Christianity and logic

Originally posted by bill718
It's mildly entertaining to read the posts of people here trying explain, prove, or disprove Christianity using logic or reason. It doesn't work that way folks.Christianity and the teaching of Christ are outside the realm of human reasoning. There are some things we have to take on faith... speaking of which faith is a gift, you either have it, or you don't. You can debate the subject of you wish, but in the end, it changes nothing.

Actually since it is a gift, and it is God that gives it. We are told that we need to water,
plant, and God that gives the increase. Agree we cannot talk someone into believing in
God, it has to be God who gives them faith, only God can enlighten someone else to Him.

We are to share and give others the truth, in the hopes that they will turn towards God
when God draws them. We do this not because we get something out of it, nor should we
being doing it for those we are sharing with, but that Jesus receive the reward of His
suffering for us. So we should be lifting Jesus up, because that is what we should be
doing He deserves it.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Actually since it is a gift, and it is God that gives it. We are told that we need to water,
plant, and God that gives the increase. Agree we cannot talk someone into believing in
God, it has to be God who gives them faith, only God can enlighten someone else to Him.

We are to share and give others the truth, in the hopes that they will turn towards Go ...[text shortened]... r us. So we should be lifting Jesus up, because that is what we should be
doing He deserves it.

I don't think that RJH agrees with you. He's in it for something, although it's not clear that even God knows what. I suspect that his central purpose is to mock Christianity. Surely no true believer would offer such absurdities.

Originally posted by Wulebgr
I don't think that RJH agrees with you. He's in it for something, although it's not clear that even God knows what. I suspect that his central purpose is to mock Christianity. Surely no true believer would offer such absurdities.

When pressed on his behaviour, he once claimed he was trying to make people hate him so that it drew the "hate" away from Jesus. He assured us he wasn't joking. That was at the height of the speculation - a few years ago - that his actual purpose here might be to mock or undermine Christianity. Alas, he has sustained the daft 'pretense' so long and so consistently that the question mark you place over the true motivation for his antics and buffoonery sounds like a blast from the past! 🙂

Originally posted by Wulebgr
I don't think that RJH agrees with you. He's in it for something, although it's not clear that even God knows what. I suspect that his central purpose is to mock Christianity. Surely no true believer would offer such absurdities.

It doesn't matter really, as I think everyone agrees it is really between God and each of us
if we seek Him or not. I know that some people avoid God because of who they consider
to be Christian are looneytoons or hypocrites, but if you think about that, it is really saying
that looneytoons and hypocrites are what is standing between them and God. Which means
even the looneytoons and hypocrites are closer to God than they are since they are
between them, it will not be an excuse.

Originally posted by KellyJay
It doesn't matter really, as I think everyone agrees it is really between God and each of us
if we seek Him or not. I know that some people avoid God because of who they consider
to be Christian are looneytoons or hypocrites, but if you think about that, it is really saying
that looneytoons and hypocrites are what is standing between them and God. Which ...[text shortened]... pocrites are closer to God than they are since they are
between them, it will not be an excuse.

Some people will do anything to sleep in on Sundays.

😀

Originally posted by KellyJay
I know that some people avoid God because of who they consider to be Christian are looneytoons or hypocrites, but if you think about that, it is really saying that looneytoons and hypocrites are what is standing between them and God.

That may be the case sometimes, but the problem is also more often than not with the ideology that the "looneytoons and hypocrites" espouse and which is also espoused by Christians who are not ludicrous or repulsive. Many non-Christians simply do not believe that there is a Christian God figure nor a gap "between" them in which 'excuses' or obstacles or counter-productive role models are "standing".

Originally posted by KellyJay
It doesn't matter really, as I think everyone agrees it is really between God and each of us
if we seek Him or not. I know that some people avoid God because of who they consider
to be Christian are looneytoons or hypocrites, but if you think about that, it is really saying
that looneytoons and hypocrites are what is standing between them and God. Which ...[text shortened]... pocrites are closer to God than they are since they are
between them, it will not be an excuse.

You can only kick that can so far down the road. Each kick damages the can a little more. Eventually, you'll have nothing left to kick.

I think that you need to go shopping for some huevos and take a position.

Do you, KJ, believe that RJH is representing the Gospel of Jesús well? Does Jesús condone his attacks on basic science and science education?

Originally posted by Wulebgr
You can only kick that can so far down the road. Each kick damages the can a little more. Eventually, you'll have nothing left to kick.

I think that you need to go shopping for some huevos and take a position.

Do you, KJ, believe that RJH is representing the Gospel of Jesús well? Does Jesús condone his attacks on basic science and science education?

I think his tone and tactics are not what I would endorse.
I can answer for me not Jesus, you'll have to take that up with Him.
The one thing I know about Jesus and RJH, you, me, and everyone else is that Jesus
took all of our sins upon Himself so we can be forgiven, because He loves us. Now does
that mean He is okay with all we say and do even in His name supposedly for Him, I do
doubt that very much.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Agree we cannot talk someone into believing in God, ....

We are to share and give others the truth, in the hopes that they will turn towards God
when God draws them.

Well, that's a truth as you see it, and I share another truth as I see it. What you call truth looks to me like transcendental ventriloquism and projections of wishful thinking into imaginary causes. Now I don't deny that your truth has given you a purpose in life; just please don't imagine that no one else could possibly have a purpose in life if he didn't share your particular set of projections.

Originally posted by moonbus
Well, that's [b]a truth as you see it, and I share another truth as I see it. What you call truth looks to me like transcendental ventriloquism and projections of wishful thinking into imaginary causes. Now I don't deny that your truth has given you a purpose in life; just please don't imagine that no one else could possibly have a purpose in life if he didn't share your particular set of projections.[/b]

Why would I think no one could have a purpose in life?
I highly value all life, human life on top of all others.
I think each persons dreams, their hopes, their loves are very important, even what they
think when they look at what is right and wrong, no matter if I agree with them or not.

I'm not sure what you are attempting to relate by bringing up projections, but I am sure
if you feel like making it clearer you will.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Why would I think no one could have a purpose in life?

I have never once heard you express any disagreement here with any Christians who have explicitly and sometimes repeatedly claimed that non-Christians and/or atheists can have no real meaningful purpose in life. That would be one reason why an onlooker might be forgiven for concluding that you think people without your religious beliefs do not have a purpose in life. You've never spoken out against such silly claims by others. People will make of it what they will.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Why would I think no one could have a purpose in life?
I highly value all life, human life on top of all others.
I think each persons dreams, their hopes, their loves are very important, even what they
think when they look at what is right and wrong, no matter if I agree with them or not.

I'm not sure what you are attempting to relate by bringing up projections, but I am sure
if you feel like making it clearer you will.

I was cross-referencing one of your remarks at another thread; my bad for not making the link explicit.

Everything From Nothing

Your remark: “That doesn't stop us from putting out there what we think occurred, which when you look at all of our views it is no different with anything else. Where we excel is where we can see the beginning and end of a process, where we are walking in faith is when we can look at what is here now and project what we think occurred, because we have never really observed them.”

Originally posted by moonbus
I was cross-referencing one of your remarks at another thread; my bad for not making the link explicit.

Everything From Nothing

Your remark: “That doesn't stop us from putting out there what we think occurred, which when you look at all of our views it is no different with anything else. Where we excel is where we can see the beginning and end of a pro ...[text shortened]... hat is here now and project what we think occurred, because we have never really observed them.”

Ah, I see I think, so your suggesting that as soon as you make up your mind you project
into all you see in the world in which we live, be it true or not? Unless you think only one
group of people does that, but not all. If it is a common trait among people, I like how you
describe it, it certainly describes prejudice well.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Ah, I see I think, so your suggesting that as soon as you make up your mind you project
into all you see in the world in which we live, be it true or not? Unless you think only one
group of people does that, but not all. If it is a common trait among people, I like how you
describe it, it certainly describes prejudice well.

The technical term for it is “perspectivism”, which means that a what person sees is at least in part determined by his presuppositions. (Which is not to be confused with “relativism”, if by relativism one means that whatever anyone thinks is true is true (which is incoherent).)

Example: When Galileo looked through his telescope at the moons of Saturn, he saw circular orbits and continuous motions. When the churchmen looked through their telescopes at the moons of Saturn, they saw spirals within spirals and retrograde motions. The difference was not in the telescopes and not in the moons of Saturn; the difference lay in the fact that Galileo presupposed a helio-centric reference point whereas the churchmen presupposed a geo-centric reference point.

Example: When Hinds considers a fossil, he sees something at most 6,000 years old, whereas if I consider the same fossil, I see something millions of years old. The rock itself is the same; it is only the presuppositions which are different.

Presuppositions set out the framework and the reference points in terms of which evidence is interpreted: they form something like a lattice upon which bits of evidence are placed and connected up with other bits of evidence. Change the lattice, and you get a whole different perspective on the same bits of evidence.

Generally, speaking, one does not choose a perspective (as one chooses which pair of shoes to put on). Generally speaking, one grows into one, though occasionally one has a watershed experience which can change one's perspective (call it conversion or apostasy).

Apply this insight now to spirituality, rather than to geology or astronomy, and you get another dimension of meaning all together. Namely, what counts as evidence at all, not merely how to interpret it. Both creationists and serious geologists agree that fossils are evidence of life in past times; they disagree about a matter of degree (as being 6,000 years old or millions of years old). Christians and non-theists disagree entirely on whether the Bible constitutes evidence at all. For Christians, the Bible counts as inerrant God-given proof; for non-theists, it counts no more than Homer’s Illiad--an entirely human story, probably based on some events which really took place but heavily embellished, and all the supernatural bits were simply made up for ‘effect’. Whereas for a historian, the Bible counts as evidence all right--namely, as evidence of what people believed (but not as evidence that what they believed was(is) true.)

As several SF correspondents, including Christians, have pointed out, it is pointless to quote the Bible at non-theists. Just as it would be pointless to mail a fossil to Hinds. People for whom God occupies the central point of the lattice evaluate putative evidence with reference to that primary point. For people not only without God at the central point of the lattice, but with no central primary point where a God might even fit, putative evidence will be evaluated by other criteria and with reference to other things. (This is what I meant when I replied to Bobby in another thread that atheism is not Christianity with a God-shaped hole in it.)

For this reason, theists and non-theists often find themselves talking at cross purposes.

Originally posted by moonbus
The technical term for it is “perspectivism”, which means that a what person sees is at least in part determined by his presuppositions. (Which is not to be confused with “relativism”, if by relativism one means that whatever anyone thinks is true is true (which is incoherent).)

Example: When Galileo looked through his telescope at the moons ...[text shortened]... t.)

For this reason, theists and non-theists often find themselves talking at cross purposes.

I see what you're saying. But let me add one thing:

I don't think that Christians simply see things through Jesus-colored glasses. I think it also has to do with the fact that many churches grind the idea that God and the Bible must be respected and honored (or even defended) at all costs, into the minds of its members.

What got Galileo into trouble wasn't simply that church astronomers saw things differently; it was the fact that anything contrary to the bible wasn't tolerated. The possibility exists that some Christian astronomers may have realized that the earth and planets orbit the sun, but simply convinced themselves that they were wrong; maybe they convinced themselves that the idea came from Satan.

The Bible passage "We walk by faith and not by sight" essentially means that Christians are to live by their beliefs rather than their observations. Taken to heart, this seriously hampers the ability to reason objectively. It's not simply a matter of there being a different perspective; it's also an issue of free thought being clouded.