Serious question...
If you have faith, you will obey the Bible right?
Or at least attempt to obey the Bible.
That said, the Bible tells us to do good works especially in Matthew 25:31–46 and in fact says those who abstain from doing good works for those in need will go to hell.
In light of this, how can you argue that faith requires no good works?
Can you be faithful and not attempt to follow the Bible? What logic is that?
You can say "I have faith in Jesus will save me and that is all I need.", but how can you have faith without following the Bible.
Or can you just have faith that all your sins will be absolved and you get a free pass without ever helping those in need like the Bible explicitly says to do or else.
>>1537611
Really? I thought there would be someone who would at least try to faith alone.
>>1537611
>how can you argue that faith requires no good works?
What? Faith is outside the bounds of empirical facts and the good bad dichotomy. That's the point of faith. It's belief outside the bounds of proof. It requires no works.
>Can you be faithful and not attempt to follow the Bible? What logic is that?
Most certainly.
>For Kierkegaard Christian faith is not a matter of regurgitating church dogma. It is a matter of individual subjective passion, which cannot be mediated by the clergy or by human artefacts. Faith is the most important task to be achieved by a human being, because only on the basis of faith does an individual have a chance to become a true self. This self is the life-work which God judges for eternity.
God exists outside these ideas of Christianity/Islam/Hebrew/Pagan ideals.
Soren Kierkegaard, give him a squizz. Father of agnosticism and attacked the churches for essentially being wrong, he did a dam good job at it.
>>1537714
I was hoping to get a protty response.
As you don't really see the relationship of faith and the Bible, then I'm not sure what there is to debate.
I suppose that makes you a heretic though.
What is Faith, /his/?
>>1533769
Idiotic.
There can be no objective faith so how can you truly believe? Faith breeds ignorance.
All of you can only say "I have faith god exists"
I can say "I KNOW you cannot know that, all you can do is hope"
>>1533769
Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.
- Heb 11:1
>>1533780
You should read John Henry Newman. He has some interesting writing about faith.
>once capitalism collapses a world wide unified socialist utopia is inevitable
>not a return to feudalism at best or a degradation to mad Max style competition for the remainder of petrol and water supplies at worst
Why are communists so dumb?
How can you ask that?
You'd have to be stupid to ever think something as irrational as communism could ever exist.
It's a fairytale ideology that has no foot on reasonable soil
>>1533195
>once capitalism collapses a world wide unified socialist utopia is inevitable
Where does he say that?
>>1533195
It's even worse than that.
>the workers will take over and kill the capitalists
>they become the de facto ruling class and install the dictatorship of the proletariat
>and then, somehow, for magical reasons, the state will vanish and we'll all live in a stateless paradise
Is Psychopathy real?
>>1532258
Yes.
>>1532258
uh yes? it's a mental condition that's been observed and studied
>>1532258
Yes, I´m not sure how anyone can doubt its existence.
>muh millennials
>muh bad new generation
Comfort has always been more fashionable and easier to attain than strength. Physically and intellectually. More so today than ever before, but still always.
Is this a problem? Is people choosing to be comfortable rather than strong a problem?
Why is everyone so mad that people have a good time?
Because wise men know that good times never last, and sooner or later strength will be required
>>1530543
How many average salaries did a house cost?
How many average salaries does a house cost today?
How many days off per year could people take and keep their job?
How many today?
What was the percentage of unemployed educated people?
What is it today?
Times are different, you can't expect the classic standards to apply.
>>1530548
Kind of a non sequitur, and if anything it proves my point: there are real fucking problems that need to be solved, but people drown themselves in lust and pleasure and kick the can down the road
>greatest matriarchal society the world has ever seen, the mosuo
>their contribution to the world is the "walking marriage", the cultural quirk that defines them
>it's their culture's greatest invention
>huh, sounds interesting, wonder what it is
>it's just a glorified version of sleeping around mixed with cuckoldry
lmfao
>>1530259
and when the bitch bleeds for half the year and is out of action for 9months + 13 more years of her life we just turn the other cheek out of good manners.
Haha
how can men even compete
Have you noticed that there are really two types of religious people?
There are people who believe their religion is true, and then there is the larger group of people who believe their religion is part of their identity.
This is why atheists are hated. The second type of religious person thinks that the atheist must be trying to identify with evil. Atheists only ever end up talking to the first type of religious person.
First type of religious people are wrong.
Second type is stupid.
>>1526260
>Let us call this unknown something: God. It is nothing more than a name we assign to it. The idea of demonstrating that this unknown something (God) exists, could scarcely suggest itself to Reason. For if God does not exist it would of course be impossible to prove it; and if he does exist it would be folly to attempt it. For at the very outset, in beginning my proof, I would have presupposed it, not as doubtful but as certain (a presupposition is never doubtful, for the very reason that it is a presupposition), since otherwise I would not begin, readily understanding that the whole would be impossible if he did not exist. But if when I speak of proving God's existence I mean that I propose to prove that the Unknown, which exists, is God, then I express myself unfortunately. For in that case I do not prove anything, least of all an existence, but merely develop the content of a conception.
>Kierkegaard primarily discusses subjectivity with regard to religious matters. As already noted, he argues that doubt is an element of faith and that it is impossible to gain any objective certainty about religious doctrines such as the existence of God or the life of Christ. The most one could hope for would be the conclusion that it is probable that the Christian doctrines are true, but if a person were to believe such doctrines only to the degree they seemed likely to be true, he or she would not be genuinely religious at all. Faith consists in a subjective relation of absolute commitment to these doctrines.
>>1526260
religion is a coping mechanism once you face your failure of your life, just like other contrived fantasizes, your faith in the scientific method included.
Religions are meant to leave material-bodily hedonism, travels, concerts, foods, sex and so on, for a spiritual hedonism, through prayers for theists and mediation for atheists.
Plenty of material hedonist love to think of themselves as less hedonistic than they are, since it improves their hedonism in thinking that they are not animals...most people who claim to be religious are not all, it is just the way they are.
In buddhism, you even leave this spiritual hedonism, after you have gained it, which is called jhanas, since you understand that this bliss from prayers, which is just a great, but not perfect concentration-stilness, are not personal nor permanent and that you are still prone to avidity and aversion.
Is the codification of Defense of the Self, Family and Property and the Posetion of Modern Firearms in the Rigths of the Citizen necessary for a Free and Democratic Society?
>>1526381
>i wish a cheating wife would result in a mass murder by assault rifle
>i hope more children kill themselves playing with what they find in their parents closet
>i have the desire to see edgy rebel period teens have the ability to actually act out their corrupted dreams
>>1526478
>being a freedom hating commie
>>1526487
>being a mob rule anarchist
Hello /his/,
I want to start a collaborative project with this board. I've seen a lot of really interesting "Historical Pictures" threads. I especially like it when people include descriptions of what is happening in the image or why it is historically significant.
What I want to do is start a sort of persistent online museum where I can, with your help collect photos with descriptions.
I am thinking that I will create a google doc and simply copy submissions made in this and future threads into the doc.
The submission process will be super loose, you do not need to have a description for your photo for it to go in the "gallery" and if you simply want to reply to a photo comment with a description I will include that as well.
I will also leave the "Comments" Function open on the doc so you can all leave persistent comments on images or add descriptions to images after the thread has been pruned.
As a token of commitment to this project and as something to get the ball rolling, I have scanned and uploaded the best images from my own physical collection to the doc. Many of these pictures are really cool and on top of that none of them can be found anywhere else on the internet. I will post them ITT for an initial bump.
Post any comments or questions ITT. As much as it pains me to do so, I will probably use a trip when posting in thread.
"prejudice" is often the same thing as a prior from bayesian decision theory.
As data becomes more available and more and more decisions will be able to be made in a rational way, how will liberals deal with the fact that certain forms of prejudice are rational?
e.g. it is rational for you to be more wary of a group of black men walking towards you on the street at night than a group of malaysian men because you know that the rate per capita of black people committing violent crime is much higher than that of east asians.
Here I am forming a pre-judgment that these people pose a greater threat to my safety than another group of people based on information linked to their race, therefore I am being racist.
However I am also objectively correct in what I say and I am being objectively rational.
Are you sure you are being entierely rational in your example?
The facts are not denyable. In USA black people are more violent than others groups. There is a correlation between blacks and violence but it does not mean there is causality.
Your skin color does not make you violent, and being violent doesnt turn you black.
In fact you should focus on the real determinents of Physical violence. What about social domination, symbolic violence, social segregation, poverty and so much more factors that are particuliary important against certain groups of people?
What if I tell you your solution "run away from black like the fat americunt you are" is the cause of US black people violent behavior? Your racism and the social disqualification you throw at people based on their skin color is the root of your problem.
What's with all the white pixels on that pic?
>>1531027
caution is not judgement
What new lie about France is going to be spread now? Fucking hell
for fucks sake what fucking bullshit
PEOPLE WEREN'T IN FUCKING BOATS LEARN YOUR FUCKING HISTORY!!!!!!
DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE THIS WTF?!
>>1513758
Wtf I hate boats now.
Beaches?
What fucking beaches, there weren't any ffs!
Why does everyone wank over the loser factions of the Spanish Civil War?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79hvTz-dlR4
Can't even imagine how shitty Spain would be now (though it probably wouldn't exist anymore) if the Republicans/communists had won
Why liberal democrats cry over the death of a soldier (Khan controversy) and are outraged that Trump's wife once took some sexy pics (what happened to the traditional family?!), even though they're anti-war and anti-morals? Leverage.
What is it about the American Midwest that produced a conservative culture that emphasizes personal responsibility, the nuclear family, and a strong work ethic?
>>1533969
If I knew I would get to work on destroying it
>>1533969
Lack of education.
>>1533969
The Midwest is where most of the more recent giant-family whacko-religious and Eastern European immigrants to the US of A went to. Big empty spaces mean that what communities are there are insular.
>the battleship era came and went with only one major engagement
>>1532280
Good. By and large they were over-expensive pieces of crap, built to fight a war of intimidation and not a real war. Mahan was a hack.
>>1532280
Battleships are like strippers.
Nice to look at, not good at very much.
>>1532280
You mean dreadnoughts, right? Older type battleships had their fair share of encounters, plus they had more interesting designs.
>Called the Seven Years War by almost the entire world
>Called the "French-Indian War" by the US
Where the fuck do you people get off?
>>1529894
I think it's because American colonists were most affected by the French and Native Americans, and weren't concerned about Frederick the Great taking on 3 countries at once.
My highschool AP US History class called it the French and Indian War (cause our involvement in the war was fighting against the French and the Native Americans) and mentioned that it was called the Seven Years' War. My AP World History class referred to it solely as the Seven Years' War, with the mention that we usually call it the French and Indian War here in the US.
>>1529894
My continent, my rules.
Yurotrash go home.