Fundamentalism and Intellectualism

redwards · #41 2nd July 2009, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by Split Rock

I have to disagree with you here. Supernatural means "beyond nature." Unless Jesus used a natural mechanism to turn water into wine (much like winemakers use natural processes to turn fruit juice into wine), then what he did was "supernatural." I am unaware of any natural process that can turn pure water into wine. This is what Jesus was reported to do.

I'm similarly unaware of of any supernatural process by which pure water can be turned into wine. For that matter, I'm unaware of any supernatural process of any kind. If Jesus did in fact transmute water into a different substance, I would be forced to observe that the natural properties of that substance had changed, and conclude that this process, occurring in the natural world, was in fact natural.

I'm more inclined to conclude that it's a myth, and that hypothesizing about the process is pointless.

Catherineanne · #42 2nd July 2009, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by Split Rock

My experience has been that Fundies, in general, are at least somewhat anti-intelliectual. Science is seen as "Man's Knowledge" and is always trumped by "God's Kowledge," as revealed through scripture. The joke is that both science and The Bible are works of Man. In addition, it is a particular interpretation of scripture that they claim is "God's Word," even though different people can interpret scripture differently.

This is fundie double speak.

Man's knowledge = what others think

God's knowledge = what I think

God's Word = what I say about anything at all, with or without a spurious Bible reference thrown in for good measure

redwards · #43 2nd July 2009, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by Catherineanne

This is fundie double speak.

Man's knowledge = what others think

God's knowledge = what I think

God's Word = what I say about anything at all, preferably with a spurious Bible reference thrown in for good measure

For a theist, you sound awfully rational.

Catherineanne · #44 2nd July 2009, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by Split Rock

I have to disagree with you here. Supernatural means "beyond nature." Unless Jesus used a natural mechanism to turn water into wine (much like winemakers use natural processes to turn fruit juice into wine), then what he did was "supernatural." I am unaware of any natural process that can turn pure water into wine. This is what Jesus was reported to do.

It was not supernatural. It was just quicker.

Changing water into an MP3 player would be supernatural. Water into wine is natural.

Catherineanne · #45 2nd July 2009, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by redwards

For a theist, you sound awfully rational.

Sorry about that.

Hespera · #46 2nd July 2009, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by Hentenza

I will disagree with your interpretation of the definition of intellectual as you are applying it.

I am an engineer. My professional life relies on solving intellectual problems. I don't solely rely on emotion as the basis of my faith. I have spend countless hours studying many aspects of it. In my opinion, the supernatural is tightly woven with the natural so I don't immediately discount it which account for my OEC belief.

I think my definition is exactly right on with regard to those areas that you dont apply any intellectual standards. Belief in the supernatural, and emotion as a basis for faith being good examples. How do you apply intellectual standards to the study of something that cant be cetected or in any way shown to exist? (not meaning faith, whatever that is exactly, it does seem to exist)

And again, its not 'immediate" or "automatic" rejection of the supernatural!!!!! It is a what, was it you said, judicial weighing of evidence? Zero evidence means I dont believe it till I see evidence!

Catherineanne · #47 2nd July 2009, 03:11 PM

Originally Posted by redwards

I'm more inclined to conclude that it's a myth, and that hypothesizing about the process is pointless.

It is not pointless if you happen to have a jug of water and a couple of bottles of decent wine handy. Then it is a good excuse for a practical experiment in the efficacy of prayer of the 'faith as small as a mustard seed' variety.

Without the wine, not so much fun.

If Jesus did in fact transmute water into a different substance, I would be forced to observe that the natural properties of that substance had changed, and conclude that this process, occurring in the natural world, was in fact natural.

Quite right. A supernatural Jesus is a scarey prospect.

Hespera · #48 2nd July 2009, 03:15 PM

Originally Posted by Catherineanne

It is not pointless if you happen to have a jug of water and a couple of bottles of decent wine handy. Then it is a good excuse for a practical experiment in the efficacy of prayer of the 'faith as small as a mustard seed' variety.

Without the wine, not so much fun.

They say the Pilgrims landed where they did in part because they had run out of beer. Anyone know it that might be true?

corvus_corax · #49 2nd July 2009, 03:23 PM

Originally Posted by Hespera

They say the Pilgrims landed where they did in part because they had run out of beer. Anyone know it that might be true?

From The Straight Dope

Bombila · #50 2nd July 2009, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by Catherineanne

I am not sure where this word supernatural comes from. Christianity is not about the supernatural, but about the natural.

Christ did not fly around the world in red underpants, he changed water into wine. Nature/God changes water into wine every day.

God's miracles are not about the supernatural. They are about what God does every day. They are about nature, and about life.

Nature generally demands the addition of something like fruit and something like yeast to water before any wine can appear.