|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
posted May 24, 2013 07:43 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 19:44, 24 May 2013.
|
Quote:
I'm still not sure if this is the final proof, but I won't argue more since it's more about faith in Trinity than facts, and I can't really argue with faith itself.
You asked what the Bible said. I quoted the Bible. That is fact, not faith. Thomas clearly stated Jesus is God and Jesus clearly called him blessed for his confession.
I don't see a trinity there. I'm not a trinitarian, I'm an apostolic oneness Pentecostal. Some people call us a cult too. I don't agree with everything my denomination teaches but they have the closest Biblical view of God of any denominational doctrine I've examined.
____________
Revelation
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted May 24, 2013 07:49 PM |
|
|
@Elodin
Quote:
Muslims say Jesus was a prophet and lesser than Mohammed.
Not exactly, it's not quantitative like Jesus is 3, Muhammed is 4. They believe the message Jesus delivered had been altered in time yet Muhammed's stood intact. According to Muslims there was only one single message from God and that was it.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted May 25, 2013 04:47 AM |
|
|
@Elodin
If I may abruptly change the subject, may I ask - as someone who is clearly a very devout Christian, what are your thoughts on Mormonism, particularly Mormon fundamentalism?
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted May 25, 2013 06:58 AM |
|
|
In my opinion Mormonism does not meet the Biblical definition of Christianity.
First, Mormons teach there are many gods. The Bible throughout both the Old and New Testaments say there is one God, only One God, and that there will never be another God.
Quote:
Isa 44:6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
This is the "confession" of the Old Covenant believers.
Quote:
Deu 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:
Jesus quoted this and said it is of primary importance.
Quote:
Mar 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
Mar 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.
Mar 12:31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.
The confession of New Covenant believers is "Jesus is ;Lord." Jesus is the one God [LORD] manifesting himself as a human being.
Quote:
Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Jesus claimed to be that one God.
Quote:
Joh 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am [he], ye shall die in your sins.
The consistent witness of the New Testamtment Scriptures is that Jesus is God manifesting himself as a man. It is God existing as the Christ who died on the cross. It is the blood of God that was shed.
Quote:
1Ti 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
1Jn 3:16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.
Now, for what Mormons say of Jesus.
Quote:
We believe Jesus is the Son of God the Father and as such inherited powers of godhood and divinity from His Father, including immortality, the capacity to live forever. While He walked the dusty road of Palestine as a man, He possessed the powers of a God and ministered as one having authority, including power over the elements and even power over life and death.
Mormons say Jesus is "a" god, not THE God manifesting himself as a man. Jesus stated in John 8:24 that anyone who does not believe that he is "I AM," the one God, will die in his sins.
Mormonism also teaches that man can go on to become gods, which conflicts with God's claims that there will never be god besides him.
Since the Mormons reject the most fundamental of Biblical doctrines about God, that there is only one God, never will be another god, and that Jesus is that God I have to conclude Mormonism does not meet the Biblical criteria for Christianity.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted May 25, 2013 07:02 AM |
|
|
May I also answer to that, Corribus?
While I don't know everything about Mormonism, I think it's ok to practice any religion you want as long it does no harm to others.
As for what I think of Mormonism itself, I find that Joseph Smith to be a "false prophet". Paul specifically warned of people that would bring a different message than the one he and his fellow early Christians preached.
While Mormons are similar to Christians, they also have things like the Adam-God doctrine, believeing that Adam is also God if I got the message right.
____________
Horses don't die on a dog's wish.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 12:18 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 00:42, 21 Jun 2013.
|
Since in another thread, Elodin again disregarded all the points that refuted his stance, I'll sum them up here again not to derail the other thread.
Quote:
I'd say that believing God is responsible for the existence of man is more in line with science than faith in an eternal universe or a universe that created itself out of a steady state of absolute nothing. And as I've said a number of times, I'm not a young earth creationist. If one believes a being created the universe surely parting a sea or raising a dead person would not be too difficult for such a being.
Anyways, Christianity belief in a rational, logical, ordered universe with natural laws is what propelled the West to an immense scientific advantage over the rest of the world.
1- The God based on rationality is a deistic God not theistic, a personified God that is able to and does violate the laws of nature is irrational. Let me simplify it this way, theistic religions have miracles and miracles by definition are irrational. The very core of a miracle is something that can't rationally and naturally happen, happening. Rationalizing the impossible with omnipotence does not make God rational, it only means you are using the psychological defense mechanism of rationalization, which is entirely something else.
2- All religions have some sort of definition of an order, that's not specific to Christianity. And Christianity isn't specific to the West. So implying a fundamental causality between scientific development of the West and Christianity is flawed from the beginning. It becomes even more flawed when the peak of that development is an age that is famous for pacifying religion and even more flawed when today 80-90 percent of scientists in Western countries are non-religious. Basically, it's saying I see the connection that the scientists themselves don't because I have faith.
Quote:
Philosophy starts with certain core beliefs that are considered true. It differs not one whit in the various religions with regard to this.
Shows how disinterested you are in philosophy, in philosophy you ARRIVE at those axioms with a line of thought first, and to be considered a big philosopher, you have to be quite technically proper with your logic. Then you regard them as axioms (or core beliefs as you call them but they are rather convictions). That is totally different from "this is true because God said so and you believe it or not, it's a matter of faith."
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 01:26 AM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 01:32, 21 Jun 2013.
|
Quote:
Since in another thread, Elodin again disregarded all the points that refuted his stance, I'll sum them up here again not to derail the other thread.
You continue to make false statements about me. Please stop it.
Quote:
1- The God based on rationality is a deistic God not theistic, a personified God that is able to and does violate the laws of nature is irrational.
No, it is not, and please stop referring to theism as irrational. Most of the atheists would object to me calling atheism irrational so lets show a little mutual respect.
Deism is a belief that says there is a God but he does not care at all about his creation and is not at all involved in any part of his creation. Why exactly would God create a universe and not care about it or be at all involved in it. Such a belief does not make sense to me.
Quote:
Let me simplify it this way, theistic religions have miracles and miracles by definition are irrational.
No they are not. Miracles are classified as "supernatural." "Super" means "above" or "beyond." When a miracle occurs the cause was "beyond" the natural.
God is "beyond" the natural, quite obviously. He existed before the natural, exists apart from the natural world, and is not bound in any way by the natural world. Just as a painter exists before his painting, apart from his painting, and his painting imposes no limitations on him.
Again, miracles are "supernatural," not irrational.
Quote:
2- All religions have some sort of definition of an order, that's not specific to Christianity.
The pagan religions taught that the world was pretty much controlled by capricious, unpredictable nature spirits. Christianity taught there are natural laws that create order in the universe. The universe can thus be studied and why things happen can be understood. If the world were controlled by nature spirits there would be no order and societies that believed such did not advance far scientifically.
Quote:
Quote:
Philosophy starts with certain core beliefs that are considered true. It differs not one whit in the various religions with regard to this.
Shows how disinterested you are in philosophy, in philosophy you ARRIVE at those axioms with a line of thought first, and to be considered a big philosopher, you have to be quite technically proper with your logic.
You are continuing to make false statements about me. I am in face interested in philosophy. And philosophy, science, and religion all make assumptions for their core beliefs. Every belief system has to star with assumptions that are not proved.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 01:47 AM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 01:57, 21 Jun 2013.
|
@Elodin
Quote:
No, it is not, and please stop referring to theism as irrational. Most of the atheists would object to me calling atheism irrational so lets show a little mutual respect.
If I were to object it would be on the grounds that it is false, not on the grounds that it is insulting. "Rational" has a strict philosophical and mathematical meaning. Theism does not qualify. Honestly, it could be argued that atheism doesn't either, at least not in some ways.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationality
If either atheism or theism was a completely rational position, then the information at hand would lead irrevocably to one of those conclusions. But to my mind there is no possible evidence to prove one position or the other, so how can either be a truly rational conclusion? I am an atheist because that is the position I believe in, but it is not a rational, scientific position because I have no empirical data (or flawless logical reasoning) to lead me to it.
It could be argued that the only truly, strictly rational position, at least given our current available information, seems to be agnosticism - which is also strictly compatible with both atheism or theism.
Rather than leaping to the conclusion that someone is trying to insult you, why don't you ask them why they think your belief system is irrational. THAT is how you have a mutually respectful conversation.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 01:52 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 01:54, 21 Jun 2013.
|
If something is supernatural, it is irrational. Rationalism suggests reality has an intrinsically logical structure. A supernatural event is not a logical event. Adding the word "beyond" does not magically change anything, if there are natural laws, nothing can be beyond them: That's what makes them frigging natural laws.
Quote:
The pagan religions taught that the world was pretty much controlled by capricious, unpredictable nature spirits. Christianity taught there are natural laws that create order in the universe. The universe can thus be studied and why things happen can be understood. If the world were controlled by nature spirits there would be no order and societies that believed such did not advance far scientifically.
I wonder where your Christian Renaissance would be without the heritage of pagan Ancient Greece and Rome. There is no causality between science and Christianity, in fact the heritage of Ancient Greece had a much deeper effect on the Age of Reason than any religion.
Quote:
Every belief system has to start with assumptions that are not proved.
Elodin, what part of "in philosophy you arrive at those axioms with a logical line of thought" don't you understand? Philosophy is not science and the scientific kind of proof is not demanded of you anyway. However, it is not religion too and it's convictions are never as arbitrary as religious convictions. They are not revelations. More importantly, they are not cultural.
I also find it quite hard to understand why you're trying to defend that theism is not irrational when theists themselves (including you in some cases, if I remember right) keep saying "this is faith, you can't understand it with logic, you have to believe it" Believing something without any logical reason is irrational. It is not an act of reasoning, period. You can't have it both ways, religion is religion, it's not science or philosophy, that's why we have different names for these things. Religion does not, can not and should not function as the other two.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 02:16 AM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 02:17, 21 Jun 2013.
|
Quote:
@Elodin
If I were to object it would be on the grounds that it is false, not on the grounds that it is insulting. "Rational" has a strict philosophical and mathematical meaning. Theism does not qualify. Honestly, it could be argued that atheism doesn't either, at least not in some ways.
Quote:
ir·ra·tion·al
[ih-rash-uh-nl]
adjective
1.
without the faculty of reason; deprived of reason.
2.
without or deprived of normal mental clarity or sound judgment.
3.
not in accordance with reason; utterly illogical: irrational arguments.
4.
not endowed with the faculty of reason: irrational animals.
None of those things apply to theists or theism.
Quote:
Rather than leaping to the conclusion that someone is trying to insult you, why don't you ask them why they think your belief system is irrational. THAT is how you have a mutually respectful conversation.
I have little doubt had I called atheism irrational I'd be at the whipping pole.
Like I said in the feedback thread I believe ideas should be able to be "attacked," but not people. But that is not what the moderators as a group apparently decided and I was previously warned for critiquing the ideas of others with negative appellations.
Calling theism irrational appears to be in conflict with the standards you posted. I have no problem with atheists being allowed to call theism irrational as long as theists can say the same about atheism. All I have ever asked for is equal treatment for all by moderation and clear, consistent standards of what is expected.
Quote:
Insults are statements made with the intent to hurt or undermine another person - either directly by assaulting their character, or indirectly by ridiculing some idea, belief, or characteristic closely related to said person (or group of people).
.....
Nevertheless, the moderators do consider the act of ridiculing posts by calling them "loony", "hogwash", "poppycock", "bullcrap", "idiotic", "inane" and other obviously negative appelations insulting behavior.
____________
Revelation
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 02:38 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 02:42, 21 Jun 2013.
|
Quote:
None of those things apply to theists or theism.
Of course if a person is a theist, that does not mean he is deprived of reason in every aspect of his life. But the idea of theism itself is indeed irrational because it suggests a super-natural being that is above (outside) natural law which practically means it is magical. Rationality demands consistency, you can not have a God who can arbitrarily change the rules if he wants anytime, anyplace and then keep on saying we live in a universe that can be understood within reason. How can you know he didn't create everything around you and every natural law you observe as an illusion, how can you be sure of anything once you claim there is a super-natural.
@Coribbus
We are not talking about any God, but the theistic God of Abrahamic religions who is quite a specified character. What you suggest may apply to the concept of God in general (but I prefer Occham's Razor), that's why I gave the example of Deists who find God in the orderliness of universe. Their reasoning is flawed to me for totally different reasons, however it is at least much more consistent than defending miracles and rationality of the universe at the same time. Rationality is, of course, a trade of the mind, not universe, but that's another topic.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 02:39 AM |
|
|
Corribus:
Theism and atheism are not equally irrational. If there is no evidence of something, you don't believe that it exists. If you had said something like "Believing that a billion dollars have just been added to my bank account and disbelieving in that are equally irrational, since there's no proof either way" - I hope you see the problem with reasoning.
You'd also have to say that you are agnostic about whether some things are green or grue, where grue is defined as "green until 2014 AD, and blue after". There's no evidence that all green things aren't really grue, right?
If you applied the same standards of knowledge of God's existence to everything else, you'd have to call yourself agnostic on a lot more questions than you do now.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 02:56 AM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 03:00, 21 Jun 2013.
|
Quote:
If something is supernatural, it is irrational.
Continuing to repeat that does not make it true.
It is not irrational to believe that if God exists he is involved in his creation. I've seen numerous instances of God intervening in creation.
My sister was healed of scoliosis. She had a short leg and a curved spine and was getting worse. She wore an insert in her shoe and was about to have to start wearing leg braces to walk. As a young teen age girl you can image she was upset. A Pentecostal couple gave my mother references of people they have prayed for who had been healed and asked if they could come pray for my sister. After my mother called and spoke to the people who had been healed through them she allowed the couple to come pray for my sister. My sister was instantly healed. Her back straightened up and her leg grew out. She joined the basketball team that week and soon became the starting point guard for the varsity team. That shook my theological world because I had been taught that miracles no longer happened. And it opened up a new dimension in my spiritual journey as I was OPEN to new truth.
I've seen many more miracles throughout my life. There is nothing at all irrational about belief in God or belief in miracles.
It makes no sense to me for someone to claim that God does not exist simply because he has not recognized the move of God. Or that miracles don't happen because he has not personally witnessed one.
Quote:
A supernatural event is not a logical event.
Yes it is. There is nothing illogical about God intervening in his universe. In fact it makes perfect sense that he would intervene in his universe. Christianity is about a relationship with God. I have a relationship with the God whom you deny.
Quote:
Adding the word "beyond" does not magically change anything, if there are natural laws, nothing can be beyond them: That's what makes them frigging natural laws.
Continuing to claim God can't intervene in his creation does not make it so. It makes no sense to me that God would be bound by the natural laws he created. Why would it be too hard for God to ignore gravity or temporarily suspend it in a specific location when he called into being everything from a steady state of absolute nothing? The Christian teaching is God can do anything that is intrinsically possible and that viewpoint makes sense to me. Your are describing a "tiny" and impotent god. I see a majestic, all powerful, all knowing, ever present, infinitely wise, self-existent eternal Spirit who fills and transcends all of his creation, past, present, and future. The Christian understanding of God is not at all like the pagan descriptions of God.
Quote:
Quote:
Every belief system has to start with assumptions that are not proved.
Elodin, what part of "in philosophy you arrive at those axioms with a logical line of thought" don't you understand?
Philosophy starts with some assumptions. For example: Existence exists. Can you prove existence exists? No.
Quote:
I also find it quite hard to understand why you're trying to defend that theism is not irrational when theists themselves (including you in some cases, if I remember right) keep saying "this is faith, you can't understand it with logic, you have to believe it"
I've said that all truth can't be discovered with the intellect alone. Man's intellect does not tower so high as to kick down the doors of heave and grasp its treasures. Some truths are only spiritually discerned. That does make the truths irrational.
Quote:
Believing something without any logical reason is irrational.
I have rational reasons for everything I believe.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 03:00 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Theism and atheism are not equally irrational.
I didn't say they were.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 03:11 AM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 03:11, 21 Jun 2013.
|
Quote:
But the idea of theism itself is indeed irrational because it suggests a super-natural being that is above (outside) natural law which practically means it is magical. Rationality demands consistency, you can not have a God who can arbitrarily change the rules if he wants anytime, anyplace and then keep on saying we live in a universe that can be understood within reason. How can you know he didn't create everything around you and every natural law you observe as an illusion, how can you be sure of anything once you claim there is a super-natural.
You can't prove you are not merely a figure in a fleeting dream I am having.
No, it is perfectly reasonable that the God who created everything out of a steady state of absolute nothing exists independently of his creation and that he can intervene in his creation at will.
Understanding that miracles occur is a part of understanding the universe. Existence is material and spiritual. There is no separation of life into "secular" and "spiritual." Life is life.
____________
Revelation
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 03:15 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 03:38, 21 Jun 2013.
|
Elodin, if your set of rational contains prayer-healing, we really use the word very differently, to put it politely. Now, even if your story was true, (I'm sure you perceive it that way but I'm also quite sure there is some kind of other explanation), that wouldn't mean miracles are rational. That would mean miracles are true and we actually live in an irrational world beyond reason. Something can't be both beyond reason and rational at the same time, it's intrinsically impossible.
Quote:
Philosophy starts with some assumptions. For example: Existence exists. Can you prove existence exists? No.
In philosophy, even if I write something as lame as "existence exists" I have to present my line of thought as an embodiment of logical context. That is why people sometimes make fun of philosophers, they write pages and pages of text to present a simple conclusion such as "our senses can deceive us." In philosophy, nothing is taken for granted without presenting an argument, even the simplest things. Just read Metaphysical Discourses by Descartes, it's a perfect example, see how he goes step by step to even prove the existence of himself. It's quite a fun book to read too, not boring at all.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 03:23 AM |
|
|
Corribus:
Sorry, I misinterpreted what you said. But you did say that there is no evidence to prove one position or the other, a standard that is more obviously strange if applied to other concepts. If theism and atheism are the only two alternatives (that is, either you believe in a god or you don't), and there is no evidence that would cause you to believe, then you don't believe, and therefore are an atheist. Consider reasoning in the other direction: "there's no reason to believe that a god doesn't exist, so I believe that a god exists". You wouldn't say that about a billion dollars in your bank account, and presumably you wouldn't say that about a deity either.
You don't need absolute certainty to have knowledge. Absolute certainty only exists in logic and mathematics. In science, if you perform an experiment and get statistically significant results, and your results are replicated, I assume you'd call that "evidence", though you only have statistical significance and not absolute certainty. Unless you're trying to disprove something, your null hypothesis is usually "[something] has no effect", and see if you can reject it. So when it comes to atheism and theism, the null hypothesis is "there is no deity", and there is no evidence that leads to its rejection.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 03:25 AM |
|
|
Oh, and while on subject, why do you think prayer-healing always works on stuff that has to a lot to do with psychological motivation to get rid of? Why isn't there for example, even a single case, where a man loses a leg and it grows back miraculously with prayer?
Also how does it both work with Hinduism and Christianity, since one of the religions should be false obviously?
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 03:42 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Philosophy starts with some assumptions. For example: Existence exists. Can you prove existence exists? No.
In philosophy, even if I write something as lame as "existence exists" I have to present my line of thought as an embodiment of logical context. That is why people sometimes make fun of philosophers, they write pages and pages of text to present a simple conclusion such as "our senses can deceive us." In philosophy, nothing is taking for granted without presenting an argument, even the simplest things. Just read Metaphysical Discourses by Descartes, it's a perfect example, see how he goes step by step to even prove the existence of himself. It's quite a fun book to read too, not boring at all.
It appears you are unfamiliar with the three basic axiomatic concepts in philosophy (existence exists is one) so I hardly see how we can continue to discuss philosophy. I recommend you read up on philosophy before trying to discuss it further.
Quote:
That would mean miracles are true and we actually live in an irrational world beyond reason.
God intervening in the universe does not make the universe irrational. It is reasonable that God would be involved in his creation. God may be beyond your experience but he is not beyond mine.
Christianity teaches God is very involved in his creation. He even went so far as to begin to eixst as a man (without ceasing to be the ever present Spirit) and lived life as man. That God that walked the shores of Galilee as a man is still walking with people today. Perhaps one day you too will hear his call and follow him.
____________
Revelation
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 21, 2013 03:43 AM |
|
|
Quote:
It appears you are unfamiliar with the three basic axiomatic concepts in philosophy (existence exists is one)
I'm curious, what are the other two?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
