Paganism

[Pax]

AnAtheist:

No, but it helps you to see the obvious answer, when you ask yourself the same question.

Hm, I have seen enough “data” to tell its either fiction, fraud, a hoax, dilusions, or wishful thinking. You think otherwise, then dig out some waterproof data.

The author is a Doctor of philosophy named Peter Kreeft./QUOTE]
I have seen his arguments for Christianity. Each one has serious flaws, which I already showed on this very board. None is really convincing.

I have no problems asking myself the question and arriving at an answer which I would be willing to defend. The answer that you have arrived at may in your mind be obvious, but I’m sure we disagree and it is therefore not an obvious answer. If it were obvious, all people of average intelligence would see it and would agree.

The data is strong but it obviously is not enough for you. Trotting out arguments will do little to persuade you since your mind is obviously made up. You claim to “have seen” Kreefts arguments. This suggests to me that you have not read his books. I would encourage you to read his works front to back. Those who think they can logically refute the arguments that he presents are over estimating their own abilities and severely underestimating this gifted professor of philosophy. Logic is the man’s game…give him a fair and thorough examination.

I’m not sure, but I may have read the posts you made elsewhere on these boards. The person’s work that I did read had not refuted Kreeft.

 

[brotherhrolf]

cheddarsox:

I do not believe that a belief in mitochlorians brings them into existence.

But there are philosophies and beliefs that do support that belief in a thing makes it real.

And I have witnesses that if enough people believe a thing is true, and all act together as if a thing is true, they can often manifest occurances that make it appear as if the thing is true.
I think that often this “group mentality” is the power behind some belief systems, because the “appearance” of reality caused by group experience fuels greater belief etc.

cheddar

Cheddar: Here I am way late at night, up because of Rita…
I am holding to my analogy. At what point does belief in a construct, i.e. mitochlorians, actually bring them into being?

If you have enough people saying , “It is so” does it really mean “It is so”? Jesus was not a construct. We have historical accounts of him (deliberately using the small h so that you know I am trying to engage you on an anthropological basis). . So, what I am hearing from you is that, given enough people with the same belief, you can pretty much bring into existence that which those people have a belief because their unified belief is capable of bringing into existence that which did not exist before into existance?

Seems to me you can’t have it both ways. Rationally, you know that the mitochlorians are a definte “constrruct” Yet, you are willing to allow that given a sufficient number of human beings, in essence, at some point, the collective “will” of those human being will bring “mitochlorians” into existence. You have to. To explain the “Force”. Sorry, but I can’t accept that. I could take a whole bunch of people, sit them down, inscribe a sacred circle with guardians to east, south, west and north, and telll them …think “Fiat lux”. I really, truly don’t think light would appear. The same applies to the mitochlorians.

It appears to me you can’t have it both ways. Intellectually, you know that invoking “mitochlorians” is an excercise in self-deception. Not saying that you do, simply saying it for the sake of the discussion. Creating something out of nothing is not a task of we human beings- don’t you think?

 

[AnAtheist]

brotherhrolf:

If you have enough people saying , “It is so” does it really mean “It is so”?

No, but if you have enough people saying it, you can build up a powerful worldwide organisation around it, and argue *ad numerum *and ad populum.

Btw, I detect strong similarities between “if enough people think so, it is real” and the ontological proof of God by Anselm of Canterbury. Christian theologists more or less have followed this reasoning too.

 

[cheddarsox]

Cheddar: Here I am way late at night, up because of Rita…
I am holding to my analogy. At what point does belief in a construct, i.e. mitochlorians, actually bring them into being?

At no point. I do not believe that they actually come into being.

If you have enough people saying , “It is so” does it really mean “It is so”?

Actualy hard physical reality, no, concepts yes. We can’t sit down and think a bear into existence, we can think a law into existence.

. So, what I am hearing from you is that, given enough people with the same belief, you can pretty much bring into existence that which those people have a belief because their unified belief is capable of bringing into existence that which did not exist before into existance?

No, you did not hear that from me. Please read my post more carefully. Are you arguing with my post, or with me because you know I do not share your religion?

Seems to me you can’t have it both ways. Rationally, you know that the mitochlorians are a definte “constrruct” Yet, you are willing to allow that given a sufficient number of human beings, in essence, at some point, the collective “will” of those human being will bring “mitochlorians” into existence.

Brother, I did not say that. Please do not misrepresent me. Go back and read the post.

You have to. To explain the “Force”.

**I have no interest in mitochlorians or the force, so no investment in explaining them.
**
Sorry, but I can’t accept that. I could take a whole bunch of people, sit them down, inscribe a sacred circle with guardians to east, south, west and north, and telll them …think “Fiat lux”. I really, truly don’t think light would appear. The same applies to the mitochlorians.

I agree.

It appears to me you can’t have it both ways.

**Perhaps the person trying to have it both ways is you. I already stated that I do not think that people can believe a physical thing into existence. But you continue to argue with me anyway.
**

Intellectually, you know that invoking “mitochlorians” is an excercise in self-deception. Not saying that you do, simply saying it for the sake of the discussion. Creating something out of nothing is not a task of we human beings- don’t you think?

**If enough people believe in a thing, and act as if the thing is truth, they can sometimes manifest situations that “support” the belief. The actual thing does not manifest, but it has become so real in the minds of the believers, that everyone behaves as if it is real.

This level of belief has consequences in the people’s lives, even though the thing they believe is untrue. And often they will use the object of belief as if it were true, and even ascribe it as the cause of occurances in their lives.

Example…a child’s imaginary friend
Example…santa claus
Example…weapons of mass destruction
Example…assumed death of a loved one
Example…the money they think Uncle Phil is leaving them in his will (but he’s not)

No matter how many people believe, those things don’t come into being, but they sure can influence lives, merely through belief in them.

Hope that clears up what I think about this issue.

cheddar
**

 

[luna]

i read only a couple of posts on this thread but i would just like to clarify that pagans and wiccans are not new …
let’s look at the ancient egyptians for examples on of the oldest civilizations, or any other, they believed in mutlitple Gods because that is all they knew, the sun and the moon controlled their everyday lives and we can’t blame them for believing these were Gods…
I like to think of it as there is only one true God…and through him sub dieties if i can call it that bring us closer to God and spirituality.
Also another thing everyone tends to forget is that the mystical aspect of christianity is there whether you want to admit it or not…Frankinsence(used for protection, etc.) which is burned in Christian churches is also burned by pagans and wiccans for similar reasons…I mean there are similarities for a reason, we are all one, we just choose to practice our beliefs differently and no one religion should proclaim itself righteous …

 

[Matteo_01]

Paganism is a much richer teaching system than catholic…

Simply because they never stop to adapt and change… but catholic have the same belief and practice for 2000 years…

 

[dranzal]

I must first admit that I know very little about “old” paganism. I do, however, have some friends that profess to be pagan. As a Catholic, I feel some amount of responsibility to accurately and adequately represent my faith when in their present. No, I am not saying that I must constantly bombard them with it, only that I should be a faithful representative.

During one visit, discussion turned to beliefs. The thing that struck me most was that they did not believe in absolute, objective truth regarding the supernatural. I found myself thinking–how can you present the TRUTH to people who don’t believe such a thing exists.
One of them actually said that I have my truth and she has her truth and who’s to say they aren’t both real. Mine is real to me, yours is real to you, etc.

I don’t know if this adds anything to the discussion. It was just my recent experience and I was stunned.

 

[rayne100]

brotherhrolf:

They couldn’t answer my questions about why. It seems to me if you can’t answer the question, why?.. Is there faith? Is there a religion? As a Catholic, I can answer why. What then is the difference?

Faith is believing when their are no explinations, when you cannot say why. Faith is a belief not a logical rhetoric.