A priori

[Spotlite]

Sure you can. Think of all the spouces that Convert to whatever religion their significant other is just to be allowed to marry in their church or synagogue etc.
The indigenous people were converted. Not sure how many really believed. Kids.

Below is where I was with the conversion part.

Ok I can see it in that way. I was viewing conversion as salvation from “sinner to saint”.

 

[bullethead]

Below is where I was with the conversion part.

I have always thought that there are points in peoples lives where they are believers but don't know why. Like children for example.
They go along with the routine or ritual because it is a part of their upbringing, but really have no idea why until later.
Like going to child day care. They know mon-fri they have to get up and go to day care but they have no idea why. It just is because mom and dad say so. No conversion or Belief, just routine.

 

[hummerpoo]

Are there any things that it's useful to believe in a priori?

2+2=4

 

[gemcgrew]

Are there any things that it's useful to believe in a priori?

For the first time in 10 yrs., I recently clicked on a GON ad and ordered a jacket. Turns out that a 3XLT in China has a completely different meaning. This is as close as my arms could get to my body and as closed as the zipper can be.

 

[Israel]

Sure you can. Think of all the spouces that Convert to whatever religion their significant other is just to be allowed to marry in their church or synagogue etc.
The indigenous people were converted. Not sure how many really believed. Kids.

Do you then conceive that such would (as "converts) identify as a now member of whatever religion, but still hold that such may not be "believer"?

 

[Artfuldodger]

For the first time in 10 yrs., I recently clicked on a GON ad and ordered a jacket. Turns out that a 3XLT in China has a completely different meaning. This is as close as my arms could get to my body and as closed as the zipper can be.

View attachment 950094

Good thing you ordered the tall!

 

[bullethead]

Do you then conceive that such would (as "converts) identify as a now member of whatever religion, but still hold that such may not be "believer"?

Something like that is very likely.

 

[Spotlite]

For the first time in 10 yrs., I recently clicked on a GON ad and ordered a jacket. Turns out that a 3XLT in China has a completely different meaning. This is as close as my arms could get to my body and as closed as the zipper can be.

View attachment 950094

You know that Chinese folks are wormy and small lol

 

[ambush80]

When a man does not believe a thing, he must be converted in order to believe.

"How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent?"

You do not believe my statement to be true. You must be converted in order to believe it.

Also, if you have "believing" as the first step, where do you have "living"?

"Believing" is an action. Even "life" precedes "belief".

Are you using "converted" as a synonym for "convinced"? Sam Harris is quoted for saying something like "If your reasons are good (I take that to mean confirmed by evidence) I will helplessly believe". Would that describe a conversion?

 

[ky55]

For the first time in 10 yrs., I recently clicked on a GON ad and ordered a jacket. Turns out that a 3XLT in China has a completely different meaning. This is as close as my arms could get to my body and as closed as the zipper can be.

View attachment 950094

Yep...”Asian sizing”.
I’m returning a 2X Tall bike jacket today.

 

[WaltL1]

Sure you can. Think of all the spouces that Convert to whatever religion their significant other is just to be allowed to marry in their church or synagogue etc.
The indigenous people were converted. Not sure how many really believed. Kids.

I had to deal with that spouse conversion deal.
It was very telling to me that whole thing was treated as a "technicality".
"Oh sure, go here take these classes, swear to God wink wink about your new conversion then we can get you on the books and you're a Catholic now.
What a sham.
Got married by a non-denominational preacher.

 

[gemcgrew]

Are you using "converted" as a synonym for "convinced"?

Feel free to substitute if you find it advantageous.

Sam Harris is quoted for saying something like "If your reasons are good (I take that to mean confirmed by evidence) I will helplessly believe".

Although I am not familiar with the quote or the context of it, I would expect him to say something like this. Sam Harris has a worldview and every worldview has a starting point(a priori). His is arbitrary. His definition of "good" is also arbitrary. He can not have "reason" as self-authenticating, hence he uses the plural of the word.

I also suspect that he means "confirmed by evidence". By what standard does he do this? By what means? Sensation? If the reason is good, it would not require authentication from something external to itself.

Would that describe a conversion?

It could describe a false convincing.

 

[bullethead]

I had to deal with that spouse conversion deal.
It was very telling to me that whole thing was treated as a "technicality".
"Oh sure, go here take these classes, swear to God wink wink about your new conversion then we can get you on the books and you're a Catholic now.
What a sham.
Got married by a non-denominational preacher.

I know all to well about it Walt.

When I sat down with the priest at my wife's church in a meeting where he wanted to talk to me about Conversion, I asked him many of the same questions that I asked in here. After stammering through scripture and me pointing out scripture doesn't cut it.
I said if you can explain something to me logically and honestly I will consider it.
I asked him to explain children out of wedlock.
He said, that having children out of wedlock was frowned upon in the eyes of the Lord. That two people should be married before they have children to be in the good standing of the Catholic Church.
I asked about Divorce.
"Divorce is not taken lightly in the eyes of God. We suggest and will try hard to keep the union of marriage together. But unfortunately sometimes it is unavoidable.
I asked, can you explain Annulment to me?
"Well, Annulment is a very intricate and delicate process in the eyes of the Lord and the church. It is a lengthy process where many things must be considered before finalized. Unfortunately certain circumstances arise where an Annulment is necessary... and then the process wipes away all rights of the marriage in the eyes of the Lord and Church"

Like if a man who was married in a Catholic church, gets a divorce'and want to remarry another Catholic woman??.
"Yes, precisely,. In order to marry he must never have been married previously by the Church".

I said interesting, ....then can You explain my sister and I in the eyes of the Lord and Church?
"What do you mean?!?!!???"

Well, my father married my mother.
They had two children
They got divorced.
My father meets another woman and wants to marry.
The church tells him that he must get an Annulment.
The "lengthy, intricate, delicate " process is done and over with in a week with the exchange of $1000.
So, now my Father was never married in the eyes of the Church, or God.
"Well, uhhh, let me.."
No father, let me finish...
In the eyes of the Lord, explain where I stand and where does my Father stand, officially?
As of right now he was never married to my mother. He is married again, yet only once officially. He has two grown children, yet both out of wedlock.
Where does he stand and can you explain what I am officially in the eyes of the Church and god? Can I even get married in here???


"Mr, Xxxxxxxx, you obviously do not want to convert."

 

[ambush80]

Feel free to substitute if you find it advantageous.

Although I am not familiar with the quote or the context of it, I would expect him to say something like this. Sam Harris has a worldview and every worldview has a starting point(a priori). His is arbitrary. His definition of "good" is also arbitrary. He can not have "reason" as self-authenticating, hence he uses the plural of the word.

I also suspect that he means "confirmed by evidence". By what standard does he do this? By what means? Sensation? If the reason is good, it would not require authentication from something external to itself.

It could describe a false convincing.

Worldviews are developed. I would say that some percentage of a worldview is shaped by the natural world and our biology. The rest is cultural, which is also shaped by facts on the ground. He often talks about "mapping one's concept of reality to facts on the ground". I guess if we really want to get into it, and I do, we could start talking about what facts are. They're strongly related to truth. I recommend listening to any of the conversations between Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson. They dive into this territory very deeply. I'd like to hear your thoughts on their discussions.

 

[Israel]

Something like that is very likely.

In that likelihood you mention, then, (especially in light of the few stories above) could there be "matters of convenience" in identification...and something other?

Regardless of whether one could identify with any precision what that something other might be, a convenient matter is known to exist in motive?

 

[ambush80]

In that likelihood you mention, then, (especially in light of the few stories above) could there be "matters of convenience" in identification...and something other?

Regardless of whether one could identify with any precision what that something other might be, a convenient matter is known to exist in motive?

Can you give some examples?

 

[Israel]

Can you give some examples?

There has long been contention there exists (in one opinion) nothing ever more than "cultural christians". Some have maintained "otherwise" exists. Even if resisting the identification of "how" otherwise exists in form made identifiable by (any) man to (any other) man.

Into this has been inserted and asserted many many arguments as to what may constitute therefore (directed at those holding to "otherwise") a "true Christian".

(forget any useless extrapolations from there in regards to the heaping of better, good, bad, poor...)

I have no dog in this hunt...except there now seems to be admission that if there may be "false"...or convenient converts, as opposed to [sic] true believers, this argument becomes moot that only "cultural christians" are all (and only) that may ever be met in any context.

 

[Spotlite]

I know all to well about it Walt.

When I sat down with the priest at my wife's church in a meeting where he wanted to talk to me about Conversion, I asked him many of the same questions that I asked in here. After stammering through scripture and me pointing out scripture doesn't cut it.
I said if you can explain something to me logically and honestly I will consider it.
I asked him to explain children out of wedlock.
He said, that having children out of wedlock was frowned upon in the eyes of the Lord. That two people should be married before they have children to be in the good standing of the Catholic Church.
I asked about Divorce.
"Divorce is not taken lightly in the eyes of God. We suggest and will try hard to keep the union of marriage together. But unfortunately sometimes it is unavoidable.
I asked, can you explain Annulment to me?
"Well, Annulment is a very intricate and delicate process in the eyes of the Lord and the church. It is a lengthy process where many things must be considered before finalized. Unfortunately certain circumstances arise where an Annulment is necessary... and then the process wipes away all rights of the marriage in the eyes of the Lord and Church"

Like if a man who was married in a Catholic church, gets a divorce'and want to remarry another Catholic woman??.
"Yes, precisely,. In order to marry he must never have been married previously by the Church".

I said interesting, ....then can You explain my sister and I in the eyes of the Lord and Church?
"What do you mean?!?!!???"

Well, my father married my mother.
They had two children
They got divorced.
My father meets another woman and wants to marry.
The church tells him that he must get an Annulment.
The "lengthy, intricate, delicate " process is done and over with in a week with the exchange of $1000.
So, now my Father was never married in the eyes of the Church, or God.
"Well, uhhh, let me.."
No father, let me finish...
In the eyes of the Lord, explain where I stand and where does my Father stand, officially?
As of right now he was never married to my mother. He is married again, yet only once officially. He has two grown children, yet both out of wedlock.
Where does he stand and can you explain what I am officially in the eyes of the Church and god? Can I even get married in here???


"Mr, Xxxxxxxx, you obviously do not want to convert."

I would agree with you here.......I don’t follow mans law.

 

[ambush80]

I would agree with you here.......I don’t follow mans law.

How do you distinguish between what is God's pure unadulterated law and how you understand it?

 

[ambush80]

There has long been contention there exists (in one opinion) nothing ever more than "cultural christians". Some have maintained "otherwise" exists. Even if resisting the identification of "how" otherwise exists in form made identifiable by (any) man to (any other) man.

Into this has been inserted and asserted many many arguments as to what may constitute therefore (directed at those holding to "otherwise") a "true Christian".

(forget any useless extrapolations from there in regards to the heaping of better, good, bad, poor...)

I have no dog in this hunt...except there now seems to be admission that if there may be "false"...or convenient converts, as opposed to [sic] true believers, this argument becomes moot that only "cultural christians" are all (and only) that may ever be met in any context.

Why the resistance?