Bonus: Who will win?
2007-10-30 07:11:15 · 24 answers · asked by primary_chem 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Dr. What, that's clever!
2007-10-30 07:16:21 · update #1
The theist didn't bring any pieces and will lose.
2007-10-30 07:15:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 6⤋
Trick question, the people may have agreed that one would bring the pieces, but if not the more "obsessive" of the two or the more experienced chess player would have brought the pieces. As for winning, the better chess player will most likely win.
2007-10-30 07:17:20 · answer #2 · answered by Pirate AM™ 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
LOL...and I thought my question yesterday about science and religion was a little abstract.
Since it seems rational and practical to have chess pieces in order to play chess, I'd say the atheist would be more likely to have brought pieces.
For the same reason, the atheist is more likely, theoretically, to win the game.
Of course, it's quite possible for a "religious" person to be rational and practical - he simply makes an exception for his religious beliefs, which are anything but.
I thought it was a little condescending to say flat out "The theist would expect God to provide the pieces," but then I read "Jesus already won the game and their (sic) is no one that can change that."
2007-10-30 07:17:42 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Aww, this is cute, everyone's rooting for their side, and I agree, Dr. What's answer is very clever. I guess it depends on what you call chess peices. If you're refering to things tangible, then it isn't the theist, because they rely on things that aren't tangible. If you're refering to faith, then it's the theist, they have plenty of that.
In response to Dr. What's reply, I have to say "perhaps he did bring the board, but what created the thing that created the board? If you can't find the creator, but say that the creator was always there, how do you know the board, which actually is there, wasn't always there as well?"
2007-10-30 12:07:48 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
argument one:
the atheist brought the pieces because he provides for himself what he needs and the theist thought that God would provide whatever he needed. in this case, the atheist wins because the theist must forfeit due to inability to play.
argument two:
the theist brought the pieces as a metaphor for having the tools for which to pursue truth and eternal life, where as the atheist has no such tools. In this case the theist wins because he is the only one capable of pursuing a victory.
argument three:
the atheist brought the pieces because he carrys his tools with him where as the theist trusted in God to bring his tools. The theist wins because he is guided to construct his own pieces out of paper scraps and through his trust in himself and God, is able to outwit the atheist.
argument four:
The theist brings the pieces because he is the one who has the tools to seek a victory. however the atheist wins the match by asking the theist to take pity on him, and he allows the atheist to use his pieces, and the atheist beats the theist by outwitting him.
honestly i cant see a clear answer to this... ill be waiting for the right one!
2007-10-30 07:23:07 · answer #5 · answered by nacsez 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In Saudi Arabia Three dimensional chess pieces are illegal because muslims fear one might be led to worship their pieces. In Saudi Arabia likely no one would bring the chess pieces.
The theist likely believes the chess pieces are idols and forbidden by their religion.
I am an atheist who brings the chess pieces because I prefer to play with my own set. I usually win.
I could play blindfolded though if I was forced to.
2007-10-30 07:24:00 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
The theist brought the pieces she had blessed in an effort to win through cheating. The atheist would assume this 'play' and knew all he need bring was logic.
Given that Blessings are superstition the Atheist won.
Given that Blessings are true the Atheist won because he played fair while the theist cheated.
2007-10-30 07:26:53 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
The one that didn't is the theist because he has faith that God will provide them for him. As far as who won, did the ahteist bring one or two sets of pieces? And did someone bring a board? The atheist may win the game of chess, but the theist may win eternal life! (I say may because not all theists will see heaven.)
2007-10-30 07:17:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
The theist doesn't need to bring chess pieces, he has faith that they're already there.
Although, the atheist doesn't believe in chess pieces, and if you can't prove them to him, he isn't going to bother trying to find any himself.
Looks like the winner will be decided by a thumb wrestling contest.
2007-10-30 07:15:22 · answer #9 · answered by Armless Joe, Bipedal Foe 6 · 15⤊ 1⤋
The one who organized the match and assigned the other one to bring the chess pieces.
Bonus: Does it matter?
2007-10-30 07:24:11 · answer #10 · answered by Open Heart Searchery 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Me cause I brought a board, clock, extra pieces for when I promote my pawns and another opponent to play after I win the first game.
edit:
what!?!?
I'm a chess coach.
.
2007-10-30 07:16:52 · answer #11 · answered by TheNewCreationist 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋