Faith (Religion)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Thursday, September 27, 2018, 12:59 (2247 days ago) @ dhw
edited by Balance_Maintained, Thursday, September 27, 2018, 13:11

TONY: The OT God does not come across as unloving to me. However […] I could see how he could be mischaracterized that way.

DHW: You can only claim that someone has been mischaracterized if you know their character. The OT gives me ample demonstration of an unloving character. I’m NOT saying God is unloving but, if he exists, nobody – including the many different authors of the bible – can claim to be an authority on his nature.

You can look outside the book, at the world that was created for us, taste its fruits, swim in its waters, bask in the warmth of its sun, and revel in the fact that you can enjoy anything at all, and know much of the character of God.

DHW: I’m puzzled. Firstly, all the Jehovah’s Witnesses I know believe in the resurrection of 144,000 bodies who will join God in heaven to rule over a kingdom of more resurrected bodies (presumably including lots of JWs) on an earthly paradise after Armageddon, which began in 1914. Why should such visions take precedence over, say, those of the Koran, in which immortal souls will survive till the Day of Judgement and the goodies will go to paradise and the baddies to hell? You claim that the bible is historically accurate, but nobody knows what happens after death!

I am not surprised you are puzzled by things discussed in books you have not read. The bible says the dead are conscious of nothing at all, that some of the 144,000 have always been on earth since Christ(as opposed to the witnesses who formed in the late 1800's), and that the earthly resurrection will be of the righteous AND the unrighteous, though not the wicked (those who knowingly and intentionally broke the law as opposed to those that make honest mistakes).

DHW: Wonderful! Then we can forget about your God altogether. It’s enough to have faith that other people exist, society is bigger than the individual and functions better when people are nice to one another, we all matter to ourselves and to those around us, subjective values are real, and you don’t need objective values to lead a happy and moral life. We have reached agreement.

This really seems to be what all of your argument, in this thread and others, is really about. No, we have not reached an agreement. You take a claim that I have never denied (that you do not need religion to live a moral life), and try to say that my lack of denial makes the rest of our gulf of disagreement moot. It does not.

But, one last thought, when you wrote your books, if I were to pick up a copy at the store, whose names would be on the cover? Whose would be bigger? Whose smaller? Whose would not appear at all? If your name is on the cover, does that mean you hand wrote and illustrated every copy that ever existed? What about the printers, delivery people, sales people, etc? Did they not help in the production of YOUR book? Do they get ANY credit anywhere in your books, or is it only the primary people (You, maybe your editor, the publishing company)

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.