Having spent nearly six months on this forum, I must admit I am surprised by the amount christians are actually arguing against their own philosophy.
What I have noticed so far
Christians arguing the burden of proof is on atheist to prove there is no god.
This is a problem for christian philosophy because the starting point it implies is, that god is revealed, and atheists have to show what is revealed is not god. With that view there is no faith, and without faith there is no means of trust, as such there are no christians.
One would have thought people trying to convert me would be asking for my trust, but they don't, they demand god is evident, thus denying their faith and philosophy. What better reason could there be not to trust them?
Having noticed this, I am now questioning whether a lot of what purports to be christian has anything to do with that philosophy at all.
Is the actual motivation from people that wish to be in the same sort of culture as their mums and dads, rather than seeking a relationship to an old philosophy? An instance of this would be A Theist's devotion to his gun rather than a need to turn the other cheek.
Given that this also occurred to me, the attacks on the understanding of evolution is not because it is in contravention of their philosophy, but rather it contravenes the understanding their culture had when it was formed?
To explain before Louis Pasteur most people thought life naturally arose out of anything. Leave a pile of old socks in a corner and you got mice. No christian had a problem with that idea up to the 1850s, which is about the time the fundamentalist christians were forming in the mid west USA.
Now from the descendants of those fundamentalists we hear only god has the power to give life. So is it cristianity they are calling for, or merely the culture of their forefathers, and its understanding of science.
Is it christanity we are even arguing with or just some fools that want it to be forever 1850.
What I have noticed so far
Christians arguing the burden of proof is on atheist to prove there is no god.
This is a problem for christian philosophy because the starting point it implies is, that god is revealed, and atheists have to show what is revealed is not god. With that view there is no faith, and without faith there is no means of trust, as such there are no christians.
One would have thought people trying to convert me would be asking for my trust, but they don't, they demand god is evident, thus denying their faith and philosophy. What better reason could there be not to trust them?
Having noticed this, I am now questioning whether a lot of what purports to be christian has anything to do with that philosophy at all.
Is the actual motivation from people that wish to be in the same sort of culture as their mums and dads, rather than seeking a relationship to an old philosophy? An instance of this would be A Theist's devotion to his gun rather than a need to turn the other cheek.
Given that this also occurred to me, the attacks on the understanding of evolution is not because it is in contravention of their philosophy, but rather it contravenes the understanding their culture had when it was formed?
To explain before Louis Pasteur most people thought life naturally arose out of anything. Leave a pile of old socks in a corner and you got mice. No christian had a problem with that idea up to the 1850s, which is about the time the fundamentalist christians were forming in the mid west USA.
Now from the descendants of those fundamentalists we hear only god has the power to give life. So is it cristianity they are calling for, or merely the culture of their forefathers, and its understanding of science.
Is it christanity we are even arguing with or just some fools that want it to be forever 1850.
