Should A Passenger Dictate What Other...
News1 min ago
Turning your back on your faith
63 Answers
If turning your back on your faith would guarantee everlasting peace in this world, would you do it?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
////Keyplus, you can't answer this question can you. Thought not. :o).////
Have you answered it? You can’t answer your own question and then you are complaining why others don’t.
////Actually Tony, it isn't a pointless question, but it is a philosophical one. Perhaps you haven't look at it from that point of view. What am I like indeed. ;o)////
Tony – you should have guessed that. Few people will call anything “philosophical” even if does not make sense only because “they” put it forward.
Few question just cannot be answered by simple “yes” or “no” and I agree with what others said in this regard. Anyone who does not agree with that just answer my question but just in simple “yes” or “no”.
Have you stopped taking drugs? Just simple yes or no please.
Notafish – Yes she was thinking about War and of course every atheist believe that religion causes war. As a reality people who believe that they do not know history or they do not want to know the history. And then I asked my five years old if only stopping wars will bring everlasting peace in this world and you know what he said? No, because even at that age he knows that there are more problems in the world than only “war” if you think about peace.
Have you answered it? You can’t answer your own question and then you are complaining why others don’t.
////Actually Tony, it isn't a pointless question, but it is a philosophical one. Perhaps you haven't look at it from that point of view. What am I like indeed. ;o)////
Tony – you should have guessed that. Few people will call anything “philosophical” even if does not make sense only because “they” put it forward.
Few question just cannot be answered by simple “yes” or “no” and I agree with what others said in this regard. Anyone who does not agree with that just answer my question but just in simple “yes” or “no”.
Have you stopped taking drugs? Just simple yes or no please.
Notafish – Yes she was thinking about War and of course every atheist believe that religion causes war. As a reality people who believe that they do not know history or they do not want to know the history. And then I asked my five years old if only stopping wars will bring everlasting peace in this world and you know what he said? No, because even at that age he knows that there are more problems in the world than only “war” if you think about peace.
Keyplus, I seem to remember when Birdie upset you, you accused him of taking drugs too. If you weren't so totally pathetic I might find the enthusiasm to take umbrage. The really amusing thing is there's not even an argument going on here. You're the only one blowing a fuse - and for obvious reasons. Oh dear.... :o)
Naomi, I don’t know if this is the kind of answer you had in mind in asking your question but nevertheless I offer you my two pence worth . . .
Relinquishing faith (belief apart from or in spite of certain knowledge) is an important first step in resolving the discord which arises from conflicting views on the nature of reality. Mutually beneficial relationships can only be successfully sustained through a mutual understanding of and agreement on the nature of the reality we share. Such a mutual understanding can only be achieved based on mutually shared observations and experiences and a mutual ability and desire to relate ones own unique experiences to each others.
It is important to attempt to resolve these differences in each parties respective experiences when ever possible for when this can be achieved successfully a greater mutual understanding and wider coherent and cohesive world view is attained providing both parties with a richer palette from which to build and establish mutually beneficial relationships. Where this wider mutual agreement can not be resolved we must resign ourselves to attempting to establishing meaningful worthwhile relationships based on what is left.
Relinquishing faith (belief apart from or in spite of certain knowledge) is an important first step in resolving the discord which arises from conflicting views on the nature of reality. Mutually beneficial relationships can only be successfully sustained through a mutual understanding of and agreement on the nature of the reality we share. Such a mutual understanding can only be achieved based on mutually shared observations and experiences and a mutual ability and desire to relate ones own unique experiences to each others.
It is important to attempt to resolve these differences in each parties respective experiences when ever possible for when this can be achieved successfully a greater mutual understanding and wider coherent and cohesive world view is attained providing both parties with a richer palette from which to build and establish mutually beneficial relationships. Where this wider mutual agreement can not be resolved we must resign ourselves to attempting to establishing meaningful worthwhile relationships based on what is left.
The world we share is shrinking with the arrival of each new face and the need for and benefit of mutual understanding are becoming increasingly obvious. But one should never demand of a relationship that another conform to their personal unique world view. Such is an act of aggression leaving only two possible outcomes, total and complete separation or an inevitable confrontation and conflict which based on each others refusal to acknowledge and set aside their differences can potentially lead to war. We each must be free to determine for ourselves just how important to us a given relationship is based on what we perceive as its potential worth.
Perhaps I could go into this in greater detail and explain where this is all leading, but I’ll leave it at that for now, at least until I’m self-assured that my point of view in this matter is both desired and welcome. Until then I would only add, I think, once more, you’ve asked an excellent and important question.
Perhaps I could go into this in greater detail and explain where this is all leading, but I’ll leave it at that for now, at least until I’m self-assured that my point of view in this matter is both desired and welcome. Until then I would only add, I think, once more, you’ve asked an excellent and important question.
mibs, be assured that everyone is most welcome to give their opinion and I'm genuinely interested in all the answers except those that accuse me of taking drugs. I mean really!! OK, I'm a grown up lady with a capacity for recognising fools so that doesn't harm me nearly as much as abusing a five year old by filling his head with thoughts of war damages a child - but it's breathtakingly stupid nonetheless.
Keyplus -
I'm not going to comment on this original question.
What I am going to comment on is your comment to Naomi, “Have you stopped taking drugs? Just simple yes or no please.”, because it is an accusation that you have also levelled at me in the past.
This is a deeply unpleasant, loaded question. It's a deliberately incriminating method of questioning which wouldn't be out of place coming from the police force of a totalitarian regime. It's like asking someone, “When did you stop beating your wife?”. Whatever answer you give suggests that you are guilty of wrongdoing or indulging in a socially unacceptable practice.
Either you are hopelessly unaware of the social 'lines' that should not be crossed or you are aware and simply couldn't give a fig. If it's the former, I can only conclude that you are an uneducated, socially inept moron; if it's the latter you are a thoroughly nasty piece of work.
My money's on the latter... and an apology is in order.
I'm not going to comment on this original question.
What I am going to comment on is your comment to Naomi, “Have you stopped taking drugs? Just simple yes or no please.”, because it is an accusation that you have also levelled at me in the past.
This is a deeply unpleasant, loaded question. It's a deliberately incriminating method of questioning which wouldn't be out of place coming from the police force of a totalitarian regime. It's like asking someone, “When did you stop beating your wife?”. Whatever answer you give suggests that you are guilty of wrongdoing or indulging in a socially unacceptable practice.
Either you are hopelessly unaware of the social 'lines' that should not be crossed or you are aware and simply couldn't give a fig. If it's the former, I can only conclude that you are an uneducated, socially inept moron; if it's the latter you are a thoroughly nasty piece of work.
My money's on the latter... and an apology is in order.
If someone believes that I accused ONE PERSON specifically (in this case Naomi as she believes I did) then I am sorry to say but few people can’t read their own first language properly or perhaps they do not want to.
Here is what I said once again,
//////Few question just cannot be answered by simple “yes” or “no” and I agree with what others said in this regard. Anyone who does not agree with that just answer my question but just in simple “yes” or “no”.
Have you stopped taking drugs? Just simple yes or no please.///////
All I said that few question can not be answered by simple yes or no as either way you are stuck.
And then what a coincidence as Naomi mentioned me accusing my little birdie of taking drugs and from nowhere my little birdie appeared to second that.
By the way Naomi you still have not answered your own question.
Here is what I said once again,
//////Few question just cannot be answered by simple “yes” or “no” and I agree with what others said in this regard. Anyone who does not agree with that just answer my question but just in simple “yes” or “no”.
Have you stopped taking drugs? Just simple yes or no please.///////
All I said that few question can not be answered by simple yes or no as either way you are stuck.
And then what a coincidence as Naomi mentioned me accusing my little birdie of taking drugs and from nowhere my little birdie appeared to second that.
By the way Naomi you still have not answered your own question.
FTAO anyone asserting that the question framing this thread is a loaded one, might I suggest that you confine attempts to back up your assertions with reference to the wording of the question in question, perhaps indicating the drug or drugs this question appears to you to be loaded on.
If upon introspection it just so happens to be either or both I currently have in mind, I think I’ll keep my incriminations to myself.
If upon introspection it just so happens to be either or both I currently have in mind, I think I’ll keep my incriminations to myself.
I think Galileo answered the question rather well (sotto voce) as he rose from his knees having renounced his belief that the earth moved around the sun to placify the Inquisition: “E pur si muove”. Or so the legend has it.
I think the answer is: would I? Yes if I was absolutely convinced that world peace would be the result. Could I? No.
Is there any evidence that any one person has made a radical faith decision even to achieve peace on this forum?
I think the answer is: would I? Yes if I was absolutely convinced that world peace would be the result. Could I? No.
Is there any evidence that any one person has made a radical faith decision even to achieve peace on this forum?
I think all lifestyle "choices" we make are hard to shift, some of them because they're addictive (bio-)chemically, others because we have a lot invested in them emotionally, spiritually or whatever. Mostly, we are where we are because of accidents of birth, development, key events, and (maybe) genetics. My question about people making radical "faith" choices is a serious one. Many people will talk of an "epiphany" moment in their lives when they "found" or "lost" faith, and that's often even harder to walk away from.
Sorry for the delay.
Keyplus, yet again you have been exposed and yet again you've hatched one of your silly conspiracy theories. What a suspicious mind you have.
Right, onwards. Because I don't have faith, the question cannot apply to me and therefore I can't answer it.
Zabadak, I suppose what this question amounts to is given the choice, would people of religion forego their dubious chances of eternal life in exchange for a peaceful world, or would they choose to continue to believe they can save their own skins - oops souls - (even if at the end of it all they can't) at everyone else's expense?
Keyplus, yet again you have been exposed and yet again you've hatched one of your silly conspiracy theories. What a suspicious mind you have.
Right, onwards. Because I don't have faith, the question cannot apply to me and therefore I can't answer it.
Zabadak, I suppose what this question amounts to is given the choice, would people of religion forego their dubious chances of eternal life in exchange for a peaceful world, or would they choose to continue to believe they can save their own skins - oops souls - (even if at the end of it all they can't) at everyone else's expense?
Latest Posts
Even Tory Mps Aren’t Voting Tory...
News2 mins ago
Food & Drink2 mins ago
Crosswords7 mins ago
Crosswords10 mins ago
