Christian Prayer.

Originally posted by stoker
well?? you say its unsaportable well is there a cure, ive not heard of it. and there is people who say they got it from blood transfutions.. inocent children who have it due to the mothers contacting it while unborn.
you just seem to ignore the facts and go on emotions well as i put it the world would be better without the aids. you show your bias in your re ...[text shortened]... for its rise other than human weakness. so if you have a point please make it otherwise you know

I didn't say cure, I said treatment.

And even if their is no cure or treatment, your position was still not supportable.

And the only reason for the rise in HIV is the efficacy of the HIV virus.

As I said, your view is unsupportable, stop digging and making it worse.

Originally posted by googlefudge
And people claim atheists have no morality.

There is a word for what you are suggesting... Evil.

this is untrue.. atheists have morality. i asked the question what would you do similar to would you shoot hitler say before 1938 knowing you would save lives. the question is no different to if you had a choice would you kill to save lives. god has no problem with death but we all have a horror at killing or should have, but would you kill hitler 1938??

Originally posted by stoker
this is untrue.. atheists have morality. i asked the question what would you do similar to would you shoot hitler say before 1938 knowing you would save lives. the question is no different to if you had a choice would you kill to save lives. god has no problem with death but we all have a horror at killing or should have, but would you kill hitler 1938??

Yes but the post you are quoting was posted before this question and refers to something else.

And as I said, the two situations you propose are not comparable, thus whether or not I would kill
Hitler in 1938 is irrelevant to the discussion of killing someone with aids.

Also god is non-existent and thus irrelevant. All morality is man made, but some has the decency to admit it.

Originally posted by googlefudge
I don't know why you are arguing this is a rational idea.

I think you are confused about what rational means.

It doesn't mean self centred.

Curing disease, improving living conditions, preventing war ect ect make the world a better and safer
place for everyone.
Both individually and for your society as a whole.

Thus it is rational, (it is ...[text shortened]...
Secularism and rationality do not mean turning people into selfish emotionless robots.

so why is it irrational to be religious?

being that religions are generally devoted to promoting altruistic actions and helping people overcome emotional problems in their lives, wouldn't such religion be rational?

Originally posted by googlefudge
Yes but the post you are quoting was posted before this question and refers to something else.

And as I said, the two situations you propose are not comparable, thus whether or not I would kill
Hitler in 1938 is irrelevant to the discussion of killing someone with aids.

Also god is non-existent and thus irrelevant. All morality is man made, but some has the decency to admit it.

they arent if you would do it for one to save lives why would you not do it for the same reason to the other.
well put it this way if you knew the person who started the aids in a similar way to how we know hitler then what

Originally posted by Melanerpes
so why is it irrational to be religious?

being that religions are generally devoted to promoting altruistic actions and helping people overcome emotional problems in their lives, wouldn't such religion be rational?

It's irrational to be religious because religions are based on faith, the belief in things of
which there is no proof or evidence, this is inherently irrational.

Also religions are not generally devoted to promoting altruism, religions are generally
devoted to promoting themselves. They may also promote some altruism as a side effect
and certainly many people who are religious are altruistic, but the purpose of the religion is
to promote itself as the one way to save your immortal soul... something for which there is no
evidence or reason for thinking exists.

Originally posted by googlefudge
It's irrational to be religious because religions are based on faith, the belief in things of
which there is no proof or evidence, this is inherently irrational.

Also religions are not generally devoted to promoting altruism, religions are generally
devoted to promoting themselves. They may also promote some altruism as a side effect
and certainl ...[text shortened]... your immortal soul... something for which there is no
evidence or reason for thinking exists.

How would you go about proving the belief that "it is good to care about people with AIDS in Africa"? -- especially if you are talking to someone who does not share this belief?

Can you prove this? In what way would this act of caring benefit you or anyone you know personally? Indeed, this act of caring diminishes your own resources which may put you or your own family at risk. And there are those people who will vehemently argue that this act of caring is a bad thing if it means raising their taxes.

Ultimately, your belief is based on a feeling deep inside that says that it is indeed good to care about people with AIDS in Africa. And you have found that many other people share this feeling.

Likewise, a person's belief in God ultimately comes from a deep-seated sense that God exists - and often that there is some way in which a person can form a relationship with this God.

Now this doesn't prove that God exists - just that many people have a sense of God and feel that it is important to seek a connection with this sense of God.

Originally posted by Melanerpes
How would you go about proving the belief that "it is good to care about people with AIDS in Africa"? -- especially if you are talking to someone who does not share this belief?

Can you prove this? In what way would this act of caring benefit you or anyone you know personally? Indeed, this act of caring diminishes your own resources which may put you o ...[text shortened]... ve a sense of God and feel that it is important to seek a connection with this sense of God.

I am not going to do it now, as it's too late.
But I can demonstrate rational reasons for supporting people in africa with aids.

Whether any individual person is in a position to care is a different question.
Western society as a whole has more resources, and more than enough to solve the problem,
than many individual persons.

Obviously if you are in financial trouble, you should look to providing for yourself and your own
family first.
This doesn't mean that there aren't good reasons to support aids prevention in africa, just that
there are other issues that can be more important for specific individuals/groups of society.

And it is still not comparable with belief in god.

Originally posted by googlefudge
I am not going to do it now, as it's too late.
But I can demonstrate rational reasons for supporting people in africa with aids.

Whether any individual person is in a position to care is a different question.
Western society as a whole has more resources, and more than enough to solve the problem,
than many individual persons.

Obviously if you specific individuals/groups of society.

And it is still not comparable with belief in god.

I'm sure you can come up with a long list of "rational reasons" for helping these people. But that's not really the reason why you'd be doing it. If those people were living on Mars and there was absolutely NO benefit to you for helping them beyond the good feeling you get from helping them, you would still do it - because you felt compassion for them.

And if you did not feel any compassion, I'm sure you could come up with an equally long list of "rational reasons" why you shouldn't help these people.

EDIT - However - you already have stated that emotional states and feelings are indeed rational things. So why would an emotional feeling regarding God be irrational?

Originally posted by Melanerpes
I'm sure you can come up with a long list of "rational reasons" for helping these people. But that's not really the reason why you'd be doing it. If those people were living on Mars and there was absolutely NO benefit to you for helping them beyond the good feeling you get from helping them, you would still do it - because you felt compassion for them.
...[text shortened]... up with an equally long list of "rational reasons" why you shouldn't help these people.

The fact that I feel compassion, and empathy, and the fact that most (normal) people also
feel compassion and empathy is part of, but not the only base for my argument.

However I could find a psychopath that could understand and reason why we should help
them for solely selfish and purely logical reasons, while simultaneously not caring about
those suffering at all.

We are social animals, our social, emotional interactions are important.
Rational arguments don't need to ignore this, indeed it is irrational to do so.

Originally posted by googlefudge
The fact that I feel compassion, and empathy, and the fact that most (normal) people also
feel compassion and empathy is part of, but not the only base for my argument.

However I could find a psychopath that could understand and reason why we should help
them for solely selfish and purely logical reasons, while simultaneously not caring about
th ...[text shortened]... are important.
Rational arguments don't need to ignore this, indeed it is irrational to do so.

we are social and emotional animals -- and we're also religious animals.

Originally posted by Melanerpes
we are social and emotional animals -- and we're also religious animals.

Nope, religion is not innate. it's learned, and it doesn't have to be.

We are all (barring a few abnormal/brain damaged people) emotional and social animals.

And religion is still not rational.

Originally posted by Rajk999
I dont know. But the women without perfect knowledge about the status of their pastor should have proceeded with the aids treatment and still allow the pastor to pray for them. There is no need to choose one or the other.

So only the prayers of a righteous man 'availeth much', and only God decides who is righteous. But no one has any way of finding out who God has decided to be righteous?

I'm sure there are countless people who claim to be 'righteoues', but no one has anyway of finding out which persons are. Sounds like some sort of cruel lottery to me.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
So only the prayers of a righteous man 'availeth much', and only God decides who is righteous. But no one has any way of finding out who God has decided to be righteous?

I'm sure there are countless people who claim to be 'righteoues', but no one has anyway of finding out which persons are. Sounds like some sort of cruel lottery to me.

no one can be righteous in the absolute sense, its impossible, for we are imperfect and
prone to aberration.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no one can be righteous in the absolute sense, its impossible, for we are imperfect and
prone to aberration.

So how do you interpret James 5:16?

How do we know who are the righteous as chosen by God?