不信不信還須信

請理性分析 我想話就算相信有造物者, 不代表要相信上帝 相信上帝 不代表要相信教會

信仰 是可以用理性分析的嗎？

?? 思考一般而言都須要理性分析 只是有些問題超出人類認知範圍以外 如"神是否存在?" 不能就科學方面提出證據證明其真實性 所以就給人一種不須分析的感覺

與emmy商榷 信有鬼，當然傾向相信有神靈． 但信有神，卻不一定是聖經裡的神． ‘神不是黃大仙’，但黃大仙可以是神． 聖經不是戰爭禍源，但部分相信聖經的神的人，卻是．（佛教和道教，如黃大仙，則平和得多） 當寧靜的時候，會聽到神的叩門聲，是誰在叩門，是耶和華？是佛陀？是阿拉？是梵天？是道？ 也許是自己的心在動？ 我真心尊重並欣賞大部分基督徒的信仰，只是對一神論的覇權感到反感．

一點想法 先說一點,就是沒有證據不代表可以說不存在,可是也不是說那是存在,那只可以說成未知,好像以前的人沒有證據證明太陽不是圍著地球走的不代表太陽是圍著地球走 而有人說為什麼會那麼多人信,那麼多人見證,可是很久以前也是大多數人也相信地球是平的,這不代表地球真的是平,人們相信什麼也不會改變客觀的事實 而信則有不信則無也是同樣的問題,就是要是沒有人信的神真的會消失,也不可以否定那個神存在過的事實 是不是精巧的事一定要有人去設計去做的問題,那可以說只要有足夠多的時間那是不需要的,就是我們也有機會擲出十個一圍骰,只要有很多的宇宙,不會完的時間,有一個像現在的宇宙一點也不奇怪,而因為我們在這麼的一個宇宙才會問為什麼宇宙會是剛好這樣子而不是那樣子,因為要是宇宙是那樣子,我們也會問一樣的問題(不過可能我們不會是現在的樣子,誰知道) 簡單的說,在我來說,神是一個問號

給emmy話 聖經中的神是有要求過人去發動戰爭和種族屠殺,要是說那些人本來是該死也改變不了祂下過的殘忍命令,要是全善,為什麼會給人可以為惡?那不是一句自由意志就可以說明的,要是真的是所謂的自由意志作怪,那神就不會是善,因為那行為就是明知做出來的人會犯錯,而且也給了他們犯錯的可能,而在他們犯錯是就可以殘虐,那不會是善的所為,就像是我們在骰子上油上一點,要是出來的結果是一我們也不可以說那是骰子的錯,它生出來就是會有機會出現一的,錯的只是做它出來的人

回應 神創造人如不給我們自由意志... 我們就只等同一個已有既定情式的機械人,我們可能只懂愛別人,誠實,慷慨... 有自由的意思不代表棄善從惡,我們也可以向善呀~難道大家認為將我們都變成一模一樣的好人就是好?父母將自己的子女關在密室裡,不讓他犯錯,不讓受傷害才是好?那不是他們的子女真心向善,只是無法去惡而已. 在有自由意志底下還選擇行善比沒有來得更珍貴(當然,這絕對不易) 故"自由意志"不是一個詛咒,而是一份禮物

上帝存在嗎 ? to 征服者 "在我來說,神是一個問號". 在你心底裡, 沒有一個答案嗎? 是真的沒有,定係怕答o左之後返唔到轉頭? 我的信仰裡的"信" 係 "confident brief without ordinary types of evidence", 容易D咁講就係係一條未知正確與否的道路上蹅出第一腳,當我一路行一路揾答案, 走錯路未返轉頭. 但我所見的你,好似係唔咁行o個隻,揾條好似o岩o既路試o下行喇,唔會死... 我行緊o個條, 都幾好....

To Emmy 自由意志在神學上定義不一, 但我相信的自由意志是這樣: 人的原罪使人o係make decision o既時候偏向罪的那一邊,神給人的自由意志從新把人放在罪與善中間,讓人可以真正自由地make decision from Goodness and Sin. P.S 在討論自由意志是什麼的時候, 我們肯定了自由意志的存在, 但究竟人有冇自由意志, 也是藉得討論的.

好多教徒 好多教徒總係覺得唔信神(應該係唔信教)既人係迷途羔羊。覺得自己點緊一條好路人行。 好多教徒總係覺得非教徒意志不堅，明明人地係保持客觀、理性，唔妄下判斷，偏偏要話人地其實唔敢認自己「信」，驚認左返唔到轉頭。 好多教徒總係覺得非教徒有路唔敢行，其實人地可能根本唔想行，想坐低睇清楚呢個世界係點。 我係話好多教徒，唔係話你，唔好對號入座。

等我個第三者出黎講兩句啦 下面Ousia覺得征服者(我係唔記得左個名，sorry)「似係唔敢行」，係有幾分道理，但你可唔可以俾d時間佢呢？如果長遠黎計呢，我係支持Ousia既講法既。

To: 心沉 首先, 我係話緊你 ^_^ hehe, joking. :P "偏偏要話人地其實唔敢認自己「信」，驚認左返唔到轉頭" 我覺得唔一定係"信"o既,如果你真係覺得唔可信未唔好鬼信, 我只希望大家可以"勇敢"做決定 "其實人地可能根本唔想行，想坐低睇清楚呢個世界係點". 坐低都好, 但問心o個句, 如果坐住o個張凳係"偏見"牌,而唔係"客觀"牌,咁我覺得行住o黎睇好過. 我20幾年,都未見過一張100% "客觀"牌o既凳,"偏見"牌仿"客觀"牌o既就好多,我自己o個張都係.如果你揾到一張100% "客觀"牌o既凳,記得介紹俾我,貴一貴都買.

to 02:59 who r u? are u 15:36? 旁觀者? 2:33? why u dun fill yr name?

to: 心沉 雖然我在"基督教"裡,但我係"基督徒",唔係基督"教"徒, 我信的是"基督",不是"基督教".

the meaning of Faith Faith for me is like gambling, I put my "belief" into it, and i m not 100% sure win, i only get some little evidence from the old dusty book called bible. I will know one day, I dun mind if i lose, cos i know that's my decision, and i will take the responsibility of it.

“不管他們的『信』是belief還是faith，我認為都不能夠無理由地信，否則就是迷信” I just want to ask wot reason make u believe in that?

Of Scepticism A few comments on Ousia’s view. 1) “在你心底裡, 沒有一個答案嗎? 是真的沒有,定係怕答o左之後返唔到轉頭?” I don’t think that this is what 征服者 has in mind. "在我來說,神是一個問號” this certainly implies that he has no definite answer regarding the issue of the existence of God. But there is nothing wrong about being sceptical (i.e., an “academic sceptic” not a “radical sceptic) of certain issues. Scepticism is certainly not what Ousia described, “好似係唔咁行o個隻”. It is a legitimate and responsible position to take, especially when we are dealing with controversial issues, the truth of which we don’t have adequate evidence to judge. 2) However, scepticism is, in many cases, the first and not the final step. Usually, when more and more evidences are gathered, finally one will come up to a more confirmed answer (either positive or negative). Now, it seems to me that征服者 is heading towards that direction (possibly, he will arrive at a position contrary to that of the believers). He is certainly not “好似係唔咁行o個隻”. 3) “在討論自由意志是什麼的時候, 我們肯定了自由意志的存在” I don’t think that this is correct. Certainly, most of us think (and FEEL) that we have freewill. But we do not “presuppose” its existence when we are discussing it. While the “concept” of freewill must exist, the existence of freewill is not presupposed. This is evident when we look at the vast literature on the issue (e.g., many “determinists deny the existence of freewill). 4) In my last reply, I suggest that non-believers should not prescribe others not to believe in religion. This, I think, is as objective as we can be. That is, when we don’t have enough evidence to support either position, even if we have our own subjective preference, we remain “objective” and “neutral” about the issue in the sense that we respect the “choice” of others. Now, on the same footing, I think that believers should not prescribe others to believe in religion. Let them “係一條未知正確與否的道路上蹅出第一腳,當我 [they] 一路行一路揾答案, 走錯路未返轉頭” and no one should presume any one “right” path for them.

In reply to I think that you misunderstand what I wrote there. “不管他們的『信』是belief還是faith，我認為都不能夠無理由地信，否則就是迷信” This is a quote from Ricky. In my reply, I go on to argue against what Ricky said. If you also take a look at my message entitled "Faith vs belief", you will see that I don't share Ricky's view on that.

To Faustus Thanks for your reply. Actually the first thing i want to say is can we not to separate into two groups? Believer and non-believer? we r just disscussing an issue here, so i think we can make friends here, hopefully. We are all the people interested in the topics related to religion, is that better? 1./ and 2./ 1) “在你心底裡, 沒有一個答案嗎? 是真的沒有,定係怕答o左之後返唔到轉頭?” I don’t think that this is what 征服者 has in mind. 在我來說,神是一個問號, maybe i see this quote differently, i think people are not 100% objective, when we have a question, we wil have a predefined answer in our mind, So i just want to know wot's his prefined answer is. But the best way to know i m rite or u r rite, we better wait for his answer. Maybe he is really walking towards a direction, i just want to know his predefined answer he have in the mind now. 3./ I m still not so sure about "Freewill", but i "believe" it exists in concept. It is the predefined answer i have thro i dun have enough evidence on that. 4./ actually i also want to know about non believers, is it the same as atheists? or u include 不可知論者inside?. I think u will be a gd teacher for me, as i think u know alot. P.S. are u in US or somewhere, cos i think u reply quite late at hk time. I m in london. Take yr time mate.