(May 5, 2025 at 4:37 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:

(May 4, 2025 at 9:47 am)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: Okay, then let's run the thought experiment: We see species that look like rocks in environments full of rocks, and species that look like leaves in environments full of leaves. If we build a room full of beachballs and drop a simple organism in there, is it not possible that they begin to display beachball-like traits over the span of millennia?

An organism that looks like a rock isn't actually a rock. An elephant that evolved to look like it has a beachball for a head, wouldn't actually have a beachball for a head.

Indeed, it is also not the point, if he believes a deity or deities are possible, and is posting in a thread asking why Christians believe in that deity. and others express disbelieve and doubt, then he must explain and evidence his claims, not offer pointless analogies. 

It's very simple, what reasons / evidence can @John 6IX Breezy present, to believe his version of the Christian deity exists, or is even possible? 

It's hard to grant any more latitude than that...

(May 5, 2025 at 4:12 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 5, 2025 at 3:51 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: Did it actually happen or was it just a parable? If it actually happened, was it just to illustrate the point? Because it kind of undermines the point, IMHO, to curse the fig tree for not bearing fruit when it wasn't supposed to.

Right, but the tree being out of season is key to the object lesson. The disillusionment only occurs when the tree gives the appearance of bearing fruit, only to find it is empty like the rest. It just wouldn't have the same meaning if it was peak season.

Hmm. That actually tracks, though I didn't get the implication that having leaves meant it should have had figs I suppose it would be obvious to a person of that time and place.

(May 5, 2025 at 4:20 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 5, 2025 at 4:10 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: It isn't shopping around. The word has two different senses. Can you not just state which sense you are talking about? 

My argument is that only one sense exists within Christianity—that of trust. The other senses are as irrelevant as it is to point out that bank also means the edge of a river when I'm trying to deposit money. These might as well be different words, so there's no reason to acknowledge them as having equal merit.

So your faith in Jesus is not based on spiritual conviction?

(May 5, 2025 at 5:00 pm)Angrboda Wrote: Blind faith has existed within Christianity since the beginning.

Okay? As long as you're using faith to mean trust, I'm fine with your assertion.

(May 5, 2025 at 5:28 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 5, 2025 at 5:00 pm)Angrboda Wrote: Blind faith has existed within Christianity since the beginning.

Okay? As long as you're using faith to mean trust, I'm fine with your assertion.

You don’t consider blind trust to be a bad idea?

Boru

(May 5, 2025 at 5:26 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:

(May 5, 2025 at 4:20 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: My argument is that only one sense exists within Christianity—that of trust. The other senses are as irrelevant as it is to point out that bank also means the edge of a river when I'm trying to deposit money. These might as well be different words, so there's no reason to acknowledge them as having equal merit.

So your faith in Jesus is not based on spiritual conviction?

He said (his faith) equates to trust, and that trust requires good reasons, he refuses to offer any though. insisting we must first accept without any evidence that a deity is possible. This kind of stridency is how religious indoctrination works of course, it is not be questioned, but it only works when being offered to children who don't know they can question it, or how, or when what is being offered is not a choice. I am reminded now of the late Christopher Hitchens quote: 

“Many religions now come before us with ingratiating smirks and outspread hands, like an unctuous merchant in a bazaar. They offer consolation and solidarity and uplift, competing as they do in a marketplace. But we have a right to remember how barbarically they behaved when they were strong and were making an offer that people could not refuse.”

(May 5, 2025 at 5:36 pm)Sheldon Wrote:

(May 5, 2025 at 5:26 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: So your faith in Jesus is not based on spiritual conviction?

He said (his faith) equates to trust, and that trust requires good reasons, he refuses to offer any though. insisting we must first accept without any evidence that a deity is possible. This kind of stridency is how religious indoctrination works of course, it is not be questioned, but it only works when being offered to children who don't know they can question it, or how, or when what is being offered is not a choice. I am reminded now of the late Christopher Hitchens quote: 

“Many religions now come before us with ingratiating smirks and outspread hands, like an unctuous merchant in a bazaar. They offer consolation and solidarity and uplift, competing as they do in a marketplace. But we have a right to remember how barbarically they behaved when they were strong and were making an offer that people could not refuse.”

‘I’m gonna make them an offer they can’t refuse.’ - Pope Corleone I

Boru

(May 5, 2025 at 5:28 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 5, 2025 at 5:00 pm)Angrboda Wrote: Blind faith has existed within Christianity since the beginning.

Okay? As long as you're using faith to mean trust, I'm fine with your assertion.

 This is again not how religious faith is defined, but even so, I would be wary of trusting any claim without sufficient objective evidence, and would simply not believe it without any...

Which of course returns us to the thread title, and asking you to offer some reason why you think a deity exists, or is possible. Telling us we should presuppose it is possible won't fly, as this gets us no closer to Jesus than it does to Thor, Zeus, Apollo, or the Aztec deity of gluttony, et al.

(May 5, 2025 at 4:20 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 5, 2025 at 4:10 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: It isn't shopping around. The word has two different senses. Can you not just state which sense you are talking about? 

My argument is that only one sense exists within Christianity—that of trust. The other senses are as irrelevant as it is to point out that bank also means the edge of a river when I'm trying to deposit money. These might as well be different words, so there's no reason to acknowledge them as having equal merit.

So your belief is based on faith, and your faith is trust, now what is that trust based on? Is it good reasons? Great, give us some, or the best one...

(May 5, 2025 at 5:34 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: You don’t consider blind trust to be a bad idea?

I think if you attach blind to any word it becomes a bad idea: Blind dinner, blind loyalty, blind date, etc.