RE: What value do you see in studying theology in concerns to Christianity?
September 8, 2019 at 4:32 pm
(September 7, 2019 at 12:18 am)Acrobat Wrote: Because thought, views, perspectives have histories, leave a trail of fossils, and you can see the fragments of the bones of your thoughts in others, trace them to their source. It’s because I can see my views in the views of people thousands of years ago. It’s probably why I like to read and discuss their writings, while you might find them boring and uninteresting.
So which particular views, exactly, do you see that you share with people thousands of years ago?
(September 7, 2019 at 12:18 am)Acrobat Wrote:
Most atheists I come across tend to sell some naturalistic story of how religions developed, often as some sort of proto-science, making their own histories of how thoughts developed, religion as a sort of early form of science, etc.... But they’re not very good, and offer very little explanatory power,
I do the same of course, but I offer one with greater explanatory scope. One capable of putting all the pieces together, answers more questions that it raises, and takes into a wide variety of writings, thoughts, and histories
So, if religion wasn't a way to understand the world around them, what was it? Were they all just playing pretend? Did the ancient Egyptians just think it was "part of the narrative" to build pyramids and bury their pharaohs in them, and then inscribe magical spells in the walls of the pyramid as instructions for the dead in the afterlife? Did the ancient Aztecs just "play into the narrative" when they sacrificed people and ripped out their still-beating hearts, offering it as a sacrifice to whoever they believed in?
Your view that Christians were somehow this group of metaphorical, story-telling masters is simply unsupported. There's no reason to believe that early Christians were any different than any other barbaric religion of the past.
Religions attempt to explain why things happen. They are, therefore, an attempt at understanding the world. I'm not sure how you can even try to debate this.
(September 7, 2019 at 12:18 am)Acrobat Wrote: The difference between categorizing writings, like this is fiction, this is non-fiction, this is philosophy, this is history, these are stories, and a sort of work that lumps all these styles together. Why even ancient historical writings can contain non historical elements, invented speeches, and no one bats an eye.
So, once again, how are you personally dictating which piece is fiction and which isn't? A figure of speech is something like, "It's raining cats and dogs outside." It's very obvious that this is a figure of speech. There are plenty of figures of speech like this in the Bible, and they are fairly obvious. However, trying to suggest that something like the story of creation is a metaphor simply isn't supported by evidence. So how exactly are you differentiating the two?
(September 7, 2019 at 12:18 am)Acrobat Wrote: Believing things have end purposes, like rocks existing so porcupines can scratch their back. As opposed to non-teleological views, were purpose is something humans give to things. Its the difference between a reality that wants to tell us how we ought to live and be, and a reality that has nothing to say, only us.
Well until you have some evidence that things have a purpose, teleological thinking is useless. So there's no need for it to be part of the conversation anymore.
(September 7, 2019 at 12:18 am)Acrobat Wrote: Uhm, because thats what the context in which the term Truth is used indicates:
“The truth shall set you free”
“I am the way the truth and the life”
“If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.”
So, this proves what?
If you're frightened of dying, and you're holding on, you'll see devils tearing your life away. But if you've made your peace, then the devils are really angels, freeing you from the Earth.
