Being logical is a great asset. At least I believe it is. It assists me with doing my job. It helps me explain my values. Logic is a great asset in most discussions. However, being the only non-Christian in my family . . . using logic creates a very interesting religious conversation.
Obviously religion is based on faith. Interestingly, there are plenty of books using logical scientific arguments to support the faith. There is nothing wrong with that. Some people need that. Some people use it as a tool to persuade nonbelievers. I have nothing against that. Logic is a tool . . . use it.
Recently, my family (myself included) was having a religious discussion. My brother, also being very logical, was discussing the Big Bang theory (BBT). The proof does not exist for the Big Bang theory. The proof also does not exist for God. So, it was a good discussion.
It seems that many (not so much the case with my family) feel that if you give any credit to the evidence for the BBT, then you are being foolhardy. Obviously, the same could be said about religion. "Ahhhhh . . . but it's about faith." I guess that faith means that you are no longer foolhardy.
No, I am not calling those with faith foolhardy; just pointing out the flaw in the argument. In fact, I make it a point in every religious discussion I have to note that I do not discourage anyone for having faith in a religious system which teaches positive values. It's only logical to promote (or at least not demote) any method for teaching good morals to ourselves and fellow humankind.
Little pieces of my thoughts while I sit here, my mind constantly churning.
Welcome
Welcome to LMC! I have off-and-on had LMC on my old web page. It has come and go as postings of philosophy and rants. While you look around, please keep in mind one of my basic mottos: "If it is meant to be funny, then laugh; if you find it offensive, pay it no mind." I welcome comments and discussion. Thank you and enjoy!
About Me
Pages Which I Enjoy
Posts by Label
- constitution (6)
- economy (2)
- history (7)
- insight (6)
- politics (6)
- religion (2)
- technology (6)
- television (1)
- work (5)
5 comments:
Unfortunatly, there is a major flaw in your arguement that we Christians believe merely on faith. Take a look at the Bible some time as a history book. Now, I am not saying the Bible is merely a history book, but the Bible is THE ONLY history book that has not changed. It dates back well into the BC period, yet the words of history written in it have NEVER been proven false. Every Other history book has been modified and/or completely re-written, but not the Bible.
Lets take a look at some facts of the Bible. Joshua chapter 6 states that the exodused Israelits marched around Jericho for 7 days. On the 7th day they blew the trumpets and the walls were knocked down by God, thus allowing them to take and destroy the city. In the 1950 an excavation team found the walls tumbled down, all except the North wall, which supported the house that the prostitute Rahab's house.
If it had just been an earthquake, massive enough to tumble the walls the way it did, thwere is little to no chance that the North wall would have stood undamaged.
The Bible, Old and New Testaments, are filled with veriufiable facts. Why do some people chose to believe that the History is true, but the story around it is false.
One thing science has screwed up and so many Christians have allowed is the tolerance of unprovable theoretic science mixed in with doctrine. Satan does a good job of throwing in enough subtle false teachers to discredit the authentic truth, by trwisting a word here or there. Verify everything through the Bible, and you'll start to see the truth.
One last point . . . if the purpose of the universe is to house life, it does a pretty poor job. We have searched for hundreds of millions of light years w/ the help of telescopes like the Hubbel, but found absolutly no signs of life. Lets look at the universe from Scripture.
Isaiah 40:12 "Who else has held the oceans in his hand?Who has measured off the heavens with his fingers?"
The point of the universe is to declare God's glory.
The real leap of faith is to believe a computer, lifeless, unintelligent and basic, cannot create itself out of nothingness, yet something as spectacular as the universe and complex as humans just happened from nothing.
SAnd to further that point, do we create something to not interact with it? No, we create it to interact with it, that it may fullfil its purpose. The Bible is God's conversation with all of us. The Word's never change, NOR THE MEANINGS, but it does speak to us. . . God speaks to us through His Word.
Next conclusion - you want to keep your creation safe until its purpose has been fully met. Take a car, for example. We maintaan it and repair it until we replace it with something else. Sometimes we have to throw out part of it, a broken part, to keep it going, but the car remains. We are God's creation and He maintains us. Sometimes he casts out the parts that are broken, but He keeps humans alive to fulfill His purpose for us.
There is absolute logic, for your logical mind.
When your faith can be verified by Scripture, History and Science it becomes more that faith.
God gives us the tools to verify His Word. Nature speaks to His greatness.
Anyone that says it is "faith alone" just hasn't taken the time to verify that faith, and needs to study the Word and back up their arguement with solid fact - readily availible to the
Christian through the Gospel.
The following is my response to the previous two comments.
"The Bible as a history book."
Whether or not the Bible should be referred to as a history book can be debated. Certainly there is historical value to the Bible and some of its contents.
"... the words ... have NEVER been proven false." Many other things have never been proven false. Shall we then accept all of those things as truths?
"... the Bible is THE ONLY history book that has not changed." Are you sure of that? The New Testament canon as it is now was first listed by St. Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, in 367, in a letter written to his churches in Egypt. Many gospels are/were excluded. Some denominations still use non-canonical gospels.
"No signs of life in the universe."
We have only searched a very minute portion of the vast universe. Yet, we have located some planets and systems with a possibility of (past or future) supporting some life. Recently one of the Mars exploration vehicles found elements capable of supporting some life-as-we-know-it organisms. If we're the only ones, that's an awful waste of space.
"God-Man to Man-Car"
This argument makes sense if you accept the presumption that God exists and has a purpose for us. If God doesn't exist, then how are we maintained? It could be argued that we maintain ourselves with medical innovations and by imprisoning those that would hurt us, for example.
I stick to my view: the proof of the Bible and scientific theories have yet to be brought to light. Religious groups have persecuted many scientists in the past. There will be a constant difference in beliefs . . . until some proof presents itself.
To you I say: "Keep believing. Pass on the good morals of the teachings. Live the values."
"Many gospels are/were excluded" as were many other writings found to be heretical. As soon as Christ died there were people speading false testamony, for profit. The established bible has been traced back and verified time and time again as the God breathed writings by the Apostles and other early church leaders. The gnostic gospels that most people refer to date only back to the second century, yet they claim to have witnessed Jesus' life on earth - impossible!
Some examples of fasle doctrine that have been rejected by the true Christian church (which is made up of believers and followers of Christ, not a denomination):
Judaizers, spoken of by Paul in Romans, for example. They attempted to enter the Roman Christian church to promote salvation through grace plus works. Romans 11:6 "And if by grace, then it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace."
The Gnostics, who sought to make "designer religions" by mixing bits and pieces of Christianity with pagan religion, were starting out while the Judaizers were finally being quelled.
Then there was Sabellianism which sought to destroy the gospel by denying the three persons of the Godhead (i.e. Trinity). he Sabellianist taught that God was in the form of any one of the three at any given time, but not in all three at the same time. How can God be one and three, in all His states at the same time. I ask you this . . . if you have a pot of ice water boiling isn't it water (liquid form), ice (solid form), and vapor all at the same time? Each part is still fully H2O, just in different states at the same time.
Next to follow was the Arians. (Approx 4th century). Arians promoted that Jesus was the Son of God, above men and angels, but below God. They sighted out of context passages where Jesus, on earth, refuse to use His God powers to save Himself. We all know if Jesus hadn't given His life, His perfect life, on the cross, as a blood sacrifice (required by God's law for forgiveness of sins) we could not be forgiven. To say that Jesus is not fully man and fully God is to take away the power of His sacrifice to nothingness. The Ultimate sacrifice had to be made for forgivness of all sins, nothing even slightly less could do.
Unfortunatly Arianism still plagues the image of Christianity. Jehovah Witness and Mormons both believe and promote this herecy.
We, as a church, have done a poor job of quelling the false doctrine that has given Christianity a bad name. From watering down the gospel to a "Jesus loves you and has a great plan for your life" (but no real answers to honest questions) and legalism that puts down people on matters that the Bible doesn't specifically address directly. I apologize for the fact that you have seen a "religious view" of Christianity, but the only way to know the truth is to read the Bible, the God breathed Bible (2 Tim 3:16), and understand that all must have a starting point, and time and time again, secular views have proven absolutely absurd at trying to define truth. If there is no God, there is no morality, because there is no real concequence.
To address another point - the scientific community jumping to conclusions again. "Recently one of the Mars exploration vehicles found elements capable of supporting some life-as-we-know-it organisms". The same robot that found the 'evidence for sustaining life' also found a toxin that would have destryed and life before it began. . .
"NASA's Phoenix spacecraft earlier this summer detected the chemical perchlorate, a highly oxidizing salt, in soil samples dug up from near the Martian surface."
They keep flip flopping. The Bible stays the same - still never disproved, yet people continue to view science as truth. And they call us blinded by faith . . .
Every time I look back at this, it saddens me that people are ignorant of their own ignorance. I certainly don't know everything, but have logic and use reasoning. The argument regarding the Mars soil samples equates to "There can be no life on Earth because although water and life sustaining gases are plentiful, there are also radioactive and toxic elements."
Post a Comment