Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Keith · 02-17-2003, 06:17 PM

Quote:

[i]Originally posted by AnthonyAdams45

"How? That is, what about not admitting the divine as a possible category for qualities destroy the possibility for understanding and reason? Just as interestingly, what is the exclusive relationship between the divine and understanding and reason?" [/B]

This is yet another great question. Atheists use reason all the time just like theists do. But they use it without recognizing the source of reason (God). It's like my three year-old son not recognizing that our car needs petrol to go anywhere. He is able to travel in the car and go places even without knowing or acknowledging that petrol is essential to the whole thing. He just takes car riding sort of for granted. He knows nothing about what cars require to work.

My use of my three year old wasn't intended to be insulting. I hope you understand that it's just an illustration.

Keith

Sue Sponte · 02-17-2003, 06:27 PM

Quote:

But they use it without recognizing the source of reason (God).

As noted earlier, you simply conclude that the source of everything is god. Do you realize you are doing this? I don't mean to be rude, but you don't appear to REASON any of these things, instead simply jumping to the conclusion that all things must be from god. As a result, you have convinced me of nothing other than reasoning isn't important to you.

Quote:

Atheists reason all the time. But their reasoning ability exists in spite of their atheism. IOW, when an atheist wants to make sense--and use reason, he/she must borrow the "tools" of reason from outside of their own worldview.

You have some very serious misunderstandings about atheism, reasoning, science, and the world in general.

I'd also note that the "tool of reason" has only recently been accepted by Christianity(in limited doses) and solely because failure to do so would have resulted in reduced membership. To equate Christianity with reason is baseless. Faith is not reason. You don't appear willing (or able) to make this distinction.

Keith · 02-17-2003, 06:35 PM

Quote:

[i]Originally posted by Keith Russell

"Where is the evidence that--evaluated rationally--led you to the understanding of 'God's' nature?

You've made claims, but you have not supported them. You have said that you have the same faith in reality as you have in 'God', but that is more easily explained as your failure to understand reality, than in your 'success' at understanding 'God'.

Support your claims, please..."

Does reality lend itself to human comprehension at all? I say yes, it does to some degree. In fact, one of the safest observations we can make about human beings is that we're curious by nature. Why is that? Could it be because we think of nature as displaying sufficient order, design, and purpose for us to try to understand it? If nature is just a bunch of random processes all of which defy categorization and explanation then humans would not attempt science and they would not be curious about anything.

We live in an ordered, designed, highly structured, and purposeful universe. IOW a PERSONAL universe. A personal universe suggests (or demands) a personal origin. No? Or did it all "just happen" for no reason?

Keith

AnthonyAdams45 · 02-17-2003, 06:43 PM

Quote:

But they use it without recognizing the source of reason (God).

How is God the source of reason, that is, what are the necessary connections that tie reason to a divine entity?

And, of course, I realize your example is not intended as insulting. In fact, it's sweet.

AnthonyAdams45 · 02-17-2003, 06:46 PM

But he will not necessarily act in accord with the laws of nature? If he will always act in accord with nature, then the bible is erroneous in citing his unnatural behavior. If he will not always act in accord with the laws of nature, then why does his presence make nature's laws reliable? Or am I missing something?

AnthonyAdams45 · 02-17-2003, 06:48 PM

Does my memory fail me or doesn't Luther call reason "the devil's whore"?

Answerer · 02-17-2003, 06:59 PM

If the 'compassionate' God do exist, there is no doubt he will :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: after looking at all his followers in the world from past to now.

Philosoft · 02-17-2003, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Keith
Does reality lend itself to human comprehension at all? I say yes, it does to some degree. In fact, one of the safest observations we can make about human beings is that we're curious by nature. Why is that? Could it be because we think of nature as displaying sufficient order, design, and purpose for us to try to understand it? If nature is just a bunch of random processes all of which defy categorization and explanation then humans would not attempt science and they would not be curious about anything.

You have yet to demonstrate how the two ends of this argument meet. I can certainly conceive of evolutionary reasons why curiosity would be beneficial to survival. Your wholesale dismissal of a naturalistic cause is extremely premature.

Quote:

We live in an ordered, designed, highly structured, and purposeful universe. IOW a PERSONAL universe.

For all you know, we are the only "personal" beings in the entire universe. To then extrapolate this fraction-of-a-fraction-of-a-fraction of space-time to a purpose for the entire universe is beyond hubris. You really need to get ahold of some perspective.

Quote:

A personal universe suggests (or demands) a personal origin. No? Or did it all "just happen" for no reason?

Perhaps you could indicate how we know when your desire for X to be true actually causes X to be true?

John Page · 02-17-2003, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyAdams45
Does my memory fail me or doesn't Luther call reason "the devil's whore"?

Quote:

Martin Luther, Erlangen Edition v. 16, pp. 142-148
"Reason is the Devil's greatest whore; by nature and manner of being she is a noxious whore; she is a prostitute, the Devil's appointed whore; whore eaten by scab and leprosy who ought to be trodden under foot and destroyed, she and her wisdom ... Throw dung in her face to make her ugly. She is and she ought to be drowned in baptism... She would deserve, the wretch, to be banished to the filthiest place in the house, to the closets."

Does go on a bit, doesn't he?

AnthonyAdams45 · 02-17-2003, 08:29 PM

Thanks, ol' bean. I knew I wasn't senile.

And, yes, he do go on about Lady Reason a bit.

Funny that Keith thinks the Devil's whore is God's mistress!

02-17-2003, 06:46 PM	#125
AnthonyAdams45 Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Florida Posts: 156	You can trust that God will always act in accordance with his nature. But he will not necessarily act in accord with the laws of nature? If he will always act in accord with nature, then the bible is erroneous in citing his unnatural behavior. If he will not always act in accord with the laws of nature, then why does his presence make nature's laws reliable? Or am I missing something?

02-17-2003, 06:48 PM	#126
AnthonyAdams45 Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Florida Posts: 156	Query Does my memory fail me or doesn't Luther call reason "the devil's whore"?

02-17-2003, 08:29 PM	#130
AnthonyAdams45 Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Florida Posts: 156	Does go on a bit, doesn't he? Thanks, ol' bean. I knew I wasn't senile. And, yes, he do go on about Lady Reason a bit. Funny that Keith thinks the Devil's whore is God's mistress!

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

02-17-2003, 06:59 PM	#127
Answerer Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Singapore Posts: 3,956	If the 'compassionate' God do exist, there is no doubt he will :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: after looking at all his followers in the world from past to now.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.