Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 09-22-2018, 01:59 AM
Ashtura Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,561
I love magic. I've dabbled in magic myself, but have also seen many tricks that I can't explain. Some I have gone to great lengths to try to figure out and succeeded, and some I haven't. I suppose that if I were a bit less educated and incurious, and a magician advertised himself as a miracle worker instead of an entertainer, I could probably be convinced he was performing miracles.

My point being is I don't think something being unexplainable makes it miraculous. Even if not a single person in the world could explain it. There are many things that we could not explain and now can, things we do not understand and will figure out, and things we do not understand and may never understand because the human mind isn't capable of understanding it.

Doesn't make it miraculous.
  #202  
Old 09-22-2018, 05:34 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,963
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike View Post
The universe can be studied and understood. It should be obvious that there is a source.
Should it? The testable implications of quantum theory readily challenge very obvious beliefs on a daily basis.

It is not obvious at all that the universe needs a source. It is asserted without evidence that this is the case and even worse it is asserted by theists that this source, very conveniently, does not itself need a source.
Complete speculation of course, assuming a creator from which it can all start. The need for a "creator creator" is hand-waved away by simply defining it that way. That's what we call "marking your own homework" Aquinas had a crack at this but his thoughts were as inadequate and circular as anything before or since.

If everything needs a source, then your creator needs a source and you are in infinite regress. Turtles all the way down.

If you declare, by fiat, that you can stop that regress at a certain point and call it "god" then on what basis and what evidence do you do that?

Even then, how can you say it is a single entity? If you have the ability for one eternal entity why not two, three or a billion?

And why even claim an eternal entity anyway. This must necessarily be a complicated thing who then goes on to create a universe from simple beginnings. How much less complicated is it to allow the same properties of eternal existence to those simple, unconscious elemental particles or energies. It requires far less explanation, provides exactly the same starting conditions and is even more in accordance with the world as we see it because it does away with the need to invent an omnipotent, omnipresent, eternal, conscious, complicated, capricious and ineffable entity who provides no evidence for their existence and is superfluous to the working of the universe. As Laplace said, it just works without that assumption.

To me, this all feels like special pleading and the god of the gaps. The theists place their god where science cannot go because then they simply cannot lose.
You'll note that as the explanatory power of science increases god becomes less and less involved in the actual, physical world. He never used to move in mysterious ways, he brought forth floods, plagues, talking shrubbery, pillars of salt, aquatic pedestrians, resurrections, food tampering etc. but has been curiously silent in a period where analytical techniques might actually be able to give weight to these "miracles".

Last edited by Novelty Bobble; 09-22-2018 at 05:36 AM.
  #203  
Old 09-22-2018, 04:32 PM
Measure for Measure's Avatar
Measure for Measure Measure for Measure is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Twitter: @MeasureMeasure
Posts: 14,025
I've seen this movie before

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
Back in the 60 or 70s, there was a famous mentalism act in the UK known as the Piddingtons who performed some extraordinary well-known acts for the BBC. In the story of their act, the man, Sidney, would say that he could read or send information with his wife, Lesley. She would be miles away, in an airplane, underwater, etc....

If you ask a magician how this was done, they'll say that they don't know. It's a mystery. But at the same time, they're not telling you that real magic happened. They just don't know, because there are multiple ways that the feat could be performed and they don't know which specific ones were used. Many of them could probably recreate the exact same result, but that wouldn't be evidence that that's what actually happened.

So should we say that it may have actually been real telepathy? Or should we say that skepticism should reign supreme - particularly when there are plausible explanations for the mystery?
We should follow the procedure of the now terminated Randi $1 million dollar challenge. I've never seen a claim of a religious miracle (of the 2nd type, defined in post 93) that stands up to scrutiny. Including Fatima. The Catholic Church is wise to emphasize faith over proof.
  #204  
Old 09-22-2018, 04:50 PM
road_lobo road_lobo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Behind you
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim B. View Post
If any one miracle could be proven, even just shown to be without easy explanation, would that be proof of God? Or maybe that is a bit too strong.
How does proof of any one miracle constitute proof of monotheism, and Christian monotheism in particular?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim B. View Post
If you are an atheist. And if something the Catholic church offers as a miracle, could at least be proven to be without immediate explanation, would that be enough to make you question your staunchly held beliefs?
There is a humdrum, everyday thing that makes atheists question their staunchly held beliefs. It's called death.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim B. View Post
there is a lot in this world that defies explanation. How do you deal with that, if you are atheist (for example)?
I accept that I will never have a rational explanation for most phenomena.
  #205  
Old 09-22-2018, 06:12 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 20,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Measure for Measure View Post
We should follow the procedure of the now terminated Randi $1 million dollar challenge. I've never seen a claim of a religious miracle (of the 2nd type, defined in post 93) that stands up to scrutiny. Including Fatima. The Catholic Church is wise to emphasize faith over proof.
The Piddingtons didn't claim to be anything but a magic act, I should say. Though, during their shows they would present it as though it was telepathy and end the show saying, "Is it real? You be the judge."
  #206  
Old 09-22-2018, 06:27 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,069
I have to notice that even EscAlaMike reports that the miracles Jim B. reported are not important to have faith or useful as evidence of God.

What does the OP says now?
  #207  
Old 09-22-2018, 07:19 PM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 15,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by road_lobo View Post
I accept that I will never have a rational explanation for most phenomena.
This is a very important point. Consider, something bizarre and inexplicable happens.
atheist: Huh. I wonder what caused that.
believer: Isn't god wonderful!
At this point, the believer is done with whatever that was, other than perhaps going to the sanctuary to adulate whatsoever it is they believe in.

The atheist, on the other hand, has a question, which they might ponder or might even start investigating in order to figure out just what the fuck that was about.

Personally, I find questions interesting – often more interesting than answers. It is true that belief does not always inhibit discovery/learning, but for the times that it does, I see that as possibly tragic. And I am sure that I will end my days will boatloads of unanswered questions, but I will treasure them far more than I would bland pat answers.
  #208  
Old 09-22-2018, 09:06 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 58,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
I have to notice that even EscAlaMike reports that the miracles Jim B. reported are not important to have faith or useful as evidence of God.
And I have to notice that this attitude from the Catholic church came after investigatory questions started being asked about said miracles.
  #209  
Old 09-23-2018, 02:18 PM
furryman's Avatar
furryman furryman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Collinwood, Collinsport
Posts: 3,693
If god proved he existed then everybody would be bothering him all the time. As much as I dislike God not answering my prayers he's probably too busy.
  #210  
Old 09-23-2018, 03:00 PM
Musicat Musicat is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sturgeon Bay, WI USA
Posts: 20,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by furryman View Post
If god proved he existed then everybody would be bothering him all the time. As much as I dislike God not answering my prayers he's probably too busy.
You mean the Omnipotent One has limited bandwidth? Who knew? That's gotta be in the Bible somewhere. Probably his ISP is throttling him for abusing his godly privilege.
  #211  
Old 09-23-2018, 04:27 PM
simster simster is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by furryman View Post
If god proved he existed then everybody would be bothering him all the time. As much as I dislike God not answering my prayers he's probably too busy.
yeah, and suddenly everybody's favorite team wins, no more losers, no more death, hurricanes stop, cancer is gone, etc.
  #212  
Old 09-23-2018, 06:30 PM
tomndebb tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 40,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
And I have to notice that this attitude from the Catholic church came after investigatory questions started being asked about said miracles.
No, it did not. The church has reacted with scepticism and outright debunking of "miracles" for hundreds of years. The Shroud of Turin was debunked by a local bishop in 1390 after being publicly displayed between 1353 and 1357.

The church has certainly greeted many "miracles" with an inordinate credulity, but it is not accurate to say that it only began to question miracles after science began to challenge them.
  #213  
Old 09-23-2018, 06:48 PM
TonySinclair TonySinclair is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by naita View Post
What happened when Moses parted the Red sea? I don't know, I think he probably never did.
Did Joseph Smith and others actually handle the book of Mormon on gold plates? I don't know, but I think they probably didn't.
Did Muhammad get someones horse to sink into the ground, and then rescue the guy through prayer? I don't know, but I think probably not.
Are people actually being abducted by UFOs? I don't know, but I think probably not.
Interesting that for most of the late 20th century, you couldn't swing a cat without hitting someone who had seen a UFO. Now that everybody has a camera in his cell phone, I can't remember the last time I've heard of a sighting.

It's kind of like how almost everywhere Jesus went, there were people possessed by demons that he had to cast out. Now that we understand mental illness a little better, there don't seem to be any more demons.

So in answer to the OP, yes, there are phenomena we don't understand. But if you want me to believe in an omnipotent, omnipresent God, he has to do something that demonstrated omnipotence and omnipresence --- having every leaf on the tree in my back yard displaying a message from him would be a good start. Having something completely under the control of priests do something that happens in my kitchen every day, like lard liquefying, would not impress me.
  #214  
Old 09-23-2018, 07:38 PM
TonySinclair TonySinclair is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomndebb View Post
No, it did not. The church has reacted with scepticism and outright debunking of "miracles" for hundreds of years. The Shroud of Turin was debunked by a local bishop in 1390 after being publicly displayed between 1353 and 1357.
No, it wasn't. A local bishop wrote to the Pope and expressed his opinion that it was a forgery, but the Church itself never proclaimed it as such, and several recent Popes, including St. John Paul II, have said or implied it was genuine. They weren't speaking ex cathedra, but they can't be unaware of how much weight their considered opinion carries.

Moreover, it is extremely disingenuous to imply that the overall attitude of the Church toward miracles was skeptical. One of the main reasons there is a Protestant church today is because the Catholic Church was in the business of selling miracles (indulgences) like merchandise. The Church still conducts exorcisms. And it is a fundamental tenet that a miracle occurs during every mass when the wafer and wine are transubstantiated into flesh and blood.
  #215  
Old 09-23-2018, 09:02 PM
tomndebb tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 40,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySinclair View Post
No, it wasn't. A local bishop wrote to the Pope and expressed his opinion that it was a forgery, but the Church itself never proclaimed it as such, and several recent Popes, including St. John Paul II, have said or implied it was genuine. They weren't speaking ex cathedra, but they can't be unaware of how much weight their considered opinion carries.

Moreover, it is extremely disingenuous to imply that the overall attitude of the Church toward miracles was skeptical. One of the main reasons there is a Protestant church today is because the Catholic Church was in the business of selling miracles (indulgences) like merchandise. The Church still conducts exorcisms. And it is a fundamental tenet that a miracle occurs during every mass when the wafer and wine are transubstantiated into flesh and blood.
The church never proclaimed that the shroud was genuine, either. The statements of recent popes has been that it is an object that inspires belief in the passion, but without ever claiming that it is "real." JPII's last quoted cryptic statement comes closest to you claim, although I would be interested is seeing the exact exchange with the reporters. A relic does not have to be authentic; it needs only be old and inspiring.

It might have been disingenuous to claim what you said, but that is not what I said.
The church has displayed credulity, as I noted, but I was responding to Czarcams's implication that the church never expressed skepticism until challenged by science, which is not accurate. The church may not have expressed your level of skepticism for every event, but it also did not credulously embrace every event. You may have gotten who was being disingenuous a bit wrong.
  #216  
Old 09-23-2018, 10:46 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,145
"An excuse is worse and more terrible than a lie, for an excuse is a lie guarded."

— Pope John Paul II
  #217  
Old 09-24-2018, 01:03 AM
DragonAsh DragonAsh is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,435
I find it odd that he seems to think the fact that Christianity required a man-made institution to spread is a vote in favor for his fairy tale. Other religions have lasted far longer without such a deeply entrenched, centralized man-made institution.
Why would you prefer a deity that required a bureaucracy to keep it afloat?
__________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think hiring a pro to do the job is expensive, wait until you hire an amateur...

Last edited by DragonAsh; 09-24-2018 at 01:03 AM.
  #218  
Old 09-24-2018, 12:01 PM
Jackmannii Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 30,495
You gotta believe.
  #219  
Old 09-24-2018, 05:35 PM
begbert2 begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 11,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySinclair View Post
So in answer to the OP, yes, there are phenomena we don't understand. But if you want me to believe in an omnipotent, omnipresent God, he has to do something that demonstrated omnipotence and omnipresence --- having every leaf on the tree in my back yard displaying a message from him would be a good start. Having something completely under the control of priests do something that happens in my kitchen every day, like lard liquefying, would not impress me.
The fact that the deity allegedly could do impressive things like parting seas and pillars of fire and causing a zombie apocalypse actually casts doubt on the namby-pamby miracles we do see. If the deity in question was inclined to do miracles to prove its existence, why does it restrict itself to things that are unconvincing? Because he wants us to rely on faith? If he wants us to rely on faith, why do miracles at all?
  #220  
Old 09-24-2018, 08:42 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
The fact that the deity allegedly could do impressive things like parting seas and pillars of fire and causing a zombie apocalypse actually casts doubt on the namby-pamby miracles we do see. If the deity in question was inclined to do miracles to prove its existence, why does it restrict itself to things that are unconvincing? Because he wants us to rely on faith? If he wants us to rely on faith, why do miracles at all?
Personally I blame the rise of the automobile

Quote:
And the Lord was with Judah; and he drove out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.
Judges 1:19
  #221  
Old 09-24-2018, 09:23 PM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 15,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
If he wants us to rely on faith, why do miracles at all?
Faith is for the faithful. There are unbelievers: the miracles are and effort to convince them. But, you see, if the miracles are too good, it is just too easy to become faithful. The deity needs people with high-quality faith. If you get believers whose faith is flawed, as you would if you played it up too much, your efforts end up being counter-productive.
  #222  
Old 09-25-2018, 06:02 AM
DragonAsh DragonAsh is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,435
So you have to have the right kind of faith, in just the right amount?

Gotcha.
__________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think hiring a pro to do the job is expensive, wait until you hire an amateur...
  #223  
Old 09-25-2018, 09:11 AM
simster simster is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonAsh View Post
So you have to have the right kind of faith, in just the right amount?

Gotcha.
Doesn't take much -



Quote:
Originally Posted by JESUS @ Matthew 17:20 (NIV)
He replied, “Because you have so little faith. Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.”
So, apparently having even a 'little' faith is very poweful - but no one actually has even that much.

Last edited by simster; 09-25-2018 at 09:13 AM. Reason: Must be like midichlorians.
  #224  
Old 09-25-2018, 11:23 AM
Ann Hedonia's Avatar
Ann Hedonia Ann Hedonia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,880
I think that if there was a God that had the power to materially affect objects and that God chose to use his power by performing obscure parlor tricks rather than doing good on Earth.......well, that’s not a God I want to associate with.
  #225  
Old 09-25-2018, 03:57 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 44,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by furryman View Post
If god proved he existed then everybody would be bothering him all the time. As much as I dislike God not answering my prayers he's probably too busy.
He answers your prayers. As The Onion headline says, he says "no."
Perhaps you didn't bribe him well enough. We know from the Bible that God takes bribes.
  #226  
Old 09-25-2018, 04:37 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 44,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike View Post
What if the rational and conscious being that created all matter and is the essense of good (the one we call God) decided to make himself known to humanity.

He decided to make himself known by becoming a human himself and living among us in a particular place and at a particular time. Because he is good, he chose the woman who he wanted to be his mother, and decided to preserve her from sin. He also decided that she would remain a virgin even though she would be pregnant and give birth. This child was born and lived a life of humility and service. He taught good things, and established a perpetual institution called The Church for the purpose of dispensing salvation to all people for all time. He then suffered a criminal's death. He then unmistakably showed who he was all along by rising from the dead and then ascending into heaven.

That would just be so lame right?
So, God didn't make himself known to Abraham? To Moses? During the Exodus?
You realize the requirement for a virgin birth comes from a mistranslation by the writer of Matthew? There is no such requirement in the Messianic prophecies - then or now.
Do you realize that the belief that God cannot save people directly demeans god?
The Gospel writers, as has been said above, made up stuff to make it look like Jesus met the messianic prophecies. He did not, not even close.
A true Messiah would have lasted more than a week in the big city. If I were an alien and was asked who seemed to be more favored of god, Mohamed or Jesus, Mohamed would win every time.
The Gospel writers thought he was coming back soon. They were wrong.
I am quite aware of how Christians pull random passages out of the Prophets to justify themselves, and ignore the passages that clearly document what the Messiah would be and do. Pitiful, really.
  #227  
Old 09-25-2018, 04:43 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 44,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike View Post

The world is here. We're here. The universe can be studied and understood. It should be obvious that there is a source. Why do we need some voice from the heavens? Why can't God just be humble?
Why does the source have to be an intelligent entity? Why does the source have to have anything to do with the God you believe in? If God made the universe for us, why wait 13 billion years or so for us to show up?
I know that Catholics don't believe the Genesis story as being literal, but why wouldn't god inspire something a bit closer to the truth?
If the universe were created by a deity, it seems more likely that the deity would be one for a distant world that is unimaginably old - and we just evolved accidentally in the universe created for his or her real people.
We can just hope the real god doesn't want to clean up.
  #228  
Old 09-25-2018, 05:16 PM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 15,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
Why does the source have to be an intelligent entity? Why does the source have to have anything to do with the God you believe in? If God made the universe for us, why wait 13 billion years or so for us to show up?
If, as has been suggested elsewhere, the deity is omnipotent, doing stuff is a bit of a challenge: in order to exert power, some other bit of power must be ceded. Hence, the deity must use its omniscient cunning to overcome its own omnipotence. Things may not be so straightforward for a superbeing.

Quote:
I know that Catholics don't believe the Genesis story as being literal, but why wouldn't god inspire something a bit closer to the truth?
The language of a deity is almost certainly different from the language of mortals. The anointed ones had to figure out how to express what they heard from the holy voice. Translation errors are inevitable, even in the very first draft. Later scribes had to adjust the holy writ in order for it to make sense in their language and culture. And subsequent translations had to make additional accomodations, ad infinitum.

Quote:
If the universe were created by a deity, it seems more likely that the deity would be one for a distant world that is unimaginably old - and we just evolved accidentally in the universe created for his or her real people.
We can just hope the real god doesn't want to clean up.
oopsie
  #229  
Old 09-25-2018, 05:33 PM
Bryan Ekers's Avatar
Bryan Ekers Bryan Ekers is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 58,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
If the universe were created by a deity, it seems more likely that the deity would be one for a distant world that is unimaginably old - and we just evolved accidentally in the universe created for his or her real people.
Heck, based on the available evidence, anyone using the "fine tuning" argument should be told that the universe looks fine-tuned for the existence of cats, and that humans are just here to feed and care for cats.
__________________
Don't worry about the end of Inception. We have top men working on it right now. Top. Men.
  #230  
Old 09-25-2018, 05:44 PM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 15,072
Based on its reported behavior, one could easily conclude that the prime deity is in fact a cat. This leads to a belief system called “Catheism”.
  #231  
Old 09-25-2018, 06:00 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 44,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschereal View Post
If, as has been suggested elsewhere, the deity is omnipotent, doing stuff is a bit of a challenge: in order to exert power, some other bit of power must be ceded. Hence, the deity must use its omniscient cunning to overcome its own omnipotence. Things may not be so straightforward for a superbeing.
A creator deity doesn't have to be omniscient, so that problem doesn't come up. But 12 billion years? He must sleep in most mornings.

Quote:
The language of a deity is almost certainly different from the language of mortals. The anointed ones had to figure out how to express what they heard from the holy voice. Translation errors are inevitable, even in the very first draft. Later scribes had to adjust the holy writ in order for it to make sense in their language and culture. And subsequent translations had to make additional accomodations, ad infinitum.
Nah, just "it happened a long. long time ago" would do. The Hindus and Buddhists got that right at least.
Anyway, if you use that excuse, all that sin stuff must be misunderstandings also.
  #232  
Old 09-25-2018, 06:26 PM
begbert2 begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 11,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschereal View Post
If, as has been suggested elsewhere, the deity is omnipotent, doing stuff is a bit of a challenge: in order to exert power, some other bit of power must be ceded. Hence, the deity must use its omniscient cunning to overcome its own omnipotence. Things may not be so straightforward for a superbeing.
Your idea and my idea of the word 'omnipotent' apparently mean very different things. My idea of the word is that it means 'omnipotent'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eschereal View Post
The language of a deity is almost certainly different from the language of mortals. The anointed ones had to figure out how to express what they heard from the holy voice. Translation errors are inevitable, even in the very first draft. Later scribes had to adjust the holy writ in order for it to make sense in their language and culture. And subsequent translations had to make additional accomodations, ad infinitum.
It would have helped if the deity was sufficiently omnipotent as to be able to manage not to mumble.
  #233  
Old 09-25-2018, 06:34 PM
DragonAsh DragonAsh is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,435
Quote:
The anointed ones had to figure out how to express what they heard from the holy voice. Translation errors are inevitable, even in the very first draft. Later scribes had to adjust the holy writ in order for it to make sense in their language and culture. And subsequent translations had to make additional accomodations, ad infinitum.
So, you're not following the word of God, you're following the word of men, writing things that you know is incorrect, that they then 'adjust' depending on the whims of the day?

Hmmmmm.
__________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think hiring a pro to do the job is expensive, wait until you hire an amateur...

Last edited by DragonAsh; 09-25-2018 at 06:34 PM.
  #234  
Old 09-25-2018, 06:42 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,145
I think I missed a part of this thread.

Did someone explain why we are suppose to accept the bible as proof of miracles yet we can't evaluate the claims in the book for validity?

The whole thread seems to be focusing on what an existing believer views as credible, wasn't the point to establish it was credible for us non-believers?

Perhaps cliff notes on what is allegory and what is infallible or some numerologist mapping?

Or is it a concept like the trinity where three beings are one, thus monotheistic and not polytheistic but hard to explain why?

As a non-theist I have no reason to doubt that believers believe, as they are...believers.
  #235  
Old 09-25-2018, 10:32 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 44,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonAsh View Post
So, you're not following the word of God, you're following the word of men, writing things that you know is incorrect, that they then 'adjust' depending on the whims of the day?

Hmmmmm.
Better than your typical prophet, who interprets the word of God to mean the suckers ^h^h^h believers should send him money or else stop doing things he finds icky. Or both.
  #236  
Old 09-27-2018, 12:26 AM
Saint Cad Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 12,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by glee View Post
Every single person on the planet believes in gravity.
This guy doesn't.
__________________
If all else fails, try S.C.E. to Aux.
  #237  
Old 09-27-2018, 01:34 AM
tomndebb tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 40,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by glee View Post
Every single person on the planet believes in gravity.
There is no gravity. The world sucks.
  #238  
Old 09-27-2018, 01:48 AM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,145
What if I believe Gravity is a fictitious force?

Am I to be burned at the stake or am I allowed to just start my own sect?

If it involves much more pain than say...a comfy chair I am uhhh....I am "asking for a friend"
  #239  
Old 09-27-2018, 10:10 AM
sbunny8 sbunny8 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Posts: 1,303
Speaking as an atheist...

If I saw something amazing that no one could explain, you'd still have to convince me that it had a supernatural cause. Then convince me that the cause was instigated by a supernatural creature. Then convince me that there is only one such supernatural creature (or that you have correctly identified it amongst all the possible creatures) and you have accurately communicated with it to determine what it wants me to do. Then convince me that doing what this creature wants is the same thing as joining your religion. Do all that and maybe I'll join your religion. Or maybe not.

Last edited by sbunny8; 09-27-2018 at 10:12 AM.
  #240  
Old 09-27-2018, 09:04 PM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 15,072
Faith (belief) is non-rational. Believers do not arrive at their faith through careful thought. It is a feeling, often established through indoctrination from infancy (“suffer the children to come unto me,” the messiah is quoted as having said). You will simply not be convinced into believing, at least by facts. In much the same way, it is profoundly difficult to convince a believer to let go of that feeling, just as it is difficult to convince an addict to put down the needle.
  #241  
Old 09-28-2018, 03:54 PM
EscAlaMike EscAlaMike is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschereal View Post
Believers do not arrive at their faith through careful thought.
This is incredibly condescending and demonstrably false.
  #242  
Old 09-28-2018, 04:07 PM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 15,072
I have first person experience that counters your “demonstrably false” claim. While feelings are not easy to present as evidence, I can attest directly to my statement, and I would be surprised to find no one else who could back me up.

Go ahead, call me a liar again.
  #243  
Old 09-28-2018, 04:11 PM
EscAlaMike EscAlaMike is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschereal View Post
I have first person experience that counters your “demonstrably false” claim. While feelings are not easy to present as evidence, I can attest directly to my statement, and I would be surprised to find no one else who could back me up.

Go ahead, call me a liar again.
Let me just clarify what you meant so that there is no misunderstanding.

By your statement "Believers do not arrive at their faith through careful thought", are you saying that no religious convert thought their decision through carefully? Or are you saying something else?
  #244  
Old 09-28-2018, 04:15 PM
EscAlaMike EscAlaMike is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,085
For the record, I have been falsely accused of calling another poster a liar twice now in this thread. Telling someone that their assertion is wrong is not the same thing as accusing them of intentional deception.
  #245  
Old 09-28-2018, 04:25 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 9,462
I thought of this thread the other day when listening to the radio in the car, and there was a half-hour interview [audio only] with a writer, columnist, and commentator named Mary Elizabeth Williams. She was a life-long Catholic until the day she walked out of the Church. Her position today is that you don't have to belong to the Church to believe in God, and though she still has great admiration for the traditions of the Catholic Church as cultural icons, she rejects its dogmatism and legacy of abuses. It struck me as being very much the way many people I know feel about their formal organized religion, especially Catholics, who tend to become CINOs (Catholics in Name Only).

A good example of that dogmatism was a few years ago in this area when students in public schools (mostly high schools, I think) were setting up clubs called "gay-straight alliances" whose purpose was to counter the bullying of LGBT students (particularly the bullying of gays) by creating a welcoming non-disriminatory social environment and trying to eliminate the stigma associated with this community. The idea was particularly incentivized by a number of tragedies where bullied gay students had been driven to suicide. The idea took off except in the separate Catholic school system, which banned any such student clubs on the grounds that homosexuality was a horrific sin, the work of the devil!

The worst of this was close to a decade ago and while I don't have the articles at hand any more, I remember that not only did the school board issue an outright ban, but a number of local Catholic bishops wrote an editorial supporting the ban and railing about the evils of homosexuality. Here's one article in which a Catholic school board official is quoted as saying, ""We don't have Nazi groups either. Gay-straight alliances are banned because they are not within the teachings of the Catholic Church."

That article was from around the time when the school boards were just on the cusp of changing this policy, being forced by public outcry and changes in the laws to modify their dogmatic positions. Today they've have to totally reverse themselves for those reasons, not the least of which is that such a ban is now illegal. But this is a good example of why people get fed up and leave this sort of dogmatic organized religion.
  #246  
Old 09-28-2018, 05:05 PM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 15,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike View Post
Let me just clarify what you meant so that there is no misunderstanding.

By your statement "Believers do not arrive at their faith through careful thought", are you saying that no religious convert thought their decision through carefully? Or are you saying something else?
Basically, I am saying rational thought is not the foundation of belief. Belief is a feeling. Any careful thought put to the question, such as supports it, is post hoc rationalization.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike View Post
For the record, I have been falsely accused of calling another poster a liar twice now in this thread. Telling someone that their assertion is wrong is not the same thing as accusing them of intentional deception.
You said “demonstrably false”. You offered nothing else in support of that. “Demonstrably false” should be accompanied by a demonstration of how my assertion is invalid and counter to my own personal experiences. If you can convince me that I misunderstood what I experienced, I will concede that you did not call me a liar. Good luck with that.
  #247  
Old 09-28-2018, 05:09 PM
EscAlaMike EscAlaMike is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschereal View Post
You said “demonstrably false”. You offered nothing else in support of that. “Demonstrably false” should be accompanied by a demonstration of how my assertion is invalid and counter to my own personal experiences. If you can convince me that I misunderstood what I experienced, I will concede that you did not call me a liar. Good luck with that.
You made a sweeping generalization. All it would take to disprove your claim is to find one religous convert who came to his belief after careful thought. I submit G.K. Chesterton.

That you may have used careful thought to come to a different conclusion does not make your assertion correct in an absolute sense.
  #248  
Old 09-28-2018, 05:25 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 58,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike View Post
You made a sweeping generalization. All it would take to disprove your claim is to find one religous convert who came to his belief after careful thought. I submit G.K. Chesterton.

That you may have used careful thought to come to a different conclusion does not make your assertion correct in an absolute sense.
Mr. Chesterton was baptized into the Church of England at the age of one month and was raised Anglican. When did he become "a convert after careful thought"?
  #249  
Old 09-28-2018, 05:34 PM
EscAlaMike EscAlaMike is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Mr. Chesterton was baptized into the Church of England at the age of one month and was raised Anglican. When did he become "a convert after careful thought"?
It's quite a stretch to say that he was raised Anglican. His upbringing was not religious and he practiced neo-paganism as a young man.
  #250  
Old 09-28-2018, 05:41 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 58,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike View Post
It's quite a stretch to say that he was raised Anglican. His upbringing was not religious and he practiced neo-paganism as a young man.
Baptized and raised in the faith, strayed a bit, then went back to the faith.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:42 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017