iamshack Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Feb 5, 2008 -> 05:09 PM) so what would you say the definition of two people not comprehending each other's ideas? ....mis...understanding? The crux of every world religion or spiritual thought, including secular humanism, is that we, the participants, must do something, work hard or act "good", to acheive something (nirvana, enlightenment, a high five). Every last one, except Chrisitianity. so to say that people misunderstand things doesn't mean I think less of you, like it's some game that puts one person over another. It just means that throughout our days on earth we learn and understand (hopefully) more and more, but there is so much misinformation and false teaching that sometimes it's hard to see the real truth. Everyone is on a journey, and my only desire for you or any person is to never stop seeking what is at the center of why you believe so fiercly one way or another. like I said, peace on you. Good luck. I see it this way...all religions are "faith-based," or at least under the common meaning of religion. So if you say you believe what you do because you have "faith" that you are correct, that's great. I can go with that. But you're telling me that I "misunderstand" something that is based on faith, that means you don't understand it either. It means you truly believe what you believe is correct, but you can't explain to any reasonable certainty why that is correct. So it's not a misunderstanding, but rather your choice to believe- via, your faith. And to me, that's what all religions are- peoples' faiths. And who am I to disagree with that or tell them they are wrong? No one. But don't tell me I misunderstand. There's a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted February 5, 2008 Share Posted February 5, 2008 QUOTE(iamshack @ Feb 5, 2008 -> 06:24 PM) I see it this way...all religions are "faith-based," or at least under the common meaning of religion. So if you say you believe what you do because you have "faith" that you are correct, that's great. I can go with that. But you're telling me that I "misunderstand" something that is based on faith, that means you don't understand it either. It means you truly believe what you believe is correct, but you can't explain to any reasonable certainty why that is correct. So it's not a misunderstanding, but rather your choice to believe- via, your faith. And to me, that's what all religions are- peoples' faiths. And who am I to disagree with that or tell them they are wrong? No one. But don't tell me I misunderstand. There's a difference. Just because something is faith based, doesn't mean it has no scientific backing and therefore impossible to support. The Bible was really written by people, Jesus really walked the earth, there really is a fundemental difference between the tenents of Christianity and all other religions. These are all real things. Regardless of your "Faith" they're easy to understand. Likewise, just because it is "scientific" doesn't exclude it from being connected to "faith". Your car has brakes (the science). When you approach a stoplight at a busy intersection and it's been snowing, you apply your brakes with the hope and faith that the mechanic that installed them did his job correctly...especially if it's slippery and you come within inches of hitting the person in front of you. I"m telling you that you probably misunderstand on two levels:) but that doesn't mean would couldn't grab a Lager and watch the Sox. ok, this could go on at least until 7pm, when I go home...so let's just say that we disagree with each other's positions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 5, 2008 -> 05:55 PM) I'll interject this thought into this converstaion. There has been numerous occasions in my life, and several here on Soxtalk, that I have been the recipient of comments made to make me feel 'inferior' because I happen to believe in something that can't be scientifically proven to exist. And if I recall correctly, it was exactly those threads that eventually forced us to ban Carl Everett's close-minded ass. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted February 6, 2008 Share Posted February 6, 2008 QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Feb 5, 2008 -> 05:35 PM) Just because something is faith based, doesn't mean it has no scientific backing and therefore impossible to support. The Bible was really written by people, Jesus really walked the earth, there really is a fundemental difference between the tenents of Christianity and all other religions. These are all real things. Regardless of your "Faith" they're easy to understand. I'm not saying anything is impossible to support. I'm saying that when it comes down to it, what you ultimately believe is entirely based upon faith. And I am not deriding that in any way. And I can understand your desire to believe something, even if it just based upon your faith. The difference is, you can't tell me I misunderstand as if we are talking about a scientific equation or why the sky appears blue to us. You choose to believe what you believe because in your mind and heart it makes sense to you. You don't think it seems extremely pompous to tell me I'm "wrong" because I don't choose to believe that too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts