Atheism

[Djevv]

I think you'll find the Bible is part of an overall package :

Church - including preaching from a recognised leader
Service
Fellowship
Prayer
Bible study
Personal revelation

Get all these right and I'll guarantee the Bible will make lots of sense!

The Bible is also pretty clear that it needs to be 'rightly divided (or interpreted)' and also that 'ignorant and unstable men' will distort it.

 

[jayfox]

Are we talking about Jesus or the Bible? Is one more correct than the other?

Off the top of my head Jesus' view on slavery could be construed as vague as we have discussed previously on this thread.

The Bible as a whole is full of vague passages open to interpretation and blatant contradiction. As Sam Harris points out....state one passage in the Bible....a book supposedly the word of God himself.....that couldn't have been written 2000 years ago? For a book of supposed divine origin, it does have passages that are useful (if not original) moral lessons, but overall it is a pretty ordinary book to live by.

Jesus created a new covenant with man including new rules and a new way of living. At the time of His first coming 2000 years ago the world needed that kind of a change. The world is nearing a time of needing a change again and I believe he will deliver that (after the rapture and tribulation).

As for the slavery point, slavery was very different thousands of years ago to what it is today. Many people back then volunteered themselves as 'slaves' so that they could support their families and provide for them just as you would work for a 'boss' or 'master' (using the old language) today.

Overall it is a pretty ordinary book to live by? Again, which of Jesus' actual teachings is "pretty ordinary to live by"?

 

[Six Pack]

That bit about the Greek inheriting the Earth has me befuddled!

 

[jayfox]

That bit about the Greek inheriting the Earth has me befuddled!

Try 'meek'.

 

[Six Pack]

Well I'll be damned!

 

[jayfox]

Well I'll be damned!

At this rate you will, but it's not too late yet.

 

[Six Pack]

Jay, as i don't believe in god, or an afterlife or any of that, how can i be damned?

 

[jayfox]

Jay, as i don't believe in god, or an afterlife or any of that, how can i be damned?

Unbelief does not negate reality. It's like jumping off a cliff and saying "I don't believe in gravity". Disbelief is not going to save you from a real death.

 

[mld]

Unbelief does not negate reality. It's like jumping off a cliff and saying "I don't believe in gravity". Disbelief is not going to save you from a real death.

Lucky for everyone there is a good proof behind gravity but no good proof behind disbelief then.

 

[jayfox]

Lucky for everyone there is a good proof behind gravity but no good proof behind disbelief then.

I think you have completely missed the point of the analogy.

 

[t-rob]

Lucky for everyone there is a good proof behind gravity but no good proof behind disbelief then.

I'm not sure there is any proof behind gravity, plenty of evidence but no proof.

If you accept the definition of proof as: "The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true." then proof only exists if you are gullible enough to accept the evidence the scientists use to support their latest crackpot theory.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

I think you have completely missed the point of the analogy.

Your analogy implies that the existence of the afterlife (or hell in this case) is as sure as the existence of gravity.

This may be the case for you, but you cannot substantiate this outside of your own mind. This is different from gravity which you can easily demonstrate by simple experimentation.

So mld's point seems apt.

 

[evo]

Wishful thinking must be the powerful urge man possess.How else can you explain the vaste majority of the world believing in the supernatural, or afterlife.

Even many atheists believe in the power of astrology or luck, or some other irrational types of belief.

I reckon the truly rational may only be 1 or 2%.Amazing really.

 

[jayfox]

Your analogy implies that the existence of the afterlife (or hell in this case) is as sure as the existence of gravity.

This may be the case for you, but you cannot substantiate this outside of your own mind. This is different from gravity which you can easily demonstrate by simple experimentation.

So mld's point seems apt.

Whilst it may imply that, (and I believe that God's existence is surer than that of gravity as He will be here forever but with gravity, who knows?), the point of my analogy was that disbelief in something does not negate its reality. You surely must agree with this?

 

[jayfox]

Wishful thinking must be the powerful urge man possess.How else can you explain the vaste majority of the world believing in the supernatural, or afterlife.

Even many atheists believe in the power of astrology or luck, or some other irrational types of belief.

I reckon the truly rational may only be 1 or 2%.Amazing really.

See evo, I reckon that's a pretty arrogant statement in itself - "that the truly rational may only be 1 or 2%", which implies that you are one of those 1 or 2% and the rest of us are, using your claim, therefore irrational.

 

[evo]

See evo, I reckon that's a pretty arrogant statement in itself - "that the truly rational may only be 1 or 2%", which implies that you are one of those 1 or 2% and the rest of us are, using your claim, therefore irrational.

Not necessarily.I succumb to belief in luck myself sometimes.I might not even be in that 1 or 2 %,but it wont be for a lack of trying.

If you consider that is arrogant,again theres not much i can do about it.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

Whilst it may imply that, (and I believe that God's existence is surer than that of gravity as He will be here forever but with gravity, who knows?), the point of my analogy was that disbelief in something does not negate its reality. You surely must agree with this?

I believe the highlighted quote above sums up the level of irrationality that religion can foster. It is no wonder that such absolute irrational belief can lead to the justification of otherwise unconscionable acts (not specifically in your case Jay, but in others that share your zeal).

As for your analogy.....I agree, but nor does belief in something make it real (even if that belief is absolute).

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

Wishful thinking must be the powerful urge man possess.How else can you explain the vaste majority of the world believing in the supernatural, or afterlife.

Even many atheists believe in the power of astrology or luck, or some other irrational types of belief.

I reckon the truly rational may only be 1 or 2%.Amazing really.

I don't know if it is possible for any human to be perfectly rational all the time....that would require the ability to measure all our sensory inputs against our accumulated knowledge, a seemingly impossible task.

The difference, as you rightly point out, is that you recognise this fact and make a concerted effort to avoid irrational thought processes and decision making, whereas many others do not. The cognitive dissonance in some of these individuals is mind blowing in some cases.

 

[evo]

I don't know if it is possible for any human to be perfectly rational all the time....that would require the ability to measure all our sensory inputs against our accumulated knowledge, a seemingly impossible task

I suspect it's a function of emotional response to incoming dating.Freud would describe it as ego.Thats why the Eastern sages always talk of the annihilation of ego as being the main goal.

Theres certainly many people throughout history who have attempted define reason in philosophy,thats what the study of epistemology is.Kant,Wittgenstein,more recently Quinne and Dennet come to mind.

Clearly there are many in the science fields who attempt to be rational as much as possible at all times.People like Einstein and Stephen Hawking for example.But even Einstein spent an innordinate amount of time trying to divine a 'theory of everything' which with the benefit of hindsight now appears fairly irrational.

The Dali Lama is probably someone I would consider highly rational,but even he believes he is a reincarnation of the former Lama.So who knows,maybe no-one is.

The difference, as you rightly point out, is that you recognise this fact and make a concerted effort to avoid irrational thought processes and decision making, whereas many others do not. The cognitive dissonance in some of these individuals is mind blowing in some cases.

Yeah cognative dissonance is the best scientific explaination of it I've seen.

 

[Tiger74]

See evo, I reckon that's a pretty arrogant statement in itself - "that the truly rational may only be 1 or 2%", which implies that you are one of those 1 or 2% and the rest of us are, using your claim, therefore irrational.

Actually Jay, I think what Evo said is right. The definition of rational is:

adjective
1 rational

having its source in or being guided by the intellect (distinguished from experience or emotion); "a rational analysis"

2 intellectual, rational, noetic

of or associated with or requiring the use of the mind; "intellectual problems"; "the triumph of the rational over the animal side of man"

3 rational

consistent with or based on or using reason; "rational behavior"; "a process of rational inference"; "rational thought"

Given the whole point of religion is having faith in something without evidence or proof. If we were to be completely intellectual about faith full stop, there is not enough evidence for any one to be proven absolutely right at this stage, with a lot of conflicting claims and insufficient evidence. Even for the "Big Bang" theory, there is still a lack of evidence to be able to say, hand on heart, that we have proven this to be 100% right.

As such, if you are being strictly rational about the whole issue, I think the answer is to shrug your shoulders and say "I don't know because I have insufficient data to make a proper informed decision". The fact however the majority of the world has made this decision however based upon a faith or theory does not make their decision irrational, it just means that they have made it on faith and not for intellectual reasons.

For the record, I think everyone here falls in this basket, including the athiests, as we all have made decisions on what we think is right based upon faith, gut feel, or our own assessment based upon the limited data. We all have made calls which require a leap of faith, and this is not rational.