Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-18-2019 10:24 PM
631 online now:
edge, Jon, Louis Morelli, messenjaH of oNe (4 members, 627 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 856,976 Year: 12,012/19,786 Month: 1,793/2,641 Week: 302/708 Day: 77/52 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1516171819
20
Author Topic:   Why Are Christians Afraid To Doubt?
CTD
Member (Idle past 4064 days)
Posts: 253
Joined: 03-11-2007


Message 286 of 300 (393250)
04-04-2007 2:05 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by crashfrog
04-03-2007 1:20 PM


It's now time for you to present some in favor of it, or else this discussion is pretty much over.

I confess there is no evidence which circular reasoning cannot reject. End of discussion.

crashfrog writes:
I've never asserted that the martyrs weren't sincere. But their sincerity is not evidence in favor of the veracity of their views. It's only evidence of the incredible power of religion to deceive.

Fine. Have you any plausible scenario by which the martyrs who testified to the resurrection of Jesus were deceived? If so, you're welcome to submit it. If not, please say so.

It's not hard to get people to believe things they know aren't true; a lot of people will do it just because everybody else is.

My observations give me no evidence with which I might honestly dispute this statement.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by crashfrog, posted 04-03-2007 1:20 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by Larni, posted 04-04-2007 3:47 AM CTD has not yet responded
 Message 293 by crashfrog, posted 04-04-2007 10:14 AM CTD has not yet responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3984
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 287 of 300 (393257)
04-04-2007 3:28 AM
Reply to: Message 282 by CTD
04-04-2007 12:47 AM


Re: Logic ain't all that
CTD writes:

"Logic is not a tool which can guarantee perfect results". Would that be a better way to put it?

You are right, it is not a tool to guarentee perfect results: nothing can.

'Intuition' is so prone to error it's not even funny. If an answer is based on intuition all kinds of bias (observer bias for starters) will creep in and confound ones conclusions.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by CTD, posted 04-04-2007 12:47 AM CTD has not yet responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3984
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 288 of 300 (393258)
04-04-2007 3:35 AM
Reply to: Message 284 by anastasia
04-04-2007 1:06 AM


ana writes:

There is that other possibility that you are wrong. There is that possibility that the words of God are living right under your nose.

But that possibility is vanishingly small and getting smaller every day.

ana writes:

Anyway, water to wine...that would sound to anyone living a few centuries ago much more plausible than would evolution of species and a big bang, complete with life forming from non-life. Much more plausible than landing on the moon. What is the big deal about making water into another liquid? What is so ridiculous about being swallowed by a whale? There are much stranger things that happen every day.

This is because we know so much more about the world since we stopped saying 'goddidit'. We learnt to doubt what we were taught and found conscistantly and increasingly more accurate answers.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by anastasia, posted 04-04-2007 1:06 AM anastasia has not yet responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3984
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 289 of 300 (393259)
04-04-2007 3:35 AM
Reply to: Message 284 by anastasia
04-04-2007 1:06 AM


ana writes:

There is that other possibility that you are wrong. There is that possibility that the words of God are living right under your nose.

But that possibility is vanishingly small and getting smaller every day.

ana writes:

Anyway, water to wine...that would sound to anyone living a few centuries ago much more plausible than would evolution of species and a big bang, complete with life forming from non-life. Much more plausible than landing on the moon. What is the big deal about making water into another liquid? What is so ridiculous about being swallowed by a whale? There are much stranger things that happen every day.

This is because we know so much more about the world since we stopped saying 'goddidit'. We learnt to doubt what we were taught and found conscistantly and increasingly more accurate answers.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by anastasia, posted 04-04-2007 1:06 AM anastasia has not yet responded

  
CTD
Member (Idle past 4064 days)
Posts: 253
Joined: 03-11-2007


Message 290 of 300 (393260)
04-04-2007 3:44 AM
Reply to: Message 268 by anastasia
04-03-2007 2:27 PM


crashfrog wrote:
11,000 individual Christian denominations worldwide, that differ on every conceivable doctrinal point. And that doesn't even include para-Christian traditions.

anastasia responds:
Sure, 11,000 sects that believe in the God of the OT who revealed himself via Christ for the good of mankind. You are being obstinate, and exactly what I told you. You are not willing to see another person's perspective.

I think what crashfrog proposes is that if a liar managed to infiltrate a Christian church, it invalidates Christian beliefs. Or if a liar wrote a fake Bible, it invalidates the true Bible. Or if a liar merely formed his own belief system, and called himself a Christian.

Maybe it would take more than one. Maybe a handful. I was trying to help clarify the situation; but I guess we'll have to wait for crashfrog to give us a logical number. And maybe some reasoning to back up this contention.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by anastasia, posted 04-03-2007 2:27 PM anastasia has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by ringo, posted 04-04-2007 5:04 AM CTD has not yet responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3984
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 291 of 300 (393261)
04-04-2007 3:47 AM
Reply to: Message 286 by CTD
04-04-2007 2:05 AM


CTD writes:

Have you any plausible scenario by which the martyrs who testified to the resurrection of Jesus were deceived? If so, you're welcome to submit it.

They were delusional. I'v met people who believe they have to keep their hand on their head at all times or their head will fall off.

I'v met people who attempted suicide because of what they believed was true.

We've all read about cults who do kill themselves because of what they believe to be true.

And it's all bollocks you know.

It's all a brain malfunction, an attribution error and an inability to disconfirm erroneous perceptual information.

Why do you think paranoid schizophrenics sincerely beleive they are being victimised? Are they right?

No, they are not.

The brain can do some wonderful things but it can also fuck up in a catastrophic, terminal way; I present your martrys.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by CTD, posted 04-04-2007 2:05 AM CTD has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 16824
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 292 of 300 (393267)
04-04-2007 5:04 AM
Reply to: Message 290 by CTD
04-04-2007 3:44 AM


CTD writes:

Or if a liar wrote a fake Bible, it invalidates the true Bible.

I think the point here is that you have no way of knowing what the "true" Bible is. Any or all of the available versions might have been altered - knowingly or unknowingly - by liars or fools.

To believe that that could not have happened is the height of credulity. That's why everything has to be examined.


Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by CTD, posted 04-04-2007 3:44 AM CTD has not yet responded

crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 293 of 300 (393303)
04-04-2007 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 286 by CTD
04-04-2007 2:05 AM


I confess there is no evidence which circular reasoning cannot reject.

I don't know what you're talking about. You seem to have mistaken my reasonable skepticism for complete intractability. Please, don't confuse the complete impotence of your arguments with some failure to be reasonable on my part.

Have you any plausible scenario by which the martyrs who testified to the resurrection of Jesus were deceived?

Sure. They belonged to a religion based entirely on falsehoods, and only believed because everybody else they knew believed. (Go back to the Asch conformity experiments.)

It's not like there are any corroborated eyewitnesses to the resurrection. Indeed, it's all but impossible to say that many of these martyrs actually existed.

My observations give me no evidence with which I might honestly dispute this statement.

But, of course, you'll go on believing anyway, long after the rational basis for belief has fallen out from underneath you. And I'm the unreasonable one. Got it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by CTD, posted 04-04-2007 2:05 AM CTD has not yet responded

anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 294 of 300 (393322)
04-04-2007 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 285 by crashfrog
04-04-2007 1:13 AM


crashfrog writes:

Since they can't be discerned, they clearly weren't preserved.

Don't assume that everyone has your lack of discernment.

You're telling me that God made it so that it did; but clearly he didn't, because at the bottom of the pyramid (where we are) we've got thousands of different messages. If he had preserved his message, it would have been preserved in every telling. Therefore everyone at the bottom of the pyramid would have recieved the same message, because God preserved it at every step.

Why? Why should your woulda coulda's have anything to do with what God does? Your intuition is not going to solve anything either. No one says that God has to preserve a message in every telling. He only has to preserve it once for it to be so. Besides, the 'Telephone' scenerio doesn't fit very well with Christian history anyway. You would have a picture where there was a pyramid game, the RCC and the Jewish people, a few others have been 'playing' the longest, and the vast majority of these other sects created a new message and started their own games. They are hoping that they have it right by accident.

The honest and best way to 'play' is to do the good old Bible studies, the research into tradition, to look and compare through the ages in the way that PD and others will do.

She will take the concept of 'surrender to God' as it has developed through the ages, and match it up to the Bible. If it fits, it does. The Bible conversely is 'fitted' to history. These are the things that Christians do every day. The purpose of this thread is to ask them what they do when they doubt that things 'match', and whether this negates their faith or negates reality for them.

Your table example is not very mysterious. Because of the side view of the table, which includes a view of the thickness in both cases, one table will appear longer or wider. It is an optical illusion. It needs to go in a puzzle book, not a science class. Well, you can use it for either. Just remember that people who do puzzles, architects, artists, and such, are not going to be 'fooled'. The folks who are afraid to doubt their own conclusion even if they find out it is incorrect, are the brunt of this thread. We are a long way from there in Christianity. We have only to deal with YEC's and that ilk as far as 'proof' goes.

Also, proving no message from God does not negate God. Ask the deists.

No, there's not. People don't change water into wine, and people don't ride around in whales. Those things don't happen.

So, maybe Jesus was a magician. That is just one direction doubt can go in.

Well, here's an idea. Instead of calling me names, why don't you try defending those folks by providing evidence that they're correct? That's usually how we do things around here. Not that it hasn't been fun, telling you what words mean in plain English and showing you line drawings.

Calling you pessimistic is calling you a name? You called me full of 'contrarianism'! You tell me I have my fingers in my ears and eyes! Do you see me getting upset? If you want to tell me in grammatical language, (you know, with verbs and pronouns and adverbs and all of that), how my sentence was incorrect, I am not against learning. While you're at it, fix my placement of commas. :)

If I say

"We can not begin the party, because all (guests) have not arrived".

I still don't see the problem. There is no implication that I am standing in an empty room.

It is probably not the best grammar, but you have made me curious anyway.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 285 by crashfrog, posted 04-04-2007 1:13 AM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by crashfrog, posted 04-04-2007 1:57 PM anastasia has responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 295 of 300 (393345)
04-04-2007 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 294 by anastasia
04-04-2007 12:32 PM


Don't assume that everyone has your lack of discernment.

With 11,000 individual Christian denominations? I don't have to assume anything. It's obvious that nobody can correctly discern the message.

Why should your woulda coulda's have anything to do with what God does?

Ah, right. "God works in ways we can't understand."

Funny, though - that didn't seem to stop either you or CTD from purporting to know exactly what God set out to do and how he did it. How come the argument from ineffability is only trotted out to oppose my arguments? How come God's ineffability doesn't stimulate a little humility on your part? When it comes to God and his messages, you seem to be of the opinion that you know perfectly what God would and wouldn't do.

You would have a picture where there was a pyramid game, the RCC and the Jewish people, a few others have been 'playing' the longest, and the vast majority of these other sects created a new message and started their own games. They are hoping that they have it right by accident.

Sure. But the basic principle of Telephone is sound. (And each of the conditions you mention only makes it worse for you.) Telephone works because of the weakness of the basic Telephone duple - I speak a message that you hear. But you don't hear it quite the way I spoke it, and you don't quite remember it the way that you heard it.

You could do it in writing, too, if each element in the chain or pyramid had to re-write the original message.

As, you know, they had to do before the days of printing presses and photocopies. Telephone definitely applies to what we're talking about.

We are a long way from there in Christianity.

Right, right. Because you say so. Of course, from what I can see - as an ex-Christian - that's exactly where you are. Caught up in a "faith-based illusion."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by anastasia, posted 04-04-2007 12:32 PM anastasia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by anastasia, posted 04-04-2007 2:24 PM crashfrog has responded

anastasia
Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 296 of 300 (393349)
04-04-2007 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 295 by crashfrog
04-04-2007 1:57 PM


crashfrog writes:

Funny, though - that didn't seem to stop either you or CTD from purporting to know exactly what God set out to do and how he did it. How come the argument from ineffability is only trotted out to oppose my arguments? How come God's ineffability doesn't stimulate a little humility on your part? When it comes to God and his messages, you seem to be of the opinion that you know perfectly what God would and wouldn't do.

No, no. I am not trying to know anything. It just gets boring to hear how 'God can't be real' because of YOUR personal logic. You must feel the same way when you hear someone say 'God MUST be real because of MY personal logic'. Every 'case' that is presented is just one possibility amoung many. There is no valid reason to say God needs to preserve 5 million copies of one message. There is no reason to say He can't, or He did, or He should, do anything. Thus all that we speak on this matter is personal opinion. It is not about who is right, but about accepting the possibility that we are wrong. I only try to state the possibilities fairly. I believe it is fair to note that there is no compelling reason to rule out a message.

Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by crashfrog, posted 04-04-2007 1:57 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by crashfrog, posted 04-04-2007 2:41 PM anastasia has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 297 of 300 (393352)
04-04-2007 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 296 by anastasia
04-04-2007 2:24 PM


It just gets boring to hear how 'God can't be real' because of YOUR personal logic.

You keep acting like this is all in my head, but the things I've told you are real facts about the world you live in. If you don't believe that there are so many translations of the Bible, go to a bookstore and see for yourself. If you don't believe that there are so many different denominations, look it up yourself.

If you don't believe me when I say that there's almost nothing that they have in common, then read about what they believe. These aren't things I'm making up in my head.

You must feel the same way when you hear someone say 'God MUST be real because of MY personal logic'.

Except then I show them the evidence that suggests that they're wrong. I listen to their logic and try to show them the flaws. And when, inevitably, they throw their hands up and tell me they were mistaken to think they could justify their faith with logic, I leave them alone. I can't reason someone out of a belief they don't think is reasonable.

Of course, even then I can't win, because Phat rolls up in here to tell me what an asshole I am for thinking he's unreasonable. And then the circle goes around again.

What are you doing, though? Telling me it's all in my head? I've gone out and sought out the facts that corroborate my views. What have you done besides imply that I'm making it all up? Nothing that I can see.

It is not about who is right, but about accepting the possibility that we are wrong.

I've accepted that possibility, and given you ample opportunity to show that I am with the production of evidence that supports your view. You've done nothing but ignore my view and my evidence, and certainly provided none of your own. Do you really think, when one side has evidence and the other is dissembling, that it's unreasonable for spectators to arrive at a conclusion about who is most likely right and wrong?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 296 by anastasia, posted 04-04-2007 2:24 PM anastasia has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 298 by ICANT, posted 04-04-2007 6:24 PM crashfrog has responded

ICANT
Member (Idle past 23 days)
Posts: 6187
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 298 of 300 (393385)
04-04-2007 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 297 by crashfrog
04-04-2007 2:41 PM


Re-Numbers
If you don't believe that there are so many different denominations, look it up yourself.

I did my source says 1,200 denomintions in the US and worldwide 34,000 seprate Christian groups.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/christ7.htm

This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by crashfrog, posted 04-04-2007 2:41 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 299 by crashfrog, posted 04-04-2007 7:22 PM ICANT has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 299 of 300 (393387)
04-04-2007 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 298 by ICANT
04-04-2007 6:24 PM


Re: Re-Numbers
I did my source says 1,200 denomintions in the US and worldwide 34,000 seprate Christian groups.

Thanks for another data point. The counts do vary widely, largely since there are so many "micro-denominations" that are difficult to track in surveys.

Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 298 by ICANT, posted 04-04-2007 6:24 PM ICANT has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3886
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 300 of 300 (393402)
04-04-2007 10:09 PM


300 messages - Closing time
If there's something in this topic that you think merits further discussion, propose a new topic.

Adminnemooseus


New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, Assistance w/ Forum Formatting, Proposed New (Great Debate) Topics, Official Invitations to Online Chat@EvC


  
RewPrev1
...
1516171819
20
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019