RE: Christian Paradox
February 15, 2010 at 11:56 am
(This post was last modified: February 15, 2010 at 11:56 am by tavarish.)
(February 14, 2010 at 2:35 pm)tackattack Wrote: 1-We're not talking about the amount of scrutiny, we're talking about what tools we use to scrutinize.
I'm basing my conclusion on the criteria that I base everything else on: reality. What is demonstrably real.
(February 14, 2010 at 2:35 pm)tackattack Wrote: 2- I don't believe I ever said "The way faith works is belief first, then find supporting arguments later". The way I feel subjective truth words is:
a:you accpet the possibility that X (could be considered a leap of faith)
b:You test to see if X is true
c: you for a belief in X
d: nothing can be proven absolutely so you assert your belief in X with evidence and maintain focus on X with faith, when not testing X.
You just proved my point. You accept first (a), then you find reasoning to make it fit (b). After that, you strengthen your belief with rationalization.
This is the way anything else in life works:
a. You test to assess the existence of something, based on evidence, maintaining neutrality. <-This is key.
b. If sufficient objective evidence is found, you can accept the claim. If not, you reject the claim of existence. No faith necessary.
Nothing can be asserted to be absolute, but you can come to a reasoned conclusion beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt.
It's intellectually dishonest to assume or accept existence of something BEFORE you test its validity. It's backwards thinking.
(February 14, 2010 at 2:35 pm)tackattack Wrote: 3-Our perception of reality is based off of subjective understanding , evidence and reason. Reality includes, society and human relationships as well as the rocks and buildings, etc. Constructs like religion, philosophy, mathmatics, etc. have contributed to society. Are you asserting that they're unfounded intangible ideology?
Religion, Philosophy, and Mathematics are all different concepts, and I have no idea why you grouped them together.
In the context of this conversation, Philosophy and Mathematics rely heavily on logic and objective perception. That means things that are true regardless of whether or not we are present. Religion is a means to group people together based on similar supernatural and superstitious beliefs. Religion is not founded on logic, and its faith based dogma requires you to abandon reason to make it work. It, by its very nature, makes no logical sense.
By the way, has anyone ever killed in the name of philosophy or mathematics?
It's not in the same league. Not even close.
(February 14, 2010 at 2:35 pm)tackattack Wrote: 4-I realize that histroy is written by the winners. I realize (howver unlikely) that the story of the MAN Jesus could have been a conglomoration of various people. I do believe in the actions of the Son of God title, whomever held it. Yes that makes sense to me.
Do you realize, by that same merit, the story of the son of god could have been pure fabrication? Do you also believe it's much more likely that someone would embellish the truth to make a compelling story in order for people to follow a set of beliefs? History is written by the winners, then could not the Jesus story (in its entirety, message and all) been perpetuated by exaggerated and misunderstood claims, since no one in the bible had any first hand account of anything?
Think about these things.