Is Christian faith necessary for Selfless Love?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sair
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
tonyrey said:
Let me attempt to be the devil’s advocate for a change - even though in this context that presupposes a Godless devil… 🙂
Click to expand...
😃
The difference between God and Maximilian is that we’ve seen men but we haven’t seen God.
Click to expand...
Let’s take this analogy:

Christmas tree : ornament : : earlobe : earring

A person who doesn’t understand analogies would say, “That’s false because an earlobe doesn’t sprout pine needles.”

This shows that the person does not grasp analogies.

Christmas tree and earlobes are ALIKE in one sense: they can have pendants.

They are different in all sorts of other ways: earlobes are fleshy and made of cartilage. Christmas trees need water and may have worms in the needles.

If someone says the analogy is false because an earlobe doesn’t have worms, well, then we need to start over and try to explain analogies.

Similarly, when someone says that my analogy is false because God cannot be seen but the PAK could theoretically be seen, we may need to start over and explain how analogies work. 🤷
 
PRmerger said:
😃

Let’s take this analogy:

Christmas tree : ornament : : earlobe : earring

A person who doesn’t understand analogies would say, “That’s false because an earlobe doesn’t sprout pine needles.”

This shows that the person does not grasp analogies.

Christmas tree and earlobes are ALIKE in one sense: they can have pendants.

They are different in all sorts of other ways: earlobes are fleshy and made of cartilage. Christmas trees need water and may have worms in the needles.

If someone says the analogy is false because an earlobe doesn’t have worms, well, then we need to start over and try to explain analogies.

Similarly, when someone says that my analogy is false because God cannot be seen but the PAK could theoretically be seen, we may need to start over and explain how analogies work. 🤷
Click to expand...
I reject analogies on principle! No, that’s wrong… Principles can’t be seen so they can’t exist. Right. I reject analogies because they can’t be seen. How about that? Why should we believe in anything we can’t see? Like selfless love, for example? 😉
 
tonyrey said:
I reject analogies on principle! No, that’s wrong… Principles can’t be seen so they can’t exist. Right. I reject analogies because they can’t be seen. How about that? Why should we believe in anything we can’t see? Like selfless love, for example? 😉
Click to expand...
Heh. 😃

I don’t think principles can be re-produced in a lab, either.

It appears that the case for the existence of principles is closed. They don’t exist.
My mind is made up.
 
PRmerger said:
Heh. 😃

I don’t think principles can be re-produced in a lab, either.

It appears that the case for the existence of principles is closed. They don’t exist.
My mind is made up.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry, dear friend. I must inform you that you don’t have a mind to make up - or if you do work some magic and produce one it is made up for you! Bad luck! :console:
 
tonyrey said:
I’m sorry, dear friend. I must inform you that you don’t have a mind to make up - or if you do work some magic and produce one it is made up for you! Bad luck! :console:
Click to expand...
We are just having way too much fun applying the atheistic paradigms ad absurdum. 😃
 
Sair said:
This is in response to an issue arising in another thread - the claim that Christian faith is necessary for acts of selflessness such as that of Maximilian Kolbe, who willingly gave up his life to Nazi cruelty in Auschwitz so that another man could go on living.

I don’t intend this thread to turn into a heated (and potentially abusive) debate over the relative merits of faith or lack of faith; so I would initially try to focus the discussion upon the kinds of motivations that lead us to sacrifice ourselves, in whatever fashion - from the merely inconvenient to the genuinely difficult or even prohibitively hard - for the benefit of others.

In short, is it necessary to believe in Christ in order to act in a truly altruistic manner? If so, what is it, exactly, that Christianity adds to the mix to motivate selflessness? Not least among the relevant considerations are the question of whether love, in any form, can actually be a selfless experience; and is it truly selfless to act in a manner that one believes will be rewarded in an eternal afterlife? Does an act of goodness, charity, or the rendering of significant assistance to others lose its value if one gains benefit from that action, even if the benefit is simply feeling good about oneself?
Click to expand...
It is well documented that non-Christians are capable or altruistic and selfless acts.

Faith does allow one to take risks which might not be taken otherwise. Lack of fear of death, and a belief that God will provide (or some other similar belief), allows for more risk taking.
 
PRmerger said:
We are just having way too much fun applying the atheistic paradigms ad absurdum. 😃
Click to expand...
I regret to inform you that fun is a permutation of particles produced by verifiable permutations of particles that can be observed under an electron microscope
(i.e. a permutation of particles ) which now enables scientists (i.e. permutations of particles) to account for all activity whatsoever right down to what are described as "every event, thought, belief, feeling, choice and decision that has occurred, is occurring or will occur throughout the entire history of the immense number of subatomic particles"commonly described as “the universe” by certain sets of subatomic particles commonly described as “persons” which are arranged in extraordinary ways, which is currently being carefully investigated by other sets of subatomic particles arranged in further sets of extraordinary ways which are currently being carefully investigated by further sets of subatomic particles - which will no doubt be investigated by yet further sets of subatomic particles… …

(I realise that my analysis is not entirely consistent but I am only a novice in diabolical advocacy. I promise to make efforts to improve (i.e. do nothing and let the sets of subatomic particles continue with their activity…).
 
tonyrey said:
I regret to inform you that fun is a permutation of particles produced by verifiable permutations of particles that can be observed under an electron microscope
(i.e. a permutation of particles ) which now enables scientists (i.e. permutations of particles) to account for all activity whatsoever right down to what are described as "every event, thought, belief, feeling, choice and decision that has occurred, is occurring or will occur throughout the entire history of the immense number of subatomic particles"commonly described as “the universe” by certain sets of subatomic particles commonly described as “persons” which are arranged in extraordinary ways, which is currently being carefully investigated by other sets of subatomic particles arranged in further sets of extraordinary ways which are currently being carefully investigated by further sets of subatomic particles - which will no doubt be investigated by yet further sets of subatomic particles… …

(I realise that my analysis is not entirely consistent but I am only a novice in diabolical advocacy. I promise to make efforts to improve (i.e. do nothing and let the sets of subatomic particles continue with their activity…).
Click to expand...
The subatomic particles which emitted that communication omitted to communicate that “investigation” is an activity of subatomic particles. Emission and communication are of course also activities of subatomic particles…
 
What about faiths other than Christian and atheist?

Can a Buddhist show “selfless love?”
 
AlanFromWichita said:
I wasn’t sure … feels like we’re still arguing.
Click to expand...
I’m just waiting for evidence* for the atheistic equivalent of Kolbe.

Selfless love is the low dive. Everyone can do that.

I want someone who has jumped off the high dive, like Kolbe did.

*Evidence using criteria which are nothing more and nothing less than that which atheists demand for God’s existence; i.e. first-hand accounts, written within the life-time of the entity in question, with no eye-witness reports being permissible, as they are “notoriously unreliable.”
 
PRmerger said:
I want someone who has jumped off the high dive, like Kolbe did.
Click to expand...
Oh.
*Evidence using criteria which are nothing more and nothing less than that which atheists demand for God’s existence; i.e. first-hand accounts, written within the life-time of the entity in question, with no eye-witness reports being permissible, as they are “notoriously unreliable.”
Click to expand...
So you want atheists to give you proof of an equivalence between something you said that cannot be done without Christian love (going off the high dive) and something that by definition has no Christian love? That’s like saying, “pick any card, as long as it’s the 3 of diamonds.”

Alan
 
AlanFromWichita said:
So you want atheists to give you proof of an equivalence between something you said that cannot be done without Christian love (going off the high dive) and something that by definition has no Christian love? That’s like saying, “pick any card, as long as it’s the 3 of diamonds.”

Alan
Click to expand...
That, except for the Christian part.

I want a name of a person who has given great sacrificial love, ala Kolbe, and evidence (of the same criteria that atheists demand) to back up the claim.
 
PRmerger said:
This whole exercise has been quite satisfying to me–the entire point, (which initiated from a genuine curiosity regarding whether there existed someone who was the atheistic equivalent of Kolbe) was to consider this:

Is there sufficient evidence to convince an* atheist *to change her mind regarding God’s existence?

It appears patently clear that the answer is: NO.
Because the criteria they demand is so…

unreasonable.

And their minds are closed to the possibility. :sad_yes:
Click to expand...
I’m amazed you still don’t see the flaw in your comparison. But I’ll point it out again, because it’s worth reiterating - there has never been obvserved, ever, any possible referent for the god of classical theism, to wit, an intelligent, creative, complex, omnipotent, interactive, yet bodiless, brainless and also “simple” entity. Indeed, the concept itself is incongruent. This is the concept upon which you absolutely rely for your faith. My lack of faith does not rely upon the selflessness or otherwise of any individual atheist. It appears that what you take to be your trump card is a comparison of unlike things.
 
Sair said:
I’m amazed you still don’t see the flaw in your comparison. But I’ll point it out again, because it’s worth reiterating - there has never been obvserved, ever, any possible referent for the god of classical theism, to wit, an intelligent, creative, complex, omnipotent, interactive, yet bodiless, brainless and also “simple” entity. Indeed, the concept itself is incongruent. This is the concept upon which you absolutely rely for your faith. My lack of faith does not rely upon the selflessness or otherwise of any individual atheist. It appears that what you take to be your trump card is a comparison of unlike things.
Click to expand...
In fact, I think it’s fair to add, in light of previous posts, that you lack even a single point of similarity between the two given phenomena with which to draw your analogy in the first place.
 
AlanFromWichita said:
Oh.

So you want atheists to give you proof of an equivalence between something you said that cannot be done without Christian love (going off the high dive) and something that by definition has no Christian love? That’s like saying, “pick any card, as long as it’s the 3 of diamonds.”

Alan
Click to expand...
Not to mention that even if we did turn up evidence of this precise individual, there are those who would simply turn around and say, “Oh, well, obviously that person was infused with divine grace anyway, since they couldn’t show that level of courage and selfless love without it.”

Which, on reflection, is perhaps fair, since as far as unbelievers are concerned, whatever Kolbe happened to believe about imitating the example of Christ or about martyrdom or about eternal life, he was still acting on the basis of his own innate human faculties. There have plainly been others who have shared such beliefs, yet not acted as Kolbe did - even if presented with the opportunity.
 
Sair said:
I’m amazed you still don’t see the flaw in your comparison. But I’ll point it out again, because it’s worth reiterating - there has never been obvserved, ever, any possible referent for the god of classical theism, to wit, an intelligent, creative, complex, omnipotent, interactive, yet bodiless, brainless and also “simple” entity. Indeed, the concept itself is incongruent. This is the concept upon which you absolutely rely for your faith. My lack of faith does not rely upon the selflessness or otherwise of any individual atheist. It appears that what you take to be your trump card is a comparison of unlike things.
Click to expand...
Your comment is like the person who says, regarding my Christmas tree analogy: Well, your comparison is flawed because earlobes don’t sprout pine needles.

You seem to have an inability to grasp abstract concepts such as analogies, Sair.

Some things that are alike are alike as ANALOGS only. To the degree that they differ, is, well, the degree that they differ.

For example, Christmas trees may have worms in their needles. Earlobes don’t have worms.

But that does not make this analogy false:

Christmas tree : ornament :: earlobe : earring.
 
 
PRmerger said:
Yes, the lack of evidence is quite telling.

This is especially egregious from someone who has demanded evidence for so many other areas of thought here on the CAFs.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=8490554&highlight=evidence#post8490554
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=6209852&highlight=evidence#post6209852
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=6199508&highlight=evidence#post6199508
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=6151271&highlight=evidence#post6151271
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=6149127&highlight=evidence#post6149127
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=5976353&highlight=evidence#post5976353

:eek:
Click to expand...
Wow. When it comes to other posters, you are well researched. Me, I forget who said what.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top