DHS/ICE seizes domain names of torrent sites

[SlowwHand]

Now you do.

Daniel in Islam
Main article: Islamic view of Daniel

Muslims traditionally consider Daniel (Arabic: دانيال, Danyal) as an Islamic prophet, alongside the other major prophets of the Old Testament, namely Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Although he is not mentioned in the Qur'an, there are a few Hadith which bear his name and which refer to his time spent in the den of the lions. There are debates, however, that go on about Daniel's time of preaching and some Muslims believe that he was not a prophet but a saintly man.

Curious that the Christian Bible has chapters attributed to these individuals, if they weren't considered Christians.

Also, read this as a start.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2841/were-christians-really-thrown-to-the-lions

[Kidlicious]

Wait a minute. I don't think that's necessarily so, Kid. Especially as concerns grown ups who come into faith later in life. By then, they've surely weighed the evidence.

I've been using the saying "weigh the evidence," but the thought of actually doing that invokes the image of placing physical objects on a material scale, which is the wrong way to think about it. Deciding whether or not God exists is completely different than that. What I'm saying is that human reason is allied with the flesh. Not only allied though, but it's subservient.

As for me I did not come to follow Jesus because I weighed the evidence (so to speak). I FELT a connection to Christ and others in the Bible. Now, I'm not claiming to never use reason. What I'm saying is that I'm highly suspicious of it.

EDIT: I don't dislike Asher either. I'm a suspicious person, and I don't count that as a fault. I believe that Jesus commands us to be suspicious. Also, the greatest philosophers were suspicious, Nietzche, Marx, Adam Smith, Freud, Kierkegaard etc...

[Jon Miller]

This appears to be the post at fault.

I meant it as a throw away, I am sure. I think I even explained that?

Anyways, I agree with the general standpoint that you are drawn to Christ and Christianity through a feeling or a gut feeling or something that is similarly hard to describe.

This doesn't make it irrational or absurd.

However, that doesn't mean that your religion and belief structure can't be highly rational. Once you step onto the path of following God, you get personal experiences and evidence showing that you that your belief is valid.

So it isn't blind faith. It is like having faith in Jordan, that he would win the finals, because of all the other finals/games he won, all the other clutch situations he won.

Similarly, the beleiver steps forward on faith. And through experiences with God and God being there for him/her, the believer gains evidences and experience validating and proving his/her faith.

Through this all, he/she can have a faith that forms part of a consistent and rational world view. Nothing needs to be absurd or irrational. Yeah, the worldview might be irrational to another, but that is because the other doesn't include the supernatural. It doesn't make the other less absurd than the beleiver (in fact, many who refuse to believe in God have more absurd and irrational world views than some beleivers).

JM

[Kidlicious]

I meant it as a throw away, I am sure. I think I even explained that?

Anyways, I agree with the general standpoint that you are drawn to Christ and Christianity through a feeling or a gut feeling or something that is similarly hard to describe.

This doesn't make it irrational or absurd.

However, that doesn't mean that your religion and belief structure can't be highly rational. Once you step onto the path of following God, you get personal experiences and evidence showing that you that your belief is valid.

So it isn't blind faith. It is like having faith in Jordan, that he would win the finals, because of all the other finals/games he won, all the other clutch situations he won.

Similarly, the beleiver steps forward on faith. And through experiences with God and God being there for him/her, the believer gains evidences and experience validating and proving his/her faith.

Through this all, he/she can have a faith that forms part of a consistent and rational world view. Nothing needs to be absurd or irrational. Yeah, the worldview might be irrational to another, but that is because the other doesn't include the supernatural. It doesn't make the other less absurd than the beleiver (in fact, many who refuse to believe in God have more absurd and irrational world views than some beleivers).

JM

Reason is more of an enemy than a friend. It's easy to use reason to believe in the less absurd claims of the Bible, but how will you use it to believe that Jesus turned water into wine or that he forgave those who crucified him?

Reason can identify sins like murder, theft, and adultery, but it's unable to identify other sins such as not loving God with all your heart, and a general spirit of rebelion and carelessness.

[Lorizael]

The absurdity that you expect people to believe is that you have no feelings about God, that you only have rational ideas about whether or not God exists. If you were talking about a subject that didn't affect you personally like math, then I would expect you to only think rationally. When it comes to subjects like religion, politics etc.. everyone has subjective biases.

This is what you don't seem to understand. Whether or not God exists, he has no observable effect on me personally. As far as I'm concerned, he is a subject like math, something interesting to ponder but not intrinsically important to me.

It's not human to not have a subjective bias about whether or not God exists.

Are isolated aboriginals not human? Are all people who lived before Judaism not human?

And to turn it around, do you have beliefs about Ahura Mazda, Baal, Camaxtli, Damkina, Eos, Freyr, Ganesha, Hsi wang mu, Isis, Jupiter, Kagutsuchi, Loki, Marduk, Ninhurzag, Odin, Poseidon, Quetzalcoatl, Rhea, Shen Yi, Tefnut, Uzume, Volturnus, Wepwawet, Xochipilli, Yum Kimil, and Zeus?

[Cort Haus]

I have a gut feeling that Asher is generally too intelligent to be drawn into a debate with Kid. However, I'm just a stupid (by Asher's analysis) atheist, so what do I know?

Well, I don't know that god doesn't exist any more than I know that there are not fairies at the bottom of the garden. I believe that neither exist on the basis of a profound lack of evidence, which is enough for me, as a probability of 99.999% certainty is close enough to 1 for me to use it as a working model.

I'm not interested in Kid's views, but I do wonder what definition of god Asher thinks might exist. God the creator? God the omnipotent? God the omniscient? God the good? God the terrible?

Why am I stupid for not believing in the supernatural?

[Cort Haus]

Last I read, atheists/agnostics were somewhat more prevalent in the scientific community than the general population (in America), but still not a majority. Somewhere around a third, IIRC.

The important bit is in bold.

As someone's map recently showed, America is significantly more theistical than the rest of the developed world, hence it's not really the best sample to use as a representation of the scientific community at large.

[Asher]

I don't have a definition of a God that might exist, because I'm not sure.

I've not seen conclusive, irrefutable proof that it's impossible to have a God, so I refuse to rule it out altogether. I don't believe in one either.

[Cort Haus]

What about fairies then?

[Asher]

Most major cities have a district where you can find them.

[Elok]

Yeah, you really should've seen that one coming.

[Kidlicious]

as a probability of 99.999% certainty is close enough to 1 for me to use it as a working model.

How did you come to that figure?

[Kidlicious]

This is what you don't seem to understand. Whether or not God exists, he has no observable effect on me personally. As far as I'm concerned, he is a subject like math, something interesting to ponder but not intrinsically important to me.

It's not that I don't understand. It's that I don't believe you. Whether or not God exists has to do with who you are and what whether or not you have a purpose in life. If God does exist you have a fate and a responsibility. If he doesn't exist you might as well do whatever you want as long as it feels good. That's not at all like math. I don't think you're stupid enough not to understand that.

Are isolated aboriginals not human? Are all people who lived before Judaism not human?

And to turn it around, do you have beliefs about Ahura Mazda, Baal, Camaxtli, Damkina, Eos, Freyr, Ganesha, Hsi wang mu, Isis, Jupiter, Kagutsuchi, Loki, Marduk, Ninhurzag, Odin, Poseidon, Quetzalcoatl, Rhea, Shen Yi, Tefnut, Uzume, Volturnus, Wepwawet, Xochipilli, Yum Kimil, and Zeus?

None of this has anything to do with what we're talking about.

[Asher]

How did you come to that figure?

Gut feeling, I'd wager.

[Lorizael]

Whether or not God exists has to do with who you are and what whether or not you have a purpose in life. If God does exist you have a fate and a responsibility. If he doesn't exist you might as well do whatever you want as long as it feels good.

Sure, unless you believe in one of these guys.

Ahura Mazda, Baal, Camaxtli, Damkina, Eos, Freyr, Ganesha, Hsi wang mu, Isis, Jupiter, Kagutsuchi, Loki, Marduk, Ninhurzag, Odin, Poseidon, Quetzalcoatl, Rhea, Shen Yi, Tefnut, Uzume, Volturnus, Wepwawet, Xochipilli, Yum Kimil, and Zeus...

Or you have some source of morality that is not divinely inspired.