03 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI've never suggested that a lack of logical or reasoned arguments in anyway detracts froma person's beliefs.
Logic and reason seem to be in short supply with many on both sides of the aisle. You admit yourself that your belief is not based on reason.
Just because a person holding to a certain belief is unable to supply logical and cogent arguments for their belief does not detract from the veracity of that belief. Some people are just better at arguing than ot ...[text shortened]... ad no footing in actual historical occurences, it would be as irrelevant and absurd as the FSM.
I'm well aware of how powerful beliefs can be, once formed.
And certainly there are better debaters in these threads than I - you yourself make some interesting points.
I agree too, that any serious argument would likely tear apart my beliefs - which given the strength of my faith, would do nothing to them.
What bothers me is that it seems to be the default position, that a religious viewpoint - let's say Christianity - is logically valid, and it's therefore the onus of the non-believer to argue why this should not be the case.
It's taken as a given.
I can't argue logically for the existence of my belief, since it is at it's core - a belief. For me to continue to hold it, it will essentially be impervious to arguments, as you point out. I'm sure the same will be true for your beliefs.
Atheism has a history that is at least as old as Christianity, so why must I justify my point, but you (or at least the general Christians) not justify theirs?
03 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHSo, by that argument Scientology is right up there with Christianity, since there's a bucketload of sources, all spouting the same crap, from a huge number of different authors. (Albeit tipping their hat to Hubbard who's their surrogate Trinity.)
The histrocity of all religions are verifiable and measurable.
Verifiable utilizing harmonious sources; measurable relative to amount of sources; reliability related to both.
For instance, the claims of the Mormons can be traced directly back to their book of Mormon. That book can be traced directly to an unpublished romance novel, found in the shop by a bored janitor.
(Have to agree with you about Mormonism by the way.)
03 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHDF stated this:
Do the words absurd and irrelevant ring a bell? Come on, Rolfey! At least get out of the vaccum and back in the real world. If you wish to posit some other belief system as possessing more viability than Christianity, at least come up with something measurable and verifiable.
"What? You want a proof of God's existance based on the existance of morals? If you're looking for a proof of God, you won't find one. Ever. Not in science. Not in math. Not in philosophy. Not anywhere. God won't allow it. That doesn't mean that we can't reason our way to Him, it just means He won't allow Himself to be a cold hard fact. If He did, one would be a fool not to believe in Him and that's not the kind of relationship He wants with us. He wants us to choose Him, not simply accept Him as a fact.
DF"
As he's on your side in this discussion and you have not stated otherwise against him directly I am assuming (admittedly dangerous) that you agree.
Despite how much you dislike the theory of the FSM you can not disprove it, like your mythical god can not be disproved. BTW, it doesn't have to be the FSM, it can be anything at all - I could state there was a three headed elephant with a lions tail (made up so if exists in some weird thing already it's coincidence) that was the maker of the world etc etc. This to you (and I) is equally absurd as the FSM, and equally so your mythical god that, again, can not be proven or disproven.
03 Mar 06
Originally posted by amannionYes, Christianity is taken as a given, and has been for many years. While some would try to make the argument that it has been the scepter used by those in power, for some odd reason, it stands while they have all fallen.
I've never suggested that a lack of logical or reasoned arguments in anyway detracts froma person's beliefs.
I'm well aware of how powerful beliefs can be, once formed.
And certainly there are better debaters in these threads than I - you yourself make some interesting points.
I agree too, that any serious argument would likely tear apart my beliefs - wh ...[text shortened]... I justify my point, but you (or at least the general Christians) not justify theirs?
Even in today's enlightened state of the separation of powers, Christianity remains as resolute as ever, despite the constant onslaught of many intent on bringing it to naught. Curious, that, don't you think?
When Christians put the onus back on the skeptic, it is little more than smoke and mirrors, as when skeptics demand Christians prove that God exists. Nothing, truly, is provable. Scientifically speaking, given the assumed launching points, God can be neither confirmed or denied.
It then falls to the record of human history in order to gather enough evidence to warrant a reasoned faith. The evidence to which a thoughtful Christian points to is impressive, objectively viewed. Conclusive? Surely enough for me. How? For the reasons stated earlier. I see no self-contradiction; no contradiction between its base and the base of human knowledge; its agreement with all established truth; its wisdom in speaking to the human condition; its consistent message of a God so unspeakably beyond human measure, conjecture or comprehension, that all else adjusts itself to Him.
That message, when seen aright, is the only message in the whole of human history that makes sense. In a world of fireflies wrapped in fog, His truth pierces as the noon day sun.
03 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI don't find the continued existence of Christianity curious at all. Clearly it, and other religions, fulfill a need for many people. A need that I don't share.
Yes, Christianity is taken as a given, and has been for many years. While some would try to make the argument that it has been the scepter used by those in power, for some odd reason, it stands while they have all fallen.
Even in today's enlightened state of the separation of powers, Christianity remains as resolute as ever, despite the constant onslaugh ...[text shortened]... t makes sense. In a world of fireflies wrapped in fog, His truth pierces as the noon day sun.
And I agree with you, while our arguments and tooing and foring is interesting, in the end we can neither prove nor disprove the existence of anything based on faith.
As for the agreement you suggest, I'm not so sure. Certainly the literalists will find much to disagree with over naturalistic and scientific explanations of the world.
As for the consistent message, a brief reading of the history of Christian theological thought would seem to disagree with you on that one. The nature of the Trinity for example has undergone significant revision and change over the 2000 years since Jesus.
And the last bit - your firefly stuff - sounds nice, but isn't very helpful, especialy to a non-believer like me.
03 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by amannionI find it curious, simply because we are not in a closed system, as China has been for a few years. Given an open market, one expects the volatility and innovation which accompanies the struggle for increased market share. Over time, the waxing and waning of consumer excitement determines what becomes one of the staples, and what becomes one of the "others."
I don't find the continued existence of Christianity curious at all. Clearly it, and other religions, fulfill a need for many people. A need that I don't share.
And I agree with you, while our arguments and tooing and foring is interesting, in the end we can neither prove nor disprove the existence of anything based on faith.
As for the agreement you ur firefly stuff - sounds nice, but isn't very helpful, especialy to a non-believer like me.
Winners and losers, for lack of a better description this late at night.
Novel acts have appeared, said their lines and exited the stage to appear no more. Throughout the many trends, however, there remains orthodox Christianity, the wheat among the chaff, if you will. I find that curious, humanly-speaking. I've already been given the answer, so it is not a mystery. But Christianity looms, the message of God's offer of a personal relationship with man persists, like a statement that demands questions, like the pyramids, only more pervasive.
Literalists have been given a bad name. When the Bible is studied in the original languages, the literal-ness of the Bible is unmistakably clear. By that I do not mean there is but one level upon which the notes are played. I do mean, when heard in concert with the rest of Scripture, the song is crystal clear. Today's literalists stop upon hearing the cacophony of warm-up, and call it good. Not good.
With respect to the Trinity, again, I draw the analogy of the wheat and the chaff. While not a salvation issue, the clarification of the nature of God is necessary if one is to mature spiritually. That the issue required clarification in councils and such only serves to show the unreliability of man's memory.
Admittedly, the firefly only has complete resonance with one who has built upon the 'assumeds.' However, it's likely safe to say there are many belief systems out there, all with (mostly) equal illuminating capacities.
03 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI'm not sure I'd take the market analogy too far in a comparison wth religious, or any other, human beliefs. As we've both said earlier, beliefs are very hard to dislodge - the vagaries of a marketplace might not be sufficient.
I find it curious, simply because we are not in a closed system, as China has been for a few years. Given an open market, one expects the volatility and innovation which accompanies the struggle for increased market share. Over time, the waxing and waning of consumer excitement determines what becomes one of the staples, and what becomes one of the "othe ...[text shortened]... ere are many belief systems out there, all with (mostly) equal illuminating capacities.
I find myself agreeing with, or at least understanding, much of what you write. As for illumination - I guess this is the core of my belief - I feel that my illumination comes from within, not from some external source.
03 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHActually if you took the trouble to read my posts you would find they are not miscalculated ravings but reasoned arguments against atheism, you will also find that I agree with you on many, if not most points, I just don't see why you need to come and attack me for saying things which are in fact very similar to most of the things you say.
Your flaming detracts from any semblance of meaningful dialogue that might be developing. It's bad enough for the antagonists to show such poor form; all the more embarassing when a self-proclaimed champion of the truth attacks without an effort made toward showing a modicum of respect to the people previously engaged.
Your posts are more akin to the dre ...[text shortened]... in you?
BTW, I tried the empty room thing, but I was continually ignored by the other bigot.
03 Mar 06
Originally posted by princeoforangeLol, please provide one of your reasoned arguments against atheism, because having read through your public forum posts, all I see is miscalculating ravings.
Actually if you took the trouble to read my posts you would find they are not miscalculated ravings but reasoned arguments against atheism, you will also find that I agree with you on many, if not most points, I just don't see why you need to come and attack me for saying things which are in fact very similar to most of the things you say.
03 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIf this is truely what christians believe, why is there so much "theology as sure knowledge" coming out of from them. God is like this, God is like that, the Trinity means this, God does not like that, etc.
its consistent message of a God so unspeakably beyond human measure, conjecture or comprehension, that all else adjusts itself to Him.
All I see is image after image being constructed of something that is supposed to be "beyond human measure, conjecture or comprehension" and then treating these images as universal truth.
03 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHActually that is the same arguement being used by the Jews! Sadly it is false logic. Christianity is not the only religion in the world and shows no sign of having any particularly unique properties.
Novel acts have appeared, said their lines and exited the stage to appear no more. Throughout the many trends, however, there remains orthodox Christianity, the wheat among the chaff, if you will.
If you studied evolution a bit you would find that the success of a species has little to do with it being "correct" or "true" but a lot more to do with survival ability and just plain dumb luck.
What you should also ask yourself is why Christianity is dying out in some former Christian strongholds.
The spreading of christianity has much to do with the specific teachings of spreading the Word. I have several muslim friends and they have never tried to preach to me in any way. Most Christian friends I have that actually go to church have at one time or another tried preaching to me. However most of them quickly find out that I know more than they do and give up.
In the past christianity (and other religions) have been forced on populations.
In a world of fireflies wrapped in fog, His truth pierces as the noon day sun.
Where I come from (Livingstone, Zambia), there are over 150 christian denominations in a town of a population of about 100,000
Many of these christian groups will go to the extent of claiming that some of the other groups are not christian at all and even call them demonic.
If this truth is so clear why such division?
03 Mar 06
Originally posted by princeoforangeActually if you took the trouble to read my posts
I just don't see why you need to come and attack me for saying things which are in fact very similar to most of the things you say.
I find your description of that process accurate. Well put.
they are not miscalculated ravings but reasoned arguments against atheism
My quarrel is not with the food on the menu...
you will also find that I agree with you on many, if not most points
...as much as the manner in which it is being served.
There are but two or three people who frequent these forums with less-than average intelligence. To speak to the remaining above-average folks with hyperbole and disdain makes you appear to be more comfortable in the company of the former than the latter.
While God is no respecter of persons, to use the adage, He certainly did not seem to mind coming down to our level, for some reason.
03 Mar 06
Originally posted by JadeMantisIf this is truely what christians believe, why is there so much "theology as sure knowledge" coming out of from them.
Not that I see agreement as the litmus test of all things right, but your point is well taken. The reasons for dissent are varied, ranging from unconscious to the conscious, and all stops in between. God's sense of humor, if there be one, in tweaking the nose of those who think they have a handle on it all.
All I see is image after image being constructed of something that is supposed to be "beyond human measure, conjecture or comprehension" and then treating these images as universal truth.
Amen. I suppose it comes down to each person making their own mind up about whatever has been revealed to them. It sure would be nice if God were more obvious, as we take obvious to mean in this space in time. Hate to say it, but with all I see, it's pretty obvious to me. Maybe I'm just really gullible. 'Guess we'll find out in the end.
03 Mar 06
Originally posted by twhiteheadChristianity is not the only religion in the world and shows no sign of having any particularly unique properties.
Except for the whole 'God-in-three-Persons' thing. Oh, and the 'personal God who emptied Himself and became a man in order to shoulder the burden of sin and thereby redeem man from the slave market' thing. Those, and the 'imputation of His righteousness to every believer' thing. Just those, plus the 'promise of the Triune God residing in every believer' thing. That's it: those things and the 'non-meritorious gift of eternal life' thing. Take away those peculiarities, and you've got yourself an argument!
If you studied evolution a bit you would find that the success of a species has little to do with it being "correct" or "true" but a lot more to do with survival ability and just plain dumb luck.
Been there, done that. Measured it in the scales, and found it wanting. Scratch that: measured it in the scales, and found it ridiculously absurd, leaving me feeling like a complete fool for even going down the path in the first place.
However most of them quickly find out that I know more than they do and give up.
Your circle of friends just got wider.
If this truth is so clear why such division?
Amen. But, as posted above, don't take agreement as the litmus test, or you'll be left with nothing in that cranium. Start with harmony, and you'll get closer to the song... too many people are competing for the lead these days.