Is the Bible........?

Post Reply New Topic

Christianity is not just another intellectual exercise. The Christian experience is so much more than the rote memorization and regurgitation of facts.

actually, it's believed that some (but unfortunately not much) of the bible was written by Women. Possibly the book of Ruth, but I haven't read the article in years, so it's a bit fuzzy.

Some say Shakespeare wasn't actually written by Shakespeare ...

The bible is a collection of just-so stories. Do not take it literally and take it as history along with a large grain of salt.

ruveyn

Believe it or not, Creationism is intellectual, wether they are wrong or not, it doesn't much matter, when it comes to this issue, because they work on it trying to make intellectual propositions to defend their beliefs, even if they come up with remarks considered pseudoscientific. It doesn't look like they just sit there and use Faith as their only supportive argument, I believe they would lose value, being less convincing in the modern world.

If faith is not an intellectual experience, and just go along with that, then it doesn't seem to be so convenient for christians nowadays, then we could really ask wether such faith or belief system is irrational, if that's the case.

Only for period between roughly 800 and 1500. The emancipation of science from theology in 16th and 17th century lead to an explosion of human knowledge.



Mere data is not knowledge. When I speculate in respect of an irrational assumption, beyond any prove, than my conclusions are as unproven and speculative as the first assumption. The assumption of the existence of a divine entity ("god") is by its very nature such an assumption and therefore the speculative "knowledge", based of this assumption, is merely speculative, so it can't count as science.



In areas where philosophy is merely speculative, you be right; but in those areas in which philosophy tries to understand the human nature and the world surrounding us, theology has no real stand. It is certainly no co-incident that all philosophers, which are important for our current understand were not religious at all.

indeed, thats y im an atheist

Faith is the irrational belief in immaterial things and improvable concepts.

Religion is the political expression of faith.

Politics is how people exert influence and control over each other.

This is why those who hold religious power over the faithful prefer their followers to be unthinking and ignorant.

Well, a change in scientific methodology and focus led to an expansion in human knowledge, but this also was tied to the large changes that were going to happen due to the increasing prosperity of Europe as well. In any case, my argument was not to argue that theology should be considered a science, but rather that it could legitimately be considered a branch of knowledge.


Why not? Data is knowledge about certain particulars. So, even if we say that the speculation is random, by more thoroughly developing this speculation you end up with knowledge about a framework. In the case of religion, it must be remembered that this framework has historical and cultural roots that make it a valid choice of study by any individual.

Hmm... I wouldn't call many assumptions purely irrational as to be honest, if you call something irrational, you have to define rational, and if you have to define rational, in order to be rational you would have to prove the rationality of this assertion of rationality, and well.... that seems problematic, particularly given that I generally think that skeptical arguments on epistemology are relatively valid, so I would have to disagree with your argument's basis. I mean, it would seem that the only way you can prove the rationality of an assumption is to prove that it is circular within your own definitions. Not only that, but given the divine entity's historic and cultural importance, it would seem that this knowledge has relevance to something as well. Finally, not all branches of knowledge are sciences, thus theology can validly be a branch of knowledge without being a science.


Umm... I don't actually understand where you get that from. Descartes was an influential philosopher and is known for his issues of skepticism and faith, Locke was an influential philosopher and usually somewhat affiliated with Socinianism, William of Ockham was a monk, Kierkegaard is considered one of the most profound philosophers and viewed himself to a great extent as a theologian, Leibniz was a notable man of religion and philosophy and mathematics, Aquinas is essential for keeping Aristotelian logic within our system of ideas, Francis Bacon was also a Christian but separated theology and philosophy more than classical philosophers did, Schleiermacher was a major theologian and an essential philosopher in hermeneutics, and from what I've heard Kant was a Lutheran, and heck, I might as well insert Kurt Godel. (Ok, I'll stop there, if I keep on inserting people as I run across them, as apparently David Hilbert is a Lutheran, then I might keep on randomly editing it, in any case, to be fair, the 2 philosophers out of this group that I ended up looking up would be Kant and Bacon, and I found Bacon using Russell's book on the history of Western Philosophy, just to show I am not trying to do too much research)

So, have I grossly misrepresented some philosophers, or do you have a different set of philosophers that you think are essential for our modern understandings?

Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 20 Jan 2009, 7:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.

And most people are the faithful then. Morals aren't material. Justice isn't material. Logic isn't material. None of these things can really be proven either, but many people take all of them as incorrigible. Unless of course, you divide rational and irrational belief in some complicated manner, which itself would perhaps seem irrational. I mean, after all, it really seems that most fundamental human beliefs are and must be pre-rational.

As practice, children have to start out learning to believe the little lies like Santa Claus, Space Aliens, King Arthur, and Faeries in the sky; so that later in life they can be taught to believe the big lies like Justice, Liberty, Morality, and Patriotism.

Sooner or later, they will come to believe almost anything.

If the things that people often invest such deep meaning to are lies, then what really matters? Or is the very question, in and of itself nonsense?

Fresh Berries.
Walking barefoot in grass.
Listening to good music in the car.
Taking a long, relaxing shower.
Coffee.
A good novel.
Popcorn and an old movie on DVD.
The smell of fresh-cut grass.
Watching the sunrise.
Walking on the beach.
A gentle morning run.
Yoga or stretching or meditation.
Snuggling in bed with your partner.
Watching the sunset.
Hugging your child tightly.
Good wine.
Dark chocolate.
Dancing like you’re crazy.
Telling jokes till your sides ache.
A long conversation with a good friend.
Root beer float.
Kissing in the rain.
Being lazy on a Sunday.
Waking to a clean house.
An uncluttered room.
Banana split.
Pillow fights.
Fries and a chocolate milkshake.
Singing in the shower, loudly.
Dancing in the rain and stomping in puddles.
Watching your child play.
Fresh-baked chocolate chip cookies.
Helping someone in need.
Making someone smile.
Homemade pie.
A nature hike.
Laying back and watching the stars.
Making a sandcastle.
Floating in the water.
Taking an afternoon nap.
Serving your spouse a surprise breakfast in bed.
Watching your children on Christmas morning.
Laying back and looking up at clouds.
Watching the ocean.
Getting a massage.
Reese’s peanut butter cups.
PB&J sandwich.
Iced green tea.
Playing footsie.
Acting crazy in public.
Seeing your savings account grow.
Seeing your debt shrink.
Taking a hot bath.
Blowing bubbles.
A gentle breeze.
The feeling after a good workout.
Checking something off your to-do list.
Snuggling together under the covers on a stormy day.
Coen brother movies.
Watching your kids play soccer.
Playing a good game of basketball.
The smell of a new Moleskine notebook.
Writing on good paper with a good pen.
A clear desk.
Fresh popped popcorn.
A fresh snow.
Swinging on a swing.
Homemade strawberry shortcake.
Watching animals in nature.
An empty email inbox.
Playing hooky.
A very slow and sensual night with your partner.
Staying up all night talking.
Having a picnic.
Swimming at night.

The question, as life itself, is whatever you make of it.

The moon *could* be made of green cheese, but based on the overwhelming evidence to the contrary it probably is made of rock.

My cat *could* be a shapeshifter, waiting to change back into a sabertooth tiger tonight and eat me alive, but based on the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, she probably is just a cat.

The bible (pick a translation) *could* have been dictated word for word by an all-knowing, all-powerful, extraterrestrial superbeing who gets mad at us if we call him by the wrong name. But based on overwhelming evidence to the contrary, it is probably just a collection of writings, cherry-picked and translated to suit out of thousands of similar writings, originally intended more for political purposes than spiritual ones.

- Jo

Ah, so egoism. Got it!

Hmm ... Orthodox or Reformed Egoism?