David Bowden

I thought davidH's question deserved its own thread. I'm going to briefly review my notes from Mortimer Adler's Truth in Religion and a couple of other sources before I post; meanwhile, dig in everyone.

-Wanderer

gixxer750

Okay.

For me, religion cannot simply be a product of the realm of philosophy, or in other words, something that only exists in our minds. My religion must confirm my day-to-day experiences, and be in agreement with everything else I know to be true. The scientific method is a way to learn truth about the world we live in. If religion contradicts something PROVEN by the scientific method, then one of them must be wrong. Therefore religious concepts must agree with scientific concepts.

How do I know that my religion is the true one? I know it because it is not simply a philosophy, or an idea, it is grounded upon historical fact. I would suggest that the resurrection of Christ is an historical event that confirms the truth of Christianity. I believe that when the resurrection is looked at in the same way as any other historical event, the evidence stands in favour of its truth.

I know it also because, having embraced it, it has confirmed everything that I have experienced in this life: it explains the reality of the sin in my life, and offers an accurate portrayal of the human condition, in my humble opinion, of course.

Just my thoughts.

BLoggins02

I agree, but this doesn't imply divine presence. You're ignoring the MAJOR impact that social pressure has on humans. Groupthink is very powerful, especially religious groupthink (ever been to a Pentacostal church?).

The implied assertion here is meaningless without specific context. Could you elaborate?

Then I take it you're not a Young Earth Creationist. So much evidence gathered by the scientific method refutes the concepts of special creation and the sub-10,000 year earth that theists typically have to resort to a "testing of the faith" argument whereby God for some reason is only TRICKING us into thinking that evolution occurred and that the world is billions of years old. Doesn't sound like an honest deity, worthy of worship does it? On the other hand, the more liberal and "fuzzy" your theology is the more you can bring it in line with modern thinking. On the other hand, you still have to account for that fact that as human beings have slowly explained more and more of the world around them, God has become less and less active in our lives. Coincidence?

This is circular reasoning, and you're committing a logical fallacy known as begging the question. You presume God exists and then say we know that Jesus is God because of the historicity of the ressurection. But because the Bible is the only source of such historicity that is taken seriously, you must have have no less than supreme faith in the bible to take any supernatural claim the bible makes seriously. You would not argue that tellings of miracles in the Qu'ran were historically validated by the Qu'ran itself would you? That's probably because you didn't happen to pick Muslim parents, think about it.

Why is it that after I left Christianity I became a much healthier, saner, more fulfilled person with less of what you would call the so-called "sins" in my life? Maybe it's because Christianity wasn't the right moral foundation for me. Maybe I felt it more accountable to myself than to some deity who seems to care an awful lot about my sex life and drinking habits. But, if it has made an improvement in your life, I'm happy for it. Just please don't assume that the rest of us don't know what we're missing. We do. It's people that feel the need to force their morality onto others that bother me. Like idiots who cover their kids eyes when a beautiful woman shows up on screen naked, but seem to care nothing about letting their kids watch hours of people killing each other. You see how arbitrary this moral code is once you look at it from outside the box? Like I said, if it works for you fine, just don't feel like it's your duty to make the rest of the world conform.

And it's nice to hear some coherent ones for a change. I'd much rather have an intellectual conversation with someone of a differing viewpoint than to hear "I'll pray for you" as if to say "I am in tight with God and if you beg really hard I might be able to persuade him to lessen that whole free will thing enough to forcefully change your mind so that maybe he won't have to throw you in a burning pit for all eternity. Which he'll do because he loves you ya know."

[ March 17, 2002: Message edited by: BLoggins02 ]</p>

Eudaimonist

A problem with your argument is that there are many people out there who believe in different religions or philosophies that also find accurate portrayals of human psychology and the human condition in them. How do you account for that?

It should be no surprise that a religion or philosophy would have something accurate to say about life. I find that my philosophy of life is more accurate and useful (for me, at least) than Christianity.

I'll credit you for at least attempting to ground your beliefs in life experience.

gixxer750

Oh Boy, where do I start?

how do I do that quote thing???
lets try that.

Okay, you have a good point here. There can be a very fine line between "spirituality" and "psychology". It's a good point, but I'm not sure what the relevance is. Maybe that Christians are building delusions in their heads. and thats all that religion amounts to? Not sure.

Maybe I elaborated enough later on. What I mean is simply that the doctrines taught through the Church and through the Bible must be in agreement with the things I experience in my life. For example, I steal a candy bar from the store and later on feel extremely guilty about it. If my religion teaches me that there is nothing wrong with stealing, then it contradicts my experiences. In that sense, I am as much a "free-thinker" as anyone else here.


I agree with you about the Young Earth thing. If science makes a discovery that contradicts something in the Bible, then there is a serious problem. Honestly, I will probably give the Bible the benefit of the doubt until the contradiction can be explained, just as, I'm sure, you would give Science the same benefit.
As for the "FACT" that God has become less active in our lives as we have explained more of the world around us - you are goning to have to go further into that. This certainly is NOT a fact from my perspective.


This is NOT circular reasoning. I don't know what it is that you think about the gospels, but you cannot discount their historical witness because they say some things you don't agree with. They are the most important HISTORIACL DOCUMENTS we have from that place and time. Suppose for a moment that Christ actually did rise from the dead and show himself to numerous people. What kind of written account would you ask for to substantiate it? In addition, there are secular accounts that mention the followers of Jesus, and their claim of the resurrection (ex. - Josephus). I believe that SOMETHING happened that Easter morning, and that it is sufficiently confirmed by eye-witnesses. I do not need the pre-supposition that God exists to make that decision. IF you look at the gospels as historical documents, even if you throw the rest of the Bible out the window, I believe they provide sufficient evidence for the resurrection.
SOMETHING happened that spawned Christianity 2000 years ago - something that convinced the first believers so strongly that they died for the cause.

One more comment that I have to make - and I know you will not like it. From your paragraph on how much more fulfilled you are since leaving Christianity I have to conclude that have never truly known Christianity. I know that sounds like a cop-out, like its avoiding the issue. It sounds to me like your memories of Christianity are ones of guilt and shame because of the moral code that was imposed on you. If that is so, then you have never truly tasted the sweet grace of God. Flame me if I'm wrong, or if I'm just being bigoted and narrow-minded, but I can say with confidence that had you experienced that same things that I have, you could never have written that paragraph.

Thanks for your post. I enjoy the discussions and I do apologize if I have offended you in any way.

gixxer750

My answer to your question is the resurrection of Christ. The resurrection is what pulls Christianity from the realm of philosophy and ideas to the realm of actual, historical fact. I believe in Christianity not because it "feels right", not simply becasue I have found wisdom in it, or just because it has confirmed some of my experiences, but becasue of an histroical event that I can look to and conclude that there is enough evidence to support it. I would be more than happy to elaborate more, but hopefully that answers your question.

BLoggins02

gixxer: No you did not offend me, and you make some very good responses to my post (which was written half asleep before I went to bed last night, hehe).

I just want to let you know that I will most likely not have time today (monday) to respond to your rebuttal as I have some work and school deadlines to make, so look for a response on tuesday (and if I forget, feel free to private message me and bug me about it). I look forward to continuing this debate. I can already see some things you have pointed out that may cause me to revise my argument

P.S. - Regarding your name "gixxer", you wouldn't happen to have a Suzuki GSX-R 750 would you?

gixxer750

Bloggins - Tuesday is np. I probably won't be on till then again anyway. And yes, I ride a GSXR-750. 1993. Do u ride?

davidH

Yeah, since this post has been started I better reply to it!

Gixxer750 - I agree with you. I too am a Christian and I'll give my views on this post too since I asked the question that started it all.


BLoggins 02 - this is the case in many religions that we see today.

Eudaimonia, Maybe you have read the works of these following atheist thinkers;

Sigmund Freud - "Religion arises out of guilt and fear of nature."

Karl Marx - "Religion is used to keep the lower classes happy."

Ludwig Feuerbach - "Religion is only wish fulfillment."

Friedrich Nietzsche - "Religion is rooted in man's weakness."

Maybe you haven't, but I thought I'd put that up, cause it does provide us with insight as to why other religions have formed.
However, in saying what I have said above, there are also a number of similar reasons why man should choose not to follow God.

One of which I will give;

Fear of authority, fear of exposure, and fear of God's otherness.
I'm not implying that you fall under any of these catagories but it would be worth examining anyway.

I don't know much about your Christain life apart from what you have already mentioned, but there could well be a number of deeper issues of why you left.

I wonder if you ever considered the following truth that I have actually been reading about at the moment. - I'm not wanting to preach or seem upity etc, I just thought I would share this with you - so don't take offense or anything.
(It's also off the subject but I'll put it in anyway)

You know the parable of the prodigal son? In Luke 15 v 11 - to end. (I think)
Well there's an important truth in there that many Christians seem to miss but really need to get.
When you read about the father talking with his son that has worked for him (not the one that ran away) Jesus shows us this.

v 29 "Look! All these years I have been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so that I could celebrate with my friends. But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prositutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!"
"My son"the father said,"you are always with me and everything I have is yours. But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this bother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found."

The older brother had got something mixed up here. He was really jealous that his father could show that much love to his son that had basically wanted him dead (when he asked for his inheritance before his father had died) and wasted his fathers wealth in wild living. Whereas he had worked hard for his father and his father had never thrown a party like this for him.
You see the older brother thought he could earn his father's love by slaving away for him in the fields, he had missed the point that his father loved him unconditionally - as he showed when he threw the party for the younger son.
That older brother is like many many Christians today - they think they have to work hard, not sin, give tithes etc. in order to earn God's favour and love. They have missed a great truth - God loves us so much - he loves us the same when we have sinned and when we have not sinned - his love is unconditional. We work hard, tithe and do our best to keep God's commands - not to earn his love but because we love him, and don't want to cause him pain by sinning.
Many Christians including myself fall into that trap of trying to earn God's love - and guess what, we fail every time.
No matter how hard we try, we fall short because we have sin in us. That gets us discouraged, we feel that God could never love us, we become depressed and as a result our love for God that we once had begins to grow cold.

I don't know if this applies in anyway to you, I know it did for me at one stage, but realising this lifted my burden and the change is apparent.
I just thought I should share that, maybe it doesn't apply to anyone but maybe it's something that you hadn't realised before.

Eudaimonia - just out of interest, what is your philosophy of life and what is it based on?

Yeah, I see your point too BLoggins 02, when having a conversation with someone like that, you can get nowhere. Well, you can get somewhere but a person putting themselves above you and seemingly sneering down at you - is never pleasent to try and have a half decent conversation with.

Again coming back to my question at the beginning, just how can you be sure, of a religion being the true one (if in fact any are true)? -Please note I am not having doubts about my own religion by asking this question.

I'd just like to hear your opinions on this. Thanks.

BLoggins02

(man I picked the WRONG week to get a debate started, but oh well)

gixxer: No I don't ride, but I'd love to if I could every find time to go learn how

OK, as promised, here goes...

As non-theists, most of us here are not asking whether or not a religion is good for anything, or whether it is a solid moral foundation (well not on this forum anyway, maybe in moral foundations an principles). We are simply concerned with whether or not the claims about the supernatural are true. My point was, that because we see similar psychology in all religion as well as superstition, the way a particular group acts is in itself no good test of the veracity of the group's claims. If this were true, we would expect followers of the One True Faith (whatever that is) to be the only ones witnessing miracles, seeing visions, having prayers answered, getting the "warm fuzzy clost to God" feeling, etc...

Again, this does not prove that divinity had any hand in it, and for the same reasons. All religions are coherent with the natural world in some way or another. If they were totally off-the-wall, there would be very few adherents (like some of the various so-called "Doomsday cults" we hear about on TV).

The reason has less to do with my philosophical convictions and more to do with the fact that I can independantly verify most scientific explanations. I can go to the source and ask questions, I can repeat the experiment, I can point out a flaw in a theory and cause the scientific community to review its foundations. You can't do any of these things with a holy text. You can't independently verify supernatural claims, you have to rely on testimony that is (usually) thousands of years old and sometimes second or third hand (as is Paul's case). You can't very well question the foundations of the sacred text because the foundations are in the text itself.

[qoute]As for the "FACT" that God has become less active in our lives as we have explained more of the world around us - you are goning to have to go further into that. This certainly is NOT a fact from my perspective.[/quote]

I didn't mean for this to be a deep observation, I was merely pointing out an observable fact. In biblical times, we hear of God literally talking to people, intervening on someone's behalf and telling others about it, opening up chasms in the sky into heaven, performing huge obvious miracles like the parting of the red sea and all those things. Today, we see absolutely none of this. God doesn't seem to physically talk to anyone, or intervene in human affairs. You could argue that the reason is because of the new covenant with Christ, but that doesn't explain why we're still not hearing from Allah or Vishnu, or any of the other 10,000 or so deities that humans have worhsipped throughout history. If you want to say "I can feel God in my heart" then I certainly can't argue with that, but as far as physical, non mystical presence goes, it seems the more obvious explanation is that God was simply never there, and people needed fewer reasons to invoke a God once the world around them was naturalistically explained.

And that's a big IF. Considering that the gospel's are just about the only source we have about the story (the veracity of the paragraph in Josephus has been questioned by many scholars. The paragraph does not appear in earlier versions of the work), it takes a big leap of faith to accept that such a supposedly major event has so few pieces of historical documentation. You have to be willing to have faith in the Christian God before you can seriously claim that the Bible is historically accurate on supernatural claims. Don't kid yourself, the bible IS religious propaganda. Read John or Revalations, it was CLEARLY written with a religious purpose, not a historical or secular one.


I DID experience the feelings of having God in your heart and the awesome power of Christ and all of that. But I started to feel that it was odd to have this sense of inner peace while at the same time feeling tormented by the fact that I was worshipping a deity who could actually throw the subjects of his creation into a burning pit of fire for all eternity. This was one of the reasons I left Christianity. After I left, those feelings were still there, but I recognized them for what they are- physiological and psychological feel-good sensations triggered by chemicals in the brain. It doesn't take a God to have an orgasm, it also doesn't take a God to be filled with a sense of God-like euphoria or peacefullness. Also, I don't know what moral code you suppose I was imposed by, because my most Christian standards I still follow the exact same code. I don't think you're being narrow-minded, but I would like to say that it should seem obvious that Christians don't have the monopoly in happy joyous living. People from all religions (including NO religion) experience these feelings, and they too lead wonderful fulfilling lives.

So we are left with two choices: either God doesn't bestow these "gifts" with prejudice, that they're given to each human being regardless of belief, or that it these feelings and the ability to lead fulfilling lives would be present with or without a God.