Hey no biggie. I'm no Bible scholar either. I'm simply what you might say a 'student' of the Bible and apologetics. A beginning student at that.Philosoft said:
What are the philosophical issues of yours still unresolved?
Upvote
0
A rational mind wouldn't believe in God
- Thread starter Norseman
- Start date
What are the philosophical issues of yours still unresolved?
Hmmm. Well I can't help you out unless you are serious.Philosoft said:
Pretty much the logic of God-belief.
I, and I'm sure others, don't want to waste our time if you aren't serious. But I'm sure you've come across enough christians, probably even at this site, who cannot give a reason for their faith, who aren't prepared with a decent answer. And for that I sincerely apologize and my prayers are for them... because I've been there.
There are so many questions/objections about God. What is the most outrageous one (I guess philosophically/morally, since we're in that forum!) you can think of? Please be honest.
I'll try only to answer logically with support. And it might be a while before I post again... I've got like.. 59.3 tests in the next four weeks. (!)
Upvote
0
Philosoft
Orthogonal, Tangential, Tenuously Related
Of course I'm serious. I don't find any deductive or inductive arguments for the existence of God convincing. Furthermore, I do find some inductive arguments for the naturalistic foundation of god-belief reasonable, if not convincing.
A big problem is religious faith itself. It's unlike our normal decision-making processes, yet we're supposed to employ it unquestionably when it comes to the most important decision. No makey sensey.
Good luck on your tests.
A big problem is religious faith itself. It's unlike our normal decision-making processes, yet we're supposed to employ it unquestionably when it comes to the most important decision. No makey sensey.
Good luck on your tests.
Upvote
0
Philosoft said:
Wowee. Deja vu dude
I had the exact same issue with faith when I turned 13. In particular, the existence of God. It was so intense though because, since I was a Christian already and things were fine and dandy before, it grew instead out of fear. And it didn't begin to fade for a long while...
Anyway, though I found out the answer, it was, and is often, hard to accept, maybe because it's so simple yet so complex (hmmm, is that possible?). it's just like you said. It is unlike our normal decision-making processes. It is against my nature, and it's frustrating sometimes. Especially when something tragic happens, or something I really never wanted to happen happens... "arrggh.. Why!"
Probably the best shrot ...i mean short
answer I can give you is this: I had like a practically perfect trust in God as a child. (Of course, though, that was because I trusted my parents and everything they said, so my trust was real, but was, or felt, effortless.) ...Til the dark, scary land of Mordor jumped off its crockit and found where I lived. Quite simply, God had to gain my trust again. The two things that helped me: though this first one may not sound so convincing, my already begun relationship with God I'd had as a child (circumstances, feelings, talking, many little things). I'll have to admit at the time it suddenly wasn't very convincing to my mind. Then I stumbled by chance into hearing The Bible Answer Man radio program, where I heard it was okay to ask questions.. I mean good grief, my whole life will be affected because of what I choose to believe. And if what I learned to believe as a child was true, wouldn't it be logical that everything we can know would testify to the truth? And so I studied and learned, because I did not want to be cavalier, I wanted to know the truth. Slowly, my trust in God is being restored, and at times in fact, stronger than it was as a child. But still, see what I mean? It's not easy to accept, because besides knowlege and logic, none of my senses can testify they've literally found God. (You don't have to respond.. sorry I write so much.. I'm a girl!)
Take care.
Upvote
0
LuckyCharm
Back from Iraq 5 Apr 04
Hi again.... I'm going to skip the parts you felt were off-topic, and go straight to our subject...
Why not? What other kind of evidence do we have for any historical event? Do you believe that Hannibal crossed the Alps on elephants? If so, why? What physical evidence do we currently have for that event?Philosoft said:
It's not supernatural because it's poorly-understood. It's supernatural because it's beyond nature. Even you must admit that for the universe to have a Creator, He/She/It must exist "beyond" nature, right? This isn't circular reasoning, but a matter of definitions. Assume for a moment that a Creator does in fact exist, and then tell me why you would expect to find Him within the confines of the created universe?
Huh? I don't understand what you're trying to get at, here....
As soon as someone presents me with a workable, reliable means of determining which supernatural explanation is correct, I'll get right into the delving part. [/quote}
Which supernatural explanations are you confronted with, besides God?
I don't know what kinds of arguments you've run up against before, but I'll tell you right off the bat that my own objections to evolution do not stem from a "strongly-held interpretation of Genesis." If God Himself were to come down right now and stand in front of me and boom authoritatively, "Evolution is true!" I could readily accept it without going, "But... but... what about Genesis...??" Because they are not contradictory at all, in my book. Genesis merely states, "God created..." It doesn't offer us the mechanics of that creation process, and evolution, were it a plausible theory, would be just as believable to me as a literal six-day creation spree. Do I believe God causes the Sun to rise every morning? You bet I do. Do I understand the rotation of our planet within the solar system? Oh yes, as an astrologer (and there goes yet another shred of my credibility in your book, I'll bet!
Allright, well I never told you any ghost stories. But I will tell you one now. When we lived in Chicago, we had only one bathroom, with a door that could only be locked from the inside (not these modern push-button locks that you can lock, then close the door, locking yourself out). One day, we discovered that the bathroom door was locked -- but everyone in the family was outside the bathroom! Thinking it might be stuck, we tried pushing it, jiggling the handle, ramming up against it, sticking hairpins in the lock.... no luck. Finally, my mom stood back and cried in a loud voice, "Lizzie!! Open this door, NOW!" There was a small click, the handle turned, and the door opened -- just like that. Nobody inside that we could see, of course (Lizzie always hid herself from the men in our home).
What other explanation would you offer for that event?
~~Cheryl
Upvote
0
Philosoft
Orthogonal, Tangential, Tenuously Related
I don't know. It's a pretty ordinary claim, however. If it turns out to be wrong, our understanding of ontology won't be terribly shaken.LuckyCharm said:
It is written that Alexander the Great claimed to have divine blood. I don't believe that either, but I still think Alexander existed.
I don't even know what that means. It's like asking me to imagine a baseball that isn't white.
Sure. I still don't know what the concept 'existing apart from everything that exists' entails.
You seem to think that quote was supportive of religious belief. I disagree.
Pretty much anything I can imagine. It's turtles all the way down, you know.
Sorry about the snap judgment. I'm used to evolution opponents whipping out a literal Genesis in response to the claims of evolution.I don't know what kinds of arguments you've run up against before, but I'll tell you right off the bat that my own objections to evolution do not stem from a "strongly-held interpretation of Genesis." If God Himself were to come down right now and stand in front of me and boom authoritatively, "Evolution is true!" I could readily accept it without going, "But... but... what about Genesis...??" Because they are not contradictory at all, in my book. Genesis merely states, "God created..." It doesn't offer us the mechanics of that creation process, and evolution, were it a plausible theory, would be just as believable to me as a literal six-day creation spree. Do I believe God causes the Sun to rise every morning? You bet I do. Do I understand the rotation of our planet within the solar system? Oh yes, as an astrologer (and there goes yet another shred of my credibility in your book, I'll bet!
In all seriousness, it would be very interesting if you would elucidate your theory in the Evo/Cre forum. Some flavor of ID I presume?
I dunno. I'm not really enthusiastic about anecdotes, truth be told.
Upvote
0
I'm rational and I believe in God. There is purpose and reason to everything around us in this universe. According to one of Newtons laws "a body at rest cannot be set into motion unless acted upon be equal or greater force". I'd say that the whole universe moving, as proven, needed something greater than it to set it so. How all this matter got here and was set into motion is a mystery far greater than anything I can imagine. That is God. For all we know the universe itself is God. Some of the most scientific and intelligent people in history felt the same way.
Upvote
0
T
The Bellman
Guest
Claiming you're rational doesn't demonstrate anything. I'm not saying that you're NOT rational - just that claiming it proves nothing.Arturis said:
And the whole universe isn't moving, simply because there's nothing for it to move in.
Yes, some of the most scientific and intelligent people in history felt the same way you do...and some others of the most scientific and intelligent people in history felt you are wrong. So what good does that appeal do? One demonstrates that a position is rational by demonstrating that about the position, not by showing how many other people take the same position.
Upvote
0
- Who says I was trying to demonstrate anything or prove anything by that statement? I believe it unto myself...whether you or anyone else believes it for that matter is of no concern to me.The Bellman said:
- lol...no offense but you should read up on modern astrophysics. Does the earth not rotate (move) around our star? Does our star not move with our galactic arm spiraling around the center of the Milky Way galaxy? Is not every galaxy moving (as proven by light shift) away from the center of our universe? Hubble proved this in 1929 and you are trying to tell me that there is no evidence of the universe moving?
- Personally I believe that Einstein was far more intelligent than you so I would tend to hold his opinions with more weight than yours. Since god cannot be scientifically proven and whos existence only holds merit in the one so convicted, then the thoughts and beliefs of these and other likeminded people certainly hold credence; for it is not in blind faith alone that these great minds came to the same conclusion. How god is proven depends upon what your definition of god is. This is not an irrational point to venture.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
T
The Bellman
Guest
If you weren't tyring to demonstrate or prove anything, why did you say it?Arturis said:
lol no offense, but you should read up on basic English. If you mean that things withIN the universe are moving, you'll get no argument. The universe itself is NOT moving, because there is nothing for it to move IN. If you have a bug in a bucket, and the bug is crawling around...do you say the bucket is moving? No, you say the bucket is stationary, and the bug within it is moving.Arturis said:
What does Einstein have to do with anything? I stipulated that many intelligent people have and do believe as you do; I also stated that many other intelligent people believe you to be wrong (including Einstein, who did not believe in a personal god). I have not suggested that belief in god is irrational; I have merely pointed out that citing others who have believed as you do demonstrates nothing.Arturis said:
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
DJ_Ghost
Trad Goth
- Mar 27, 2004
- 2,737
- 170
- 53
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Engaged
- Politics
- UK-Liberal-Democrats
The Bellman said:
But the proposition we are debating is not that it IS rational to believe in God, we are debating the thread title that a rational mind would NOT believe in God. Hence if we can show that even one rational person has ever believed in God we falsify the OPs claim.
You are quite right that we do not show a thing as rational by showing how many other people have beleived in it, but since that is not what we have been asked to do here, its not relevent.
Ghost
Upvote
0
LuckyCharm
Back from Iraq 5 Apr 04
Can we define "rational," and agree on a criteria for determining that a given person is, indeed, rational?The Bellman said:
~~Cheryl
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
T
The Bellman
Guest
Yes, you certainly are. If you were offering it as merely an opinion, without support, then I'll take just as that - an unsupported opinion.Arturis said:
No, it is neither a petty argument nor wrong. No other universe has ever been observed; there is no reason to believe such exists. The universe, as far as we can tell, is ALL that there is. Obviously, it cannot move, for there is nothing for it to move IN.Arturis said:
The universe is not in motion. The movement of things within it does not constitute movement OF it.
Point out others who believe likeminded is not demonstrating nothing; it demonstrates that they believe it. It demonstrates nothing about the belief beyond the fact that it was/is believed. Certainly, it does nothing to show the validity of the belief.Arturis said:
Who on earth told you that Einstein is "generally considered to be the most intelligent human being ever in recorded history"? I've never heard such nonsense. And regardless, apparently his opinion isn't of that great an influence on you, since it completely contradicts yours. Once again, Einstein was explicit in that he did NOT believe in a personal god.
It's called debating. People debate opinions. If you don't like that, I suggest that you are in the wrong forum. It is neither pompous nor arrogant to disgree with someone, nor to debate with them about that disagreement.Arturis said:
Upvote
0
T
The Bellman
Guest
Point taken; however, I was not debating that proposition (mainly because I believe it to be too absurd to even bother debating). So citing that rational minds have believed in god does not demonstrate to me that the OP is false, because I never believed the OP to be true.DJ_Ghost said:
Upvote
0
tryptophan
Well-Known Member
In my opinion, it is not a case of proving or desproving the existence of God, but just of faith. Yeah, I know you've heard that before, but it's what I feel. I don't believe in leprechauns or things like that just because I don't believe in them. Maybe it is irrational, but I just believe. There's nothing more to it.
Upvote
0
- Don't ignore what I said. Is the universe expanding? Yes? Then it is moving, just like the membrane of a balloon when blown up.The Bellman said:
Furthermore, you have no factual evidence to claim there is nothing for it to move in, not that makes any difference whatsoever. Everything concerning what lies beyond the universe (if anything), if the expansion of our universe is traversing some sort of medium or if there are parallel universes is all conjecture at this point.
- Are you kidding? I'm not even going to begin trying to debate this because it is pointless.
Furthermore, who cares if he didn't believe in a "personal" god? Did you not read his quote I've posted as one of my signatures? It is plain obvious he believed in "A" god.
- You are right it isnt pompous or arrogant to disagree with someone. What is pompous and arrogant is trying to teach someone something they already know. Here is my original statement and your response to it.
I'm rational and I believe in God. There is purpose and reason to everything around us in this universe. According to one of Newtons laws "a body at rest cannot be set into motion unless acted upon be equal or greater force". I'd say that the whole universe moving, as proven, needed something greater than it to set it so. How all this matter got here and was set into motion is a mystery far greater than anything I can imagine. That is God. For all we know the universe itself is God. Some of the most scientific and intelligent people in history felt the same way.
Claiming you're rational doesn't demonstrate anything. I'm not saying that you're NOT rational - just that claiming it proves nothing. (as if I didnt already know this)
And the whole universe isn't moving, simply because there's nothing for it to move in. (there is no proof to your statement so it is also conjecture)
Yes, some of the most scientific and intelligent people in history felt the same way you do...and some others of the most scientific and intelligent people in history felt you are wrong. So what good does that appeal do? One demonstrates that a position is rational by demonstrating that about the position, not by showing how many other people take the same position. (Again, I already know this. There is no need for me to demonstate my position as rational because it was never meant ot be rational, I was neither debating anyone in the thread nor countering anyone elses argument I was merely throwing my two cents in. Period. If you don't like my opinion then fine...If you are going to bash it then at least back it up with something worthwhile instead of blowing hot air.)
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Philosoft
Orthogonal, Tangential, Tenuously Related
Actually, this is quite an honest and forthright admission. For an amino acid.tryptophan said:
Frankly, I think we need to better understand the nature and mechanisms of belief before we decide which ones are rational and which ones aren't.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
