Announcement

Collapse

General Theistics 101 Guidelines

This area is open for nontheists and theists to interact on issues of theism and faith in a civilized manner. We ask that nontheist participation respect the theistic views of others and not seek to undermine theism in general, or advocate for nontheism. Such posts are more suited for and allowable in Apologetics 301 with very little restriction.

The moderators of this area are given great discretion to determine if a particular thread or comment would more appropriately belong in another forum area.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Split off of Wilkowsky's posts in Christianity 201

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Wilkowsky View Post
    So basically my problem with Christianity and actually with everything else that's controversial and not definitely agreed upon (does that make sense to you?) is that I just can't decide. There are just so many arguments and facts and it's impossible to check all the information there is and it's sooo easy to fall for rhetoric from any side of the debate. You know, atheist folks often create this kind of reason-aura around themselves, like they are the only rational people and others are just superstitious morons. On the other hand maybe this isn't completely baseless? I mean how many Christians or generally religious people you know that simply don't care about backing up their worldview with reason? I know too many. Yet again this doesn't mean their worldview is false. And yet again even those Christians that can support their faith with reasonable arguments sometimes just seem like they are Christians for personal reasons (for example William Lane Craig and his Milky Way story), just justifying their presupposed belief, I feel like they start with conclusion and then pick facts that support it.

    I just try to be as neutral and unbiased as is possible but I just can't. I am biased. I just am. How can I make a decision? There are so many people that play Wise Men and they all have different worldviews and come to different conclusions. Who can I trust if I can't ultimately even trust myself? And even if I reject reason and just pray for some sign, and let's suppose I get a sign, how can I know it's not either some kind of delusion or some being opposing genuine God that tries to lead me astray? Like both Christians and Mormons claim to be led by the Holy Spirit but that obviously can't be true unless God cares much much much less about doctrine than we think.

    I feel trapped. Like every move I can make is wrong. And God, if there is one, is just waiting there to kill me and then send me only he knows where for punishment because I didn't figured out the right answers. Sometimes I feel like he's some kind of cynical prankster who's purposefully confusing us with all those different ideas just so at the Judgement he can say something like: "Sorry guys, the cult of great cat god was the right answer. Bummer, you are all going to hell". That's probably just my frustration though.
    I have a lot of thoughts on this, so bear with me as I try to get them across properly.

    1) Everyone is biased. You can't help it. Everything you experience is filtered through the lens of past experiences, past understandings, current understandings, personality, general beliefs, etc. Bias is inevitable. What you shouldn't do is correlate that with inaccuracy. I think Tim Minchin puts it well:

    Source: Tim Minchin

    A famous bon mot asserts that opinions are like arse-holes, in that everyone has one. There is great wisdom in this… but I would add that opinions differ significantly from arse-holes, in that yours should be constantly and thoroughly examined.

    We must think critically, and not just about the ideas of others. Be hard on your beliefs. Take them out onto the verandah and beat them with a cricket bat.
    Be intellectually rigorous. Identify your biases, your prejudices, your privilege.

    © Copyright Original Source



    As he says, learn to identify them. Learn to identify them in others. Above all, don't use this as a hand-wave. That a scholar is Christian doesn't mean their work is faulty. That a scholar is non-theistic doesn't make their work solid. Or vice versa.


    2) It's impossible to know everything. There simply isn't time. What you can do is learn to evaluate. Where does this person get their information? What is their methodology? What is their background? A person with failings in one or more of these issues may not automatically wrong, but you're looking primarily for trustworthiness. Yes, your judgment can be wrong. It probably will be wrong at some point. That's ok.


    3) Accept that you will get things wrong. Nobody is perfect, and it's not necessary anyway. Honest and earnest investigation is the best you can do, so do your best. I know more than a few Christians who will say that such investigation will lead you to God in the end.


    4) No god worthy of worship is waiting around trying to kill you or punish you just because it can. Eternity with such a god wouldn't be a guarantee of happiness, either. Worry about the end game less. Nobody really knows anyway.


    5) Please spend some time on epistemology as suggested, but don't let it bog you down. There aren't definite answers there, either, but at least it will give you a footing making some decisions.
    I'm not here anymore.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
      If it was just a question of being aware of your surroundings while you should have been unconscious I would agree with you that it could also be evidence for "faults in our ability to measure such things as brain functions", but when there are reports of people accurately describing what happened at places where they were not physically at place, while in an NDE state, I find that hard to swallow.

      Of course, this all presumes that these reports are reliable and I'm not really in a position to make a judgement either way.
      Granted.
      I'm not here anymore.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
        I think you need to reread Descartes and what he did or didn't conclude. Descartes doesn't "surrender to the reality that we can't even prove our own existence". He defeats that quite conclusively. He does struggle with verifying the existence of other things, but conveniently plugs that hole with God. God as the guarantor of true knowledge is the assumption to get out of the rabbit hole. I'd agree that the assumption has no greater claim to truth, but I don't think that helps your case...
        I'll look at it - it's been a while since I read Descartes. The point doesn't rest on his work so it doesn't affect the argument so much as the presentation.


        If the point that Assumption A (materialism) has no greater claim to truth stands then the overall case is made - the argument isn't that the material world doesn't exist but that the epistemological basis for assuming it does exist is not stronger than any other such assumption - which defeats Willow's unintentional rabbit hole (or makes it a morass, depending on what he decides to do with it).
        "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

        "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

        My Personal Blog

        My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

        Quill Sword

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
          ...
          As he says, learn to identify them. Learn to identify them in others. Above all, don't use this as a hand-wave. That a scholar is Christian doesn't mean their work is faulty. That a scholar is non-theistic doesn't make their work solid. Or vice versa.
          *emphasis mine

          Sorry, that just struck me as funny. Hard to say if it's just redundant or truly circular.

          We now return you to your serious thread, already in progress.... <snicker>


          Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
          ...

          5) Please spend some time on epistemology as suggested, but don't let it bog you down. There aren't definite answers there, either, but at least it will give you a footing making some decisions.
          ^Yeah, that!
          "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

          "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

          My Personal Blog

          My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

          Quill Sword

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
            I'll look at it - it's been a while since I read Descartes. The point doesn't rest on his work so it doesn't affect the argument so much as the presentation.


            If the point that Assumption A (materialism) has no greater claim to truth stands then the overall case is made - the argument isn't that the material world doesn't exist but that the epistemological basis for assuming it does exist is not stronger than any other such assumption - which defeats Willow's unintentional rabbit hole (or makes it a morass, depending on what he decides to do with it).
            Descartes' answer to existence itself was that he couldn't even ask the question if something didn't exist. That was the point of cogito ergo sum. He had to exist in some sense to even ask the question if he existed. What he couldn't get past is whether or not his experiences were real, perhaps due to a demon puppet-master that manipulates experience to present a complete lie.

            We more or less agree, I think, but I would suggest that even materialism skips too many steps. Descartes jumped them too without apparently realizing that even a demon puppet-master showed that other things exist (which was part of his dilemma). The real question should be "are there other things". Only with that answered can one begin investigating what the nature of those other things is (if they exist).

            For what it's worth, I hold to a sort of neutral monism. Materialism and physicalism look like part of a false dichotomy from where I sit.
            I'm not here anymore.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
              *emphasis mine

              Sorry, that just struck me as funny. Hard to say if it's just redundant or truly circular.

              We now return you to your serious thread, already in progress.... <snicker>



              ^Yeah, that!
              It's redundant, but on purpose. I can't count how many times I've seen people reject scholars based on their faith, as if that automatically undermines their ability or claims. I've seen it on both sides of the fence, too, which is why I included the 'vice versa'.
              I'm not here anymore.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Wilkowsky View Post
                I see it this way: when they were martyred they were already respected leaders among their people. So it makes sense they'd rather choose death than get back to being simple fishermen or whatever they were doing.
                I don't know that it would make sense to choose death; though many people in the early church accepted martyrdom when faced with it, many others recanted in order to live.
                On the other hand they'd be ridiculed and would face the threat of death through all of their "career", not just at the end. And that's something to consider.
                And Peter's open preaching in Acts started within weeks of his teacher being put to death by the authorities.
                I don't want to sound like a fundy atheist but are there any evidence for that from outside the Bible or church tradition? Or could you demonstrate that the tradition is reliable in this matter?
                The martyrdom of James is related by Josephus. I'm not aware of any others explicitly, but the killing of Christians by order of Nero is attested in secular histories.
                Don't you guys believe there is no salvation outside the Catholic and Orthodox churches? Or is it just Catholic people? Or I get it completely wrong?
                There are some who do.
                I do have a problem with Protestant churches being plankton essentially. On the other hand some of Catholic (I don't know much about Orthodoxy but I suppose you share at least some tradition with them) practices seem to me superfluous at best and at worst contradicting the Bible.
                We'd have to discuss specifics on this, I think.

                As an aside, you might find the story of Klaus Kenneth interesting.
                Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                sigpic
                I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
                  It's redundant, but on purpose. I can't count how many times I've seen people reject scholars based on their faith, as if that automatically undermines their ability or claims. I've seen it on both sides of the fence, too, which is why I included the 'vice versa'.
                  Oh, I fully agree with the point. The wording, however...

                  The 'vice versa' is what made it so funny to me - they are the opposing sides so the vice versa only sends us back to the first one.

                  Yes, I'm easily amused...
                  Last edited by Teallaura; 04-29-2014, 09:57 AM.
                  "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                  "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                  My Personal Blog

                  My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                  Quill Sword

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                    The 'vice versa' is what made it so funny to me - they are the opposing sides so the vice versa only sends us back to the first one.

                    Yes, I'm easily amused...
                    Bad wording on my part, then.
                    I'm not here anymore.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
                      Bad wording on my part, then.
                      Not that bad - it just struck me as funny. No criticism intended.

                      I did mention that I'm easily amused, right?
                      "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                      "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                      My Personal Blog

                      My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                      Quill Sword

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
                        Indeed. The Resurrection is the best explanation of all the facts surrounding the empty tomb and changed lives of the disciples.
                        I do not consider it the best explanation from an outside unbiased historical perspective. None the less it is the traditional Christian explanation.
                        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                        go with the flow the river knows . . .

                        Frank

                        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          I do not consider it the best explanation from an outside unbiased historical perspective. None the less it is the traditional Christian explanation.
                          Since 'outside, unbiased, historical perspective' doesn't exist, this objection is silly. Perfectly fine if that's what you want to do - but its irrational as a methodology.
                          "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                          "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                          My Personal Blog

                          My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                          Quill Sword

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                            Since 'outside, unbiased, historical perspective' doesn't exist, this objection is silly. Perfectly fine if that's what you want to do - but its irrational as a methodology.
                            Contemporary academic methodology is not irrational. Do propose that Christian theologians represent an unbiased perspective?
                            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                            go with the flow the river knows . . .

                            Frank

                            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Thanks for all responses. It's been great to know your opinions and they were helpful to me. I've understood I must stop being so emotional about it all, get over it that everyone (including me) is biased, watch out for rhetoric (I've noticed that morons are often the most confident speaking people, it seems they're too stupid to doubt) and just start working my way through this vast jungle of different opinions, arguments and counter-arguments.

                              Thank you all.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                                Contemporary academic methodology is not irrational. Do propose that Christian theologians represent an unbiased perspective?
                                Academics aren't aliens, have biases and may or may not incorporate an historical perspective - eliminating 2 of the three criteria and in some cases all three. I presume you meant 'independent' and not 'outside' but that's still a highly relative term. Unbiased is almost non-existent - and in this case, the few exceptions probably don't apply.

                                I propose that your criteria are silly. Of course all examiners will have bias - which is fine so long as they acknowledge it and minimize as much as possible. The chances of a truly independent examiner are tiny - most people have some investment in their religious beliefs/background - which is also fine as long as it is acknowledged and minimized (or at least pointed out when not possible). Presuming that an ivory tower shields the occupant from human foible is silly. Doing so to the degree that one excludes all other observers is foolish.
                                "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                                "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                                My Personal Blog

                                My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                                Quill Sword

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X