Is Faith Dangerous? A Question for Believers...

by AllTimeJeff 85 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • yaddayadda

    deleted (posted twice).

  • Deputy Dog
    Deputy Dog

    To answer the question, faith is only dangerous to nonbelievers!

  • ringo5
    DD To answer the question, faith is only dangerous to nonbelievers!

    OK, I'll bite and state the obvious scenario here.

    Take one faith-ridden Muslim, add one breastplate of explosives, insert into roadside cafe, and presto, disastrous results for ONE believer and MANY MULTIPLES of non-believers.

    Oh, wait, this almost supports your statement, as faith in this case was much more dangerous to non-believers.

    Still, it would seem to indicate danger, hmmmmm..........

  • TopHat

    All I can say is: The evidence of God is all around us...starting with ourself. I can not believe otherwise.

  • Deputy Dog
    Deputy Dog


    Still, it would seem to indicate danger, hmmmmm..........

    So what is your "faith" in?

  • AllTimeJeff

    Cool responses all. Thanks for being interested in this. Just for my part, I want to clarify a couple of things...

    I do not believe in evolution, nor do I think that the current understanding of how life got here should be represented as fact. It is certainly a work in progress. Faith is a part of certain evolutionists thinking, and some are just as unwilling to talk about the holes in their theories as are many theists theirs..... It is very unsatisfying as a view of how the world came to be, and arrogant on the part of scientists who push it so hard. My view is that no one has the current correct view, thiests or athiests, thus more honest study of how we got here needs to be gone into, and an honest discussion of what the facts show needs to take place between thiests, athiests and scientists.

    A couple of my questions framed this debate in such a way so as to suggest that only people who claim to be a part of a denomination could be religous or believe in god. That wasn't my intent, I just didn't proof read those points before I posted them. I am more then happy to recognize that people of faith who believe in god may frequently want nothing to do with an organized religion. I didn't mean to charecterize you in this way if that is how you believe.

    All those who are people of faith responded in one way or the other and if you would work with me on this summation, it appears that my title for this thread might have been offensive to some. I apologize, though I certainly have made the best effort I could to explain and quantify why I put it this way. Not everyone's faith moves them to destructive acts. That wasn't my point. But the fact can't be argued that faith has moved many to harm millions over the centuries. The more we are willing to believe things, esp traditions, that have little to no evidence and only ancient scrolls to turn to, such beliefs become open to interpretation to all who believe. Instead of holding people of faith to the same standards of evidence as most other fields of study or knowledge, religous people tend to offer no proofs at all, and frankly, that is because few proofs exist outside of these ancient scrolls. But they have faith. That is no longer good for me, but if that is where you are, I am not your enemy, I just wanted to talk about this and broach the subject.

    I do want to answer a couple of thoughts from some of you...

    Narkissos wrote

    To me, the danger or benefit of faith (which both exist) are independent from its being right or wrong (sorry to repeat myself).

    Iow, a wrong belief can be beneficial in some circumstances; harmful in others. Same with a true belief.

    Mmmm, anything is possible. I mean, to me that is very circular reasoning, doesn't explain a great many things very well, and seems to be a theoretical arguement of convenience. For example, (please follow me here) if I had car problems involving a hose on a car, I suppose that a straw and some sturdy tape could temporarily fix a problem, but it will have to be replaced and is obviously of inferior quality, and not long term solution. I would liken this arguement similarly, if any good comes out of a wrong belief, I would say that it is at best a quick fix of inferior quality to the truth. At best this arguement is the exception, not the rule. Not that I begrudge your right to believe this. But let me repeat your arguement:

    Wrong = beneficial (in some circumstances) Truth = harmful (in some circumstances)

    Danger vs Benefit is actually independant from belief being right or wrong.

    Alright, I doubt that we will come to any conclusion on this. I certainly disagree with that, but that is life. No hard feelings on my end.... And I apolgize to you Narkissos for missing your point. It is a limitation of the internet that I didn't catch your humor. Sorry for taking what you said the wrong way. It was my intent all along to avoid that.. mea culpa!

    To answer the question, faith is only dangerous to nonbelievers!

    With respect, I wanted to talk about proofs and evidence, not feelings. My question in the thread implied faith is dangerous. I received examples of some peoples faith being good and not dangerous, not that that makes what they believe correct. My arguements regarding fundamentalists were not discussed at all. Thus, no one has convinced me that faith is any less dangerous then when I began this thread. Is it too hard or scary a subject to broach with people of faith? Because this is a sensitive subject, I don't begrudge at all people of faith and their views, but I was hoping that an attempt would be made to offer some evidence, some logic, regarding why faith in these scrolls and religions is correct, the way to go, the truth. I received some possible scenarios regarding death, how we deal with death, how we cope with problems, and religous faith seems to help these ones, irregardless of whether they can prove their faith right or defend it. Being that is what it is, I would think it more honest to say such religious ideas are at best a theory, and definitly not proven truth. Thus, I would put the above statement of Deputy Dog as a platitude that didn't really contribute to the discussion. What did that mean anyway?

    However, while I look forward to discussing this more, although probably not anymore today, I realize that the primary purpose of this board is to discuss issues regarding JW's. So since we have this in common, I don't want to make anyone feel bad. I think there are points to be made, but not at the expense of the purpose of this board, so I hope to all that I bantered with today will remember that this is hope..... I am tired, my brain is shutting down, so I will wish all a good night till tomorrow...

  • proplog2

    USSR tried to destroy religion. It failed. People are dangerous. Faith and Religion are NOT dangerous. Kind of like National RIfle Assosciation slogan "Guns don't kill - people kill".

    Society has to slowly mature to the point where they don't need God. Just like kids have to grow up to the point where they don't need their parents.

  • proplog2

    Little Toe:

    There is a big difference between imagining you are talking to a human (there are now over 6 Billion of them) and talking to a deity.

  • Narkissos


    to me that is very circular reasoning

    Well, any reasoning is circular ultimately, but I tend to think yours works in a closer circle -- it is dangerous because it is wrong, it is wrong because it is dangerous... At least my separating those two issues breaks the cycle into a larger one, or perhaps a spiral.

    Error, or even lie, do change reality every day, for both the worse and the better. Of course you can never go very far away from any extant state of reality at once, but infinitesimal "mutations" and major breakthroughs do occur in the process. And what works them out, both against and with reality, if not what we call "fantasy"? A real flying airplane must be suited to physical reality, but mere submission to reality would never have produced it either. This artificial reality has required a long line of fantasies (the impossible flying machines of past dreamers) to exist.

    Any notion of "truth" tends to be static, freezing a continuing flow of things-events into a "that". From any "truth" I -- we -- will have to differ, ever and ever again.

    Fantasy is the breath of the human mind. And that has included, and probably will include for some time yet, what we call "religion". Which includes (but doesn't limit itself to) a relation to the fantastic past (old scrolls).

    No hard feelings on my end....

    Neither on mine. Hadn't I enjoyed the topic I wouldn't have replied...

  • avidbiblereader

    Is Christ dangerous? Was Paul or Peter dangerous people as possesers of faith?

    and a dreadful inquisitor with correct beliefs.

    A question for Narkisos, name one that was both dreadful and was correct in what they were doing?

    As Peter said of Paul's teachings, anyone can twist things to their own destruction.


Share this