(July 14, 2015 at 11:04 am)Dystopia Wrote:(July 14, 2015 at 10:53 am)Pyrrho Wrote: The thing is, once one gives up on it being all correct, why regard it as at all special? There are plenty of stories that have meaning, like Aesop's fables, and they make a whole lot more sense than the stories in the Bible. Why not be an Aesopist instead of a Christian? Why call oneself a "Christian" if the basis of Christianity is nothing special at all?The foundation of Christianity is the belief in the resurrection and divinity of Jesus, so as long as you believe in that, you're as Christian as anyone else. Just my opinion. I don't want to approach a different variation of the no true scotsman fallacy and say some people are not really Christians
My own take on this is that many modern Christians have basically rejected the foundation of their religion, but keep their religion anyway. And that is very irrational.
Fine, but the reason people believe that is because it appears in old writings that we now call the "Bible." Without the writings, no one would have such beliefs. So by rejecting the writings as anything special, the foundation for such beliefs is no longer present. Yet many still retain the beliefs that are based on the writings.
Does that make my point clearer?
To use a metaphor, it is like building a house and then tearing out the foundation while expecting the house above it to remain, suspended in air.
Or to be closer to being literal, it is like regarding homosexuality as bad only because it is written in the Bible, and then rejecting the Bible, and then continuing to regard homosexuality as bad. The basis for the belief is gone, but the belief remains. Continuing such beliefs is irrational, as the reason for it no longer exists.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.