What question is answered by religion?

[peterm13]

Originally Posted by Iseeyouthere

Which part of Christianity offers that answer?
Yours?
Westboro Baptist Church?
Church of Australia?
Church of America?

They all say different things. And I'm willing to bet that they will dismiss the others claims if it doesn't fit into their view.
"America is god's country."
"No... god is everywhere!"
'No, your god is fake. False believers!"
"No, god wants THIS!"
"No THIS, not THAT!"

So. No... They can't answer that.

Apparently to suffer a lot from what I'd read. Of course, you'll say that is wrong.
We'll have many different branches all saying something different:
"Hate/kill the gays!"
"Kill doctors!"
"Love everyone!"
"Hate everyone!"
"Kill everyone!"
"Convert everyone!"
"Suffer for our sins!"
"Live a good life!"
"Pray 50 times a week!"
"Shave your heads!"
"Don't eat pork"


Their reason?
"Its what god WANTS US TO DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"
So, no... you can't answer that one either.

Question one: "Who is God"?

One member of the trinity. To deny this wouldn't make you a Christian, so that question still stands answered by Christianity.

Question two: "What does God want for us"

This has no pivot on fundamental christian beliefs. So Christians are free to disagree on the finer points of God's purpose for us as long as they still affirm the fundamentals.

But the answer I offered IS a Christian one because I affirm the fundamentals and can justify my answer of Gods purpose for us with scripture.

So that question is still answered by Christianity.

The topics above you raised where Christians disagree with each other are internal to Christianity.

All you have to affirm to be a Christian is, The Trinity, Jesus being God incarnate and rising bodily from the dead and the bible being God's inspired word. ( hopefully i haven't missed a fundamental belief there.)

So the minor points that christians disagree on don't discredit my answer.

All I would have to do is affirm the fundamentals I listed above and then offer my reason of What I think Gods purpose is for our lives and justify it using the bible and I would have an answer justifiably true offered by Christianity.

[Iseeyouthere]

Originally Posted by peterm13

Question one: "Who is God"?

One member of the trinity. To deny this wouldn't make you a Christian, so that question still stands answered by Christianity.

That is a No True Scotsman statement.
Disappointing and thus fails to answer the question because you are stating that you have to be a "true" Christian to be able to answer the question of "Who is god?".

Which also raises the question of what makes a "true Christian", but that is starting to get off topic.

You have failed to provide an answer for this question.

Question two: "What does God want for us"

This has no pivot on fundamental christian beliefs. So Christians are free to disagree on the finer points of God's purpose for us as long as they still affirm the fundamentals.

What classifies as "fundamentals"?
Is it your ways? Westboros ways?

They are different as well.
And you can't use the No True Scotsman of telling me that they aren't real Chrisitans either.

But the answer I offered IS a Christian one because I affirm the fundamentals and can justify my answer of Gods purpose for us with scripture.

Thats is YOUR answer. Not a Christian one.
Why?
Because of the different branches of Christianity that state different meanings in the 'stripture', which I presume is the bible... and therefore, come to different ends which contradict each other.

So that question is still answered by Christianity.

No its not.

The topics above you raised where Christians disagree with each other are internal to Christianity.

Actually, no. They are relevant. Because if you two groups, one saying that god wants us to die and the other saying that god wants us to live... then you can't get a straight answer from either of them because their views contradict each other and thus can't be answered by them as a whole.

All you have to affirm to be a Christian is, The Trinity, Jesus being God incarnate and rising bodily from the dead and the bible being God's inspired word. ( hopefully i haven't missed a fundamental belief there.)

Once again... No True Scotsman is at work.
"Gotta be this, this and this to be A TRUE CHRISTIAN!"

So the minor points that christians disagree on don't discredit my answer.

Sadly, they have been used to discredit your claim. Not so minor now eh?

All I would have to do is affirm the fundamentals I listed above and then offer my reason of What I think Gods purpose is for our lives and justify it using the bible and I would have an answer justifiably true offered by Christianity.

Ahh... truth... How do you know your way is the 'true' way? What makes your way right and all the others wrong? How can you be so sure? SO many different branches all saying different things...

...and you are certain that what you are saying is the true way... Playing on the No True Scotsman again...

And to top it off...
You have failed to provide an answer for this question.

[Xeno]

Originally Posted by peterm13

The topic of the thread, in your own words "question to which religion provides answers, not mere assertions or pious hopes, and that answer is coherent, unavailable to science, and would reasonably remain unavailable."


I've said that Religions answer the questions of "Who is God?" and "What does God want for us?"

Those questions are directly related to the topic, no dodging, no avoiding.

So your example of "my approach" is totally false.

Also, where have I been vague?

If your going to show I've failed you need to prove that Christianity doesn't offer an answer these questions.

You said, what question does religion answer, I've given two questions answered exclusively by religion.

The only proof I need to offer is that religions DO offer answers to these questions. The truth of them is another thing. ( you may need to start another thread for that, as its a different topic or re-phrase the question on here).


No avoiding at all.

Originally Posted by peterm13

Yeah I do see what you're saying, but the challenge isn't, how many people does the question have to be answered for.

The challenge was what question does religion answer?, and I've offered two.

You can't invalidate the fact that religion does offer answers to those questions based on how many people believe them.

Originally Posted by peterm13

No, my answers are actually relevant and on topic, not random irrelevant rubbish that makes no sense ie your giraffe and spoon example.

You also seem to understand what I wrote in previous posts, and now you're saying "its a string of words that makes no sense" what have I said that doesn't make sense to you?

Your changing the conditions of the challenge again, please remember, you don't have to believe Christianity to be true to assert that it does offer answers to the two questions I've brought forward.

Far from changing the conditions of the question, we are asking you to adhere to them without your current line of evasion by equivocation.

As stevebrooks has already pointed out, there is a difference between a reply and an answer. You are equivocating over the word answer to try to avoid this fact. I will give you a more direct example, although functionally it is the same as those which I and stevebrooks have already used.

Question: "What question is answered by looking at a certain crease line on your palm?"
Answer: "How many children you will have."

This is obviously a false answer. It is a reply, but it is not an answer in that there is no discoverable connection between a given line on the palm of a hand and the number of future children. The idea is absurd in every available test.

By the same token, your reply about religion has to show that it works, and that the same answer was not discoverable by science. By selecting replies which you can not demonstrate to work, have any validity or even avoid looking absurd, you are using sophistry, fallacious arguments with the intent of deceiving an audience.

Your reply fails, and your claim to have answered is tantamount to lying. It really would be of equal [lack of] utility for you to have advanced flat-footed fairies as your answer, because they are logically and evidentially no less credible than your actual reply.

Originally Posted by peterm13

So to be clear you are asking " Why did god create us?" ( not asking what Gods purpose for our lives) is that your question?

Asking this now, peterm13, you appear to suggest that the question was somehow unclear previously? Would that be on every one of the previous eleven occasions I have asked? Have you ever considered the possibility of trying to retain a shred of credibility?

Here is the list of previous posts in which I asked or referred to a previous ask of that question. First, in the "pete's 1st post" thread:
97, 117, 133, 149, 162, 211, 250, 286 and in this thread: 61, 85 and 107.

Now that you have worked out what was the question, peterm13, what is your answer or, failing an answer, what is your view and on what do you base it?

[Soup Dragon]

It occurs to me P13 you are not trying that hard to challenge you're beliefs, isn't that how you found yourself here in the first place?

[ClayMonk]

Originally Posted by peterm13

All you have to affirm to be a Christian is, The Trinity, Jesus being God incarnate and rising bodily from the dead and the bible being God's inspired word. ( hopefully i haven't missed a fundamental belief there.)

Sidetracking, but I think you're missing the point there. Where does it say you have to believe those things in the Bible? It say's that you must believe in Jesus and follow him, and that's precisely what the word Christian means. These guys might disagree with your version of it;

Oneness Pentecostalism