Freethought & Rationalism Archive

orac · 03-28-2003, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by 7thangel
It is inappropriate to challenge God when you have no intention to accept His doctrines. Gideon asked for a sign from God, that is a good challenge. But of Elijah challenging the baalites is more of condemning, and that challenging of the baalites is of the purpose of showing God unto the Israelites.

Ok, I've got it.

According to you, "intellectually convincing" means that you believe in God first, and then you find out whether or not God exists, based on what you believe to be true. Fortunately, tests are only relevant to people who don't need them, so of course you can reject every test that anyone proposes.

That's an original, intellectual and compelling argument that we've never heard before. Oh, sorry, no it isn't.

Has noone ever explained the problems with circular reasoning to you?

Fiach · 03-28-2003, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by orac
Ok, I've got it.

According to you, "intellectually convincing" means that you believe in God first, and then you find out whether or not God exists, based on what you believe to be true. Fortunately, tests are only relevant to people who don't need them, so of course you can reject every test that anyone proposes.

I did probably believe in God first. Perhaps that was age 3-6. Then at 7, I began to see anomalies in the Bible stories (Noah's Flood, inherited sin). My belief in god began to weaken, and I had doubts. I could not define those doubts if I recall, but it just was wrong in some way. So I set out to rid my mind of doubts. I started to read the Bible. I wanted to find evidence to prove God and soothe my doubts. Perhaps I was too young, not conditioned to filter out the bad parts. Therefore, I read the good and bad verses. My faith dwindled over the years until it was gone at least by age 10. By age 12, I openly declared myself an agnostic and an Atheist in reference to the christian god .

That's an original, intellectual and compelling argument that we've never heard before. Oh, sorry, no it isn't.

Has noone ever explained the problems with circular reasoning to you?

Maybe it is circular, but remember that I started with a belief indoctrinated to me as a small child by my Christian mother. My unbelief took many stages of evolution. The paradox is that the harder I tried to prove God to myself, the more implausible that God became to me.

Fiach

BioBeing · 03-28-2003, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 7thangel
It is inappropriate to challenge God when you have no intention to accept His doctrines. Gideon asked for a sign from God, that is a good challenge. But of Elijah challenging the baalites is more of condemning, and that challenging of the baalites is of the purpose of showing God unto the Israelites.

I offer challenge because it is for my benefit, like when Gideon asked for a sign; I need God's confirmation. And yet, it must be according to God's will, not just because we think we need it. Also, if our challenge contradicts the prophesies, or the very nature of God itself, then it is not acceptable. I see no intention from those who make challenge to obey God's doctrines, and becasue they have no intention to subject themeselves unto those whom they challenge.

But the sign that God gave Gideon was the same - fire!

Quote:

17 Gideon replied, "If now I have found favor in your eyes, give me a sign that it is really you talking to me. 18 Please do not go away until I come back and bring my offering and set it before you."
And the LORD said, "I will wait until you return."
19 Gideon went in, prepared a young goat, and from an ephah [2] of flour he made bread without yeast. Putting the meat in a basket and its broth in a pot, he brought them out and offered them to him under the oak.
20 The angel of God said to him, "Take the meat and the unleavened bread, place them on this rock, and pour out the broth." And Gideon did so. 21 With the tip of the staff that was in his hand, the angel of the LORD touched the meat and the unleavened bread. Fire flared from the rock, consuming the meat and the bread. And the angel of the LORD disappeared. 22 When Gideon realized that it was the angel of the LORD , he exclaimed, "Ah, Sovereign LORD ! I have seen the angel of the LORD face to face!"

So what is the difference?

7thangel · 03-28-2003, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fiach
Maybe it is circular, but remember that I started with a belief indoctrinated to me as a small child by my Christian mother. My unbelief took many stages of evolution. The paradox is that the harder I tried to prove God to myself, the more implausible that God became to me.

Fiach

Actually, you got a very good point, Fiach. Relative of the stages of evolution of your unbelief, "faith" is only partial knowledge of the whole thing, so asking a confirmation of faith through challenge gives us security of what faith lacks. There is a difference when you doubt God, which is your unbelief, to orac's unbelief with and essence that he does not know anything about God, or intentionally rejects Him. So he doesn't understand what is it for you to challenge God, as to him to challenge God.

Did I get what you mean?

Fiach · 03-29-2003, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 7thangel
Actually, you got a very good point, Fiach. Relative of the stages of evolution of your unbelief, "faith" is only partial knowledge of the whole thing, so asking a confirmation of faith through challenge gives us security of what faith lacks. There is a difference when you doubt God, which is your unbelief, to orac's unbelief with and essence that he does not know anything about God, or intentionally rejects Him. So he doesn't understand what is it for you to challenge God, as to him to challenge God.

Did I get what you mean?

I think that I do, and that you are one of the first to understand me. That is why I get angry when I am accused of 'not wishing to believe" or "Choosing not to believe."

I chose to believe, honestly, I tried very hard. It was that effort that makes me sensitive to the charge that I only disbelieve because of choice. I wanted to believe but failed. I might want to look like Pierce Brosnan but no matter how hard I wish, it won't happen. I still look like a short stocky, excessively hairy Highlander.

Fiach

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.