everything was in the past, all was lost except memories.
It was unremitting sadness, hopeless grief, regret, despair, unspoken goodbyes, untaken (sic) opportunities.
It was desperate.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
If I didn't believe in an afterlife, I would focus on doing that which directly benefits me and my family, even if at the expense of others.
I make an effort to be more giving and more loving than I would be naturally because I want to be like Jesus, and He said after this life I'll get to hang out with Him, which sounds fantastic in my opinion.
If this life is all there is, one should do anything possible to make it last, even if that hurts other people. That people who don't believe in an afterlife don't give into that base desire, is (in my view) because God set eternity on our hearts whether we acknowledge it or not.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
]I don't understand this way of thinking at all. Specifically the belief that life without an afterlife is pointless. You may as well say that it's pointless to eat a meal because after a while the food will all be absorbed and you'll be hungry again. Or that it's pointless to try and save someones life because eventually they are going to die.
Speaking for myself, I don't think it's pointless for atheists. But it's a bit odd for Christians. It seems to be a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Christianity seems a bit bloodless without it, but no more 'realistic'; not unless you remove all the other supernatural elements too.
One problem with heavenless Christianity is that it undermines the notion of faith as a journey. We've had a bit of this is in the argument over whether faith is like a race, but the journey is a more common metaphor, IME. If there's no heaven is the Christian faith a journey without a destination? Some old-time Christians used to sing 'this world is not my home'; does this mean that the heavenless Christian will never be at home anywhere? Or is the heavenless Christian actually quite at home in this world?
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
If this life is all there is, one should do anything possible to make it last, even if that hurts other people.
Why?
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
If this life is all there is, one should do anything possible to make it last, even if that hurts other people.
Why?
To maximize one's own chances of survival.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
It is possible to do good for goodness sake rather than swinging wildly to Darwinism.
Which I already acknowledged in my second to last post. "Eternity on the heart of man..."
People do act in kindness but there is no reason that they should, if there is no belief in a higher power or afterlife. And most in the West if dropped into a warzone would give up their secular humanism in about 5 minutes anyway.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
If this life is all there is, one should do anything possible to make it last, even if that hurts other people.
Why?
To maximize one's own chances of survival.
Well if you were born without empathy or your moral code allowed you to hurt others in the pursuit of happiness I can see that happening but otherwise it seems unlikely. I admit I've never met you seekingsister but I wonder if you are being a bit overly harsh about yourself.
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
And most in the West if dropped into a warzone would give up their secular humanism in about 5 minutes anyway.
Do you really think that's the case? Seems unlikely. I for one would be far too busy with practical concerns for theological/philosophical musings.
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
If this life is all there is, one should do anything possible to make it last, even if that hurts other people. That people who don't believe in an afterlife don't give into that base desire, is (in my view) because God set eternity on our hearts whether we acknowledge it or not.
I disagree. I think it's perfectly reasonable to do the right thing because it's the right thing to do, and I think that's what a lot of non-believers in the afterlife do.
Of course I can't prove whether God has set eternity on my heart, or my atheist husband's heart or not!
It does also get a bit more complicated when looking at motivation. Do I do the right thing at least in part because it'll make me feel better, or I couldn't bear to leave what I think of as the right thing undone?
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
quote:
Originally posted by Jemima the 9th:
For me, the idea that she's still somehow out there somewhere (and yes I understand this is Platonic rather than Christian)
I'm sorry about your mum, but (1) still being out there somewhere is a Christian doctrine and (2) there needn't be an either/or dividing Platonic (in at least some aspects) and Christian.
Thank you.
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
]Well if you were born without empathy or your moral code allowed you to hurt others in the pursuit of happiness I can see that happening but otherwise it seems unlikely. I admit I've never met you seekingsister but I wonder if you are being a bit overly harsh about yourself.
I'm not talking about happiness. I said survival for a reason. If I were in a desperate situation, without faith in Christ I don't see why I wouldn't commit a crime to get money to feed my kids. It's the rational thing to do.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Well, at the risk of reliving a thread from a couple of weeks back, even with faith in Christ I'd still steal before I let my children starve. I wouldn't see that as wrong; quite the opposite.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
And most in the West if dropped into a warzone would give up their secular humanism in about 5 minutes anyway.
Do you really think that's the case? Seems unlikely. I for one would be far too busy with practical concerns for theological/philosophical musings.
That's exactly my point. It's easy to think about the value of each human being when there aren't human beings trying to take your life, liberty, or livelihood on a regular basis.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Well, at the risk of reliving a thread from a couple of weeks back, even with faith in Christ I'd still steal before I let my children starve. I wouldn't see that as wrong; quite the opposite.
I've acknowledged this point already as well.
Without faith in a higher power or an afterlife, there is no reason not to steal. With that faith, it's still extremely likely the person would do it, they just have a reason that they shouldn't.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Well, at the risk of reliving a thread from a couple of weeks back, even with faith in Christ I'd still steal before I let my children starve. I wouldn't see that as wrong; quite the opposite.
I've acknowledged this point already as well.
Without faith in a higher power or an afterlife, there is no reason not to steal. With that faith, it's still extremely likely the person would do it, they just have a reason that they shouldn't.
I'm not sure about that. My moral code tells me that letting children starve is worse than theft, and I can't see how my faith or otherwise in Christ changes that.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Well, at the risk of reliving a thread from a couple of weeks back, even with faith in Christ I'd still steal before I let my children starve. I wouldn't see that as wrong; quite the opposite.
I've acknowledged this point already as well.
Without faith in a higher power or an afterlife, there is no reason not to steal. With that faith, it's still extremely likely the person would do it, they just have a reason that they shouldn't.
I'm not sure about that. My moral code tells me that letting children starve is worse than theft, and I can't see how my faith or otherwise in Christ changes that.
And some animals, including humans, have evolved so as to act with empathy and cooperation. Hence, stealing from another individual infringes that. Of course, it can be over-ridden, but I don't think it is erased.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I'm not sure about that. My moral code tells me that letting children starve is worse than theft, and I can't see how my faith or otherwise in Christ changes that.
So you would starve, to ensure children in your city who are starving have enough food to survive?
Or do you just mean your own children, or children that you know?
There are a lot of lofty claims from Shippers about how they would do the right thing in extreme situations. Without a moral compass most people do what's best for them. I'm not saying it has to be Christ, it could be any religious belief. But if this life is it, then willingly suffering or making it worse to help someone else unrelated to you is totally illogical.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I'm not sure about that. My moral code tells me that letting children starve is worse than theft, and I can't see how my faith or otherwise in Christ changes that.
So you would starve, to ensure children in your city who are starving have enough food to survive?
Or do you just mean your own children, or children that you know?
I don't know. My moral code tells me I should, regardless of whether there's life after death. And I don't know whether I'd have the strength to make that right choice, regardless of whether there's life after death. I don't see how it changes right and wrong.
quote:
There are a lot of lofty claims from Shippers about how they would do the right thing in extreme situations. Without a moral compass most people do what's best for them. I'm not saying it has to be Christ, it could be any religious belief. But if this life is it, then willingly suffering or making it worse to help someone else unrelated to you is totally illogical.
And yet people without a religious belief do have moral compasses that do tell them to take altruistic actions that may result even in their own deaths. Nor is it necessarily illogical; it's the choice of Spock in Wrath of Khan - the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
And yet people without a religious belief do have moral compasses that do tell them to take altruistic actions that may result even in their own deaths. Nor is it necessarily illogical; it's the choice of Spock in Wrath of Khan - the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.
I've acknowledged this now twice previously. I know people without belief behave this way and I have given my understanding of why that is.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
"because God set eternity on our hearts whether we acknowledge it or not"?
Do you have any evidence for that being the reason they act that way, despite they themselves being able to give a perfectly rational reason?
I prefer to believe what people tell me, short of good reasons to doubt them, myself.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
OK Karl - can you explain to me what the reason - not the feeling or emotion - behind making oneself worse off to help someone else, beyond personal or kinship ties, if there is nothing after this life and suffering in this life isn't replaced with something better in the future. There aren't many.
Of course people without faith do these things. But you seem to be making an error here - that because people do X, their reason for doing so must be consistent with their publicly stated belief system.
If someone who says "There is no life but this one" gives up their last scrap of food to save someone else - I would say that the act is so selfless and loving as to be inspired by something beyond the claim the individual is making. Something deep inside of him has compelled him to be sacrificial in a way that causes personal harm and possibly death. In my view that is what comes of us being made in God's image and at moments being able to see God in other people too.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
The reason? As I already pointed out to you - Spock's reasoning - the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few - or the one.
I have a lot more time for the person who sacrifices themselves despite having no expectation of anything beyond death, than the one who does so because he does, to be honest.
I do not assume people's actions must be because of their stated ethical system, but when they say they are, and they are consistent with that ethical system, I see no reason to doubt them.
[ 29. October 2014, 15:08: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
OK Karl - can you explain to me what the reason - not the feeling or emotion - behind making oneself worse off to help someone else, beyond personal or kinship ties, if there is nothing after this life and suffering in this life isn't replaced with something better in the future. There aren't many.
My son (29) does this all the time. He's an atheist. He strongly believes that when we die, that's it - no after life, heaven or anything else.
He has only one pair of shoes, when I offer to buy him another he says, with genuine confusion 'why do I need another pair of shoes?'
He deliberately chose his profession (nurse) to help other people. He spends his spare time working for others and giving to others. He lives in a small flat (one room of a small flat in fact) and gives any extra money he has away.
He is using the same mobile phone he had when he was 16 - all numbers long since worn off.
He doesn't need a reason to be a loving, giving, generous, sensitive person - it's just the way he is.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I do not assume people's actions must be because of their stated ethical system, but when they say they are, and they are consistent with that ethical system, I see no reason to doubt them.
Well if God exists, He exists the same regardless of an individual's stated ethical system, right? And the afterlife too - whether or not you believe in it, if it exists then it exists.
If these things do exist then you should doubt such people who say they believe otherwise, because they are wrong.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
If someone who says "There is no life but this one" gives up their last scrap of food to save someone else - I would say that the act is so selfless and loving as to be inspired by something beyond the claim the individual is making.
You ask for the "the reason - not the feeling or emotion" but the reason might be the emotion. I think people have often starved to save others. You say that is impossible without God, how do you know what human emotion is capable of? Is the cause of every unselfish act down to God? Where do you draw the line?
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Well, at the risk of reliving a thread from a couple of weeks back, even with faith in Christ I'd still steal before I let my children starve. I wouldn't see that as wrong; quite the opposite.
Without faith in a higher power or an afterlife, there is no reason not to steal. With that faith, it's still extremely likely the person would do it, they just have a reason that they shouldn't.
As a side-note, traditional Christian morality has always said that it is permissible to steal to feed yourself, and obligatory to feed someone else. The idea that property rights take precedence over the preservation of life comes along with secularism.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
I don't understand this way of thinking at all. Specifically the belief that life without an afterlife is pointless. You may as well say that it's pointless to eat a meal because after a while the food will all be absorbed and you'll be hungry again. Or that it's pointless to try and save someones life because eventually they are going to die.
Suppose a genie appears and offers you a deal. You can have the time and resources you need to do anything you wish - climb Everest, learn to play chess to grandmaster standard, take a group of schoolchildren back in time to ancient Pompeii for an outing. Anything. The catch is that afterwards neither you nor anybody else involved will remember anything about it, nor will any other traces remain in the lives of anyone involved.
What would you pay for the deal?
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
If these things do exist then you should doubt such people who say they believe otherwise, because they are wrong.
There is a difference between "X exists" and "I believe X exists".
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
