Ask a Christian philosopher a question

[Ana the Ist]

Yes, really. You are describing a particular type of person who enjoys believing that way, whereas I am discussing how an entire society has become convinced, and that society contains many types of people - even those who are studious and thoughtful.

I suppose you could build the story little by little...but seriously, what part of the story is something they won't want to believe? That they're god's chosen people? That god saved them long ago from the mightiest empire in the known world?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yes, really. You are describing a particular type of person who enjoys believing that way, whereas I am discussing how an entire society has become convinced, and that society contains many types of people - even those who are studious and thoughtful.

Btw what's the point that it's "an entire society"? You've got more christians in the U.S. today convinced that evolution didn't happen than there were Jews 3000-4000 years ago.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yes, really. You are describing a particular type of person who enjoys believing that way, whereas I am discussing how an entire society has become convinced, and that society contains many types of people - even those who are studious and thoughtful.

Is it really so unimaginable to you? It's not as scientology didn't spring up in less than a century...you tell people they're special, tell them you have answers, tell them you can fix their problems...they'll buy in. Ancient Jews aren't any different...if anything you'd imagine that they faced a lot more problems than modern man and would be more susceptible to such shenanigans.

 

[oi_antz]

I suppose you could build the story little by little...but seriously, what part of the story is something they won't want to believe? That they're god's chosen people? That god saved them long ago from the mightiest empire in the known world?

It's an interesting idea that it could have been built bit by bit, thanks. If you read some of the prophets in the old testament, say Jeremiah and Hosea, they are expressing observations that they did not really believe as much as you suggest they wanted to.

Btw what's the point that it's "an entire society"? You've got more christians in the U.S. today convinced that evolution didn't happen than there were Jews 3000-4000 years ago.

It's actually not quite an equal comparison though. Christians are not a clan with a common ancestor, and the only equivalent belief they hold is that Jesus did speak the words of life, was killed and raised to everlasting life, to rule God's kingdom forever. Within that identified kin, then you have a society of various types of people. Yet they are all convinced of that truth, that is the basis of Christian faith.

 

[oi_antz]

Is it really so unimaginable to you?

Probably not.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Probably not.

All I'm saying is you could literally make the same argument for every religion...

Could people have possibly believed in the story of Hercules if it didn't actually happen? How about Zeus? Osiris? And so on and so on and so on....I just don't know what makes people think the Jews or christians are somehow special in this respect.

 

[oi_antz]

All I'm saying is you could literally make the same argument for every religion...

Could people have possibly believed in the story of Hercules if it didn't actually happen? How about Zeus? Osiris? And so on and so on and so on....I just don't know what makes people think the Jews or christians are somehow special in this respect.

I think that this doesn't really address the question though. In Israel's case, they believed solemnly that their heritage descended from Adam, the first man, with detailed, unbroken genealogy. Furthermore, if you look back a few pages, you can see that it is said to have been only a handful of generations from Adam to Jacob, then 198 years before Genesis was written. This is quite different to the story of other mythologies, where they one day come up with some answer to the question of how they got to where they were. I just do not know how it would have gone down if on one day everyone had no idea, then on the next day someone produced the Genesis accounts. The first question would have been "who told you that?" .. whereas you are suggesting it was "OK". Whereas if as you suggested, it was devised bit by bit over time, then the other problem is the one who formalised it with such accurate, sincere lifespans and records of family trees, has intentionally presented what they know is not true, deceitfully to appear as solemn truth. Yet, I don't read a hint of such deceit in the writer.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I think that this doesn't really address the question though. In Israel's case, they believed solemnly that their heritage descended from Adam, the first man, with detailed, unbroken genealogy. Furthermore, if you look back a few pages, you can see that it is said to have been only a handful of generations from Adam to Jacob, then 198 years before Genesis was written. This is quite different to the story of other mythologies, where they one day come up with some answer to the question of how they got to where they were. I just do not know how it would have gone down if on one day everyone had no idea, then on the next day someone produced the Genesis accounts. The first question would have been "who told you that?" .. whereas you are suggesting it was "OK". Whereas if as you suggested, it was devised bit by bit over time, then the other problem is the one who formalised it with such accurate, sincere lifespans and records of family trees, has intentionally presented what they know is not true, deceitfully to appear as solemn truth. Yet, I don't read a hint of such deceit in the writer.

You don't read a "hint of deceit"? As in what? At the end genesis there's a winky face...nudge nudge this didn't really happen?

Let's suppose someone amongst the Jews starts a story. It's a story that the vast majority don't buy into...but a small group do. As generations pass...let's say this small group takes up a bigger and bigger part of the population, because they tell it to each generation and they tell it to their children and so on. Then one day one of these people is one of the Jews in charge and he tells everyone, "Hey, everyone can only tell this story that I believe in"...

You make it sound like the entire story would be fabricated in one generation and they all have to buy it, that's not how religions work or spread.

 

[oi_antz]

You don't read a "hint of deceit"? As in what? At the end genesis there's a winky face...nudge nudge this didn't really happen?

Let's suppose someone amongst the Jews starts a story. It's a story that the vast majority don't buy into...but a small group do. As generations pass...let's say this small group takes up a bigger and bigger part of the population, because they tell it to each generation and they tell it to their children and so on. Then one day one of these people is one of the Jews in charge and he tells everyone, "Hey, everyone can only tell this story that I believe in"...

You make it sound like the entire story would be fabricated in one generation and they all have to buy it, that's not how religions work or spread.

Are you able to explain the way that you envisage it may have come about, using approximate dates in the BCE? I have only really exercised the view of it according to the information it contains. I think that would be helpful. Yes, you know how when someone writes what they believe, it has that conviction, and when someone is making stuff up, it has that feel to it? Maybe you don't, but I think I do. This is not to suggest that I have never been deceived by a liar though, rather that the Genesis accounts do not convey as though the writer is just making up fiction. Interestingly, nor does the Enuma Elish, but the Enuma Elish does present much of a general illustrative story intended to explain basically what created the world we have today, whereas the Pentateuch presents much more of a detailed, accurate record of events with no steps missing from A to Z.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Are you able to explain the way that you envisage it may have come about, using approximate dates in the BCE? I have only really exercised the view of it according to the information it contains. I think that would be helpful. Yes, you know how when someone writes what they believe, it has that conviction, and when someone is making stuff up, it has that feel to it? Maybe you don't, but I think I do. This is not to suggest that I have never been deceived by a liar though, rather that the Genesis accounts do not convey as though the writer is just making up fiction. Interestingly, nor does the Enuma Elish, but the Enuma Elish does present much of a general illustrative story intended to explain basically what created the world we have today, whereas the Pentateuch presents much more of a detailed, accurate record of events with no steps missing from A to Z.

No...you're basically kidding yourself if you think you can read something and tell lies from truth. That's the sort of thing that tends to require training to do with someone speaking with you...you can't train to do it with writing. All you can do is look at current available evidence, such as...

Do burning bushes talk to people?

If the answer is no, then it's reasonable to think that this didn't happen in the past either.

More importantly though, your feelings are deceiving you. You think that they can reflect something other than you...they can't. Think of all the times you thought someone liked you or was telling the truth only to find out they didn't...or vice versa.

I had a thread up awhile back asking people about experiences where god spoke to them. Many initially said god doesn't actually speak in a voice...then others said he did, others said he spoke in dream or put ideas in their head.

My point is everyone thought they knew what everyone else was talking about when they claimed god spoke to them...they didn't. In fact, they even argued that certain things other people claimed happened didn't really happen. They all felt they were speaking of the same thing...then realized that they weren't.

So you can believe that the Jewish religion is somehow unique in the way it sprang up, because it looks honest to you...or you can look at it dispassionately and realize that it's not significantly different from any other religions and probably sprang up just like they did.

 

[anonymous person]

I had several that you never bothered to address.

Yes I know. Was there one in particular?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Yes I know. Was there one in particular?

Yes, all of them.

 

[oi_antz]

No...you're basically kidding yourself if you think you can read something and tell lies from truth. That's the sort of thing that tends to require training to do with someone speaking with you...you can't train to do it with writing. All you can do is look at current available evidence, such as...

Not necessarily. If you know a person well enough, you can know if they are lying. I have known when friends have lied and tried to deceive me in doing so. Plus, you don't need to even know a person that well. For instance, on this website I often ask questions of people and their response is deliberately avoiding the purpose of the question. When this happens over and over as I ask the same question, it becomes apparent that they cannot really give a truthful answer to the question because they are afraid of the implications of doing so.

As well as this, knowing holiness is to be able to recognise a holy person. It is the holy spirit that testifies to the truth. People who are deceitful do not exhibit a holy spirit, because deceitfulness is sinful. Jesus said this too: Your eye is like a window for your body. When your eye is healthy, your body is full of light. When there are no dark corners within you (that means to be actively repentant - having no sin in you), then your face glows as though a powerful beam of light is shone on it. You can read of this happening to Stephen when he chose to bear witness to the truth before he was dragged outside and stoned. Holy people can be mistaken though, and that can cause them to be wrong. But the thing is, that the holy spirit is consistent. It has a certain gracefulness about it, that makes it so obvious that the person is not acting in deceit.

Do burning bushes talk to people?

You can notice that the bible doesn't make out that they do. But, it makes a claim that Moses had this experience. I am not worried to believe that it was a hallucination. But what I see about this, is that seeing it is not normal, does not make it impossible that Moses had this experience, and the context and tone of the claim is given such that it does certainly appear that the reader is meant to believe it really did happen. I can see a distinct difference to the way that bhstme stated he had been abducted by aliens two nights ago. I could see that he was making that statement deceitfully. Mostly, it is because I knew his motives, and that provided context for me to reliably view it as not being a genuine claim of truth.

Yet, it becomes this question again: - is it possible that the man Moses really did have this experience. I think it is. But I think that is probably one of the most modest examples you can deliver, as I know there are examples in the bible that I find impossible to imagine.

If the answer is no, then it's reasonable to think that this didn't happen in the past either.

I think you are wrong to have said this, and expected me to agree or to be wrong not to agree. It's as though you think I cannot possibly be right to say that God can do that if He wants to. This concept of God that you and I have central, is one that is attributed to creating everything when it wasn't created in the first place. Plus many other things. It's an immensely powerful being, and if you are addressing me knowing me to be someone who makes a base assumption such a being can possibly exist, and is most likely to exist, then this comment of yours seems to not have enough effort applied, if your objective is for us to find some agreement. Otherwise, if your objective is something else, ok maybe this comment would do that.

More importantly though, your feelings are deceiving you.

I know they do this sometimes. Can you offer some practical feedback for me?

You think that they [your feelings] can reflect something other than you...they can't.

I like that

Think of all the times you thought someone liked you or was telling the truth only to find out they didn't...or vice versa.

Ok, sure. So that would show me that people do not love me as I love myself, and possibly they could have good reasons; and that people are not as honest as I would be. But why suggest that my feelings are causing some delusion in that? Isn't it somewhat just as fair to say that I simply had different understanding of their views than they did?

I had a thread up awhile back asking people about experiences where god spoke to them. Many initially said god doesn't actually speak in a voice...then others said he did, others said he spoke in dream or put ideas in their head.

He has spoken to me in all those ways, FWIW.

My point is everyone thought they knew what everyone else was talking about when they claimed god spoke to them...they didn't. In fact, they even argued that certain things other people claimed happened didn't really happen. They all felt they were speaking of the same thing...then realized that they weren't.

Do you think there was some jealousy, or pride, or insecurity going on behind all that dissension? Don't you think that if people were truly at peace with their self, their security in God, then they would love their brethren and support them, being confident in their self, and manifesting unity? Does it sound to you as though Galatians 5:20 describes the same things that you saw?

So you can believe that the Jewish religion is somehow unique in the way it sprang up, because it looks honest to you...or you can look at it dispassionately and realize that it's not significantly different from any other religions and probably sprang up just like they did.

I could. But as yet I haven't seen an alternative view than the one I am viewing, and that seems to be quite well detailed. Sure though, do let me know if you are able to provide some alternative view, as I also asked Aelred a few posts back. It wouldn't be wasted if it is useful.

 

[oi_antz]

Yes, all of them.

Yes, please OP give Archaeopteryx some fair attention, because he deserves it. And don't be afraid to answer truthfully, the truth can support itself This guy Archaeopteryx does like to reveal the truth

 

[Ana the Ist]

.

Not necessarily. If you know a person well enough, you can know if they are lying. I have known when friends have lied and tried to deceive me in doing so. Plus, you don't need to even know a person that well. For instance, on this website I often ask questions of people and their response is deliberately avoiding the purpose of the question. When this happens over and over as I ask the same question, it becomes apparent that they cannot really give a truthful answer to the question because they are afraid of the implications of doing so.

As well as this, knowing holiness is to be able to recognise a holy person. It is the holy spirit that testifies to the truth. People who are deceitful do not exhibit a holy spirit, because deceitfulness is sinful. Jesus said this too: Your eye is like a window for your body. When your eye is healthy, your body is full of light. When there are no dark corners within you (that means to be actively repentant - having no sin in you), then your face glows as though a powerful beam of light is shone on it. You can read of this happening to Stephen when he chose to bear witness to the truth before he was dragged outside and stoned. Holy people can be mistaken though, and that can cause them to be wrong. But the thing is, that the holy spirit is consistent. It has a certain gracefulness about it, that makes it so obvious that the person is not acting in deceit.

You can notice that the bible doesn't make out that they do. But, it makes a claim that Moses had this experience. I am not worried to believe that it was a hallucination. But what I see about this, is that seeing it is not normal, does not make it impossible that Moses had this experience, and the context and tone of the claim is given such that it does certainly appear that the reader is meant to believe it really did happen. I can see a distinct difference to the way that bhstme stated he had been abducted by aliens two nights ago. I could see that he was making that statement deceitfully. Mostly, it is because I knew his motives, and that provided context for me to reliably view it as not being a genuine claim of truth.

Yet, it becomes this question again: - is it possible that the man Moses really did have this experience. I think it is. But I think that is probably one of the most modest examples you can deliver, as I know there are examples in the bible that I find impossible to imagine.

I think you are wrong to have said this, and expected me to agree or to be wrong not to agree. It's as though you think I cannot possibly be right to say that God can do that if He wants to. This concept of God that you and I have central, is one that is attributed to creating everything when it wasn't created in the first place. Plus many other things. It's an immensely powerful being, and if you are addressing me knowing me to be someone who makes a base assumption such a being can possibly exist, and is most likely to exist, then this comment of yours seems to not have enough effort applied, if your objective is for us to find some agreement. Otherwise, if your objective is something else, ok maybe this comment would do that.

I know they do this sometimes. Can you offer some practical feedback for me?

I like that

Ok, sure. So that would show me that people do not love me as I love myself, and possibly they could have good reasons; and that people are not as honest as I would be. But why suggest that my feelings are causing some delusion in that? Isn't it somewhat just as fair to say that I simply had different understanding of their views than they did?

He has spoken to me in all those ways, FWIW.

Do you think there was some jealousy, or pride, or insecurity going on behind all that dissension? Don't you think that if people were truly at peace with their self, their security in God, then they would love their brethren and support them, being confident in their self, and manifesting unity? Does it sound to you as though Galatians 5:20 describes the same things that you saw?

I could. But as yet I haven't seen an alternative view than the one I am viewing, and that seems to be quite well detailed. Sure though, do let me know if you are able to provide some alternative view, as I also asked Aelred a few posts back. It wouldn't be wasted if it is useful.

Alternative view to what? Your religion being the absolute truth? We're past that point oi...

You see, as you've explained, the holy spirit has given you magical powers in recognizing the truth and holiness in others. What could I possibly say? If your god has convinced you black is white...would it matter if I told you it is white? Of course not, you'd think I lacked some holy truth which you've gained the ability to recognize...

Try to imagine what would convince you that lets say....your religion is no different substantially than any other....what would be something that could convince you of that?

 

[anonymous person]

Yes, all of them.

I can't address all of them at once due to certain time constraints. Do you have one in particular you would like me to attempt to answer?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I can't address all of them at once due to certain time constraints. Do you have one in particular you would like me to attempt to answer?

What time constraints?

 

[bhsmte]

Let me see whether I can answer your question better, thanks for clearing this up.

If an event is in the past, it cannot be witnessed in the present, because it has happened. In this way, we cannot witness the Twin Towers collapsing. All we can do is observe records of the eye witnesses who saw it happening, we can observe the monuments, and consider whether the monuments really do commemorate those events. In the case of the Twin Towers, there is video evidence. However, even if it was not captured on video and was only written about, we still would need to believe the record of the event that we are observing. Since we can study video footage and come to be fairly certain that it is not generated, we can come to treat it as quite a strong form of reliable evidence. When it comes to a man's testimony though, we are complicated more by the possibility that the witness is being dishonest, and that the record given by the witness has not accurately conveyed the facts to us due to some communication error. Video footage doesn't have the limitations of miscommunication, but it does have limitations of context (seeing as we cannot observe what happens outside of the viewport).

Applying this to claims of the bible, as we were discussing at this point, Israel having come to regard Moses and the Exodus from Egypt as fact, then obviously they cannot witness the Exodus happening. All they can do is see that they inhabit the region and read the accounts of someone who claims to have witnessed (or summarised the accounts of those who did witness) the events that led to it. Yet, if this myth just pops into existence, there is obviously one day when it doesn't exist and the society believes something about their roots; then the next day they suddenly believe that they have descended from Jacob's captivity in Egypt. My question is about trying to understand how such a myth can just appear and then come to be believed as though it is fact.

The same question was asked toward HitchSlap regarding the proliferation of Christianity.

Myth can become accepted as fact because of enough people and forces, who simply need to believe it.

This happens to all religious beliefs, as the faithful to those beliefs, belief the stories are considered fact, even though they believe on faith. Stating it is fact, is a way to feel better about their belief and to create security in the same.

Just because a certain religion gains momentum, has nothing to do with it's truth. You do realize, there are other religions that also proliferated and grew and what we have today, is 2/3 of the worlds population, not being part of the Christian faith. How do you explain 2/3 of the world's population being so wrong?

 

[bhsmte]

Yes, really. You are describing a particular type of person who enjoys believing that way, whereas I am discussing how an entire society has become convinced, and that society contains many types of people - even those who are studious and thoughtful.

You would really benefit from reading up on this subject; the psychology of belief.

 

[oi_antz]

.
Alternative view to what? Your religion being the absolute truth?

Not that. What is the plausible alternative view than that which is claimed in the Penteteteuch, for how the Penteteuch came to be?

.
You see, as you've explained, the holy spirit has given you magical powers in recognizing the truth and holiness in others. What could I possibly say? If your god has convinced you black is white...would it matter if I told you it is white? Of course not, you'd think I lacked some holy truth which you've gained the ability to recognize...

This is entirely truth. But, you and I do not agree to what the holy spirit testifies is true in this statement. We could though, it's up to you. FYI, I think your view could quite simply change to accept it's truth, by considering and recognising that when you say "If your god has convinced you black is white.." - that in this you are making a judgement. Whereas if you read this for the hypothetical question it appears to be, then your whole statement is one of truth. The resulting conclusion of this statement, is that the god I know can relate to me better than you can.

Try to imagine what would convince you that lets say....your religion is no different substantially than any other....what would be something that could convince you of that?

I really don't think it is possible, because I see it isn't a realistic idea of truth. Truth is like a rock that can't be broken. All the saints who know the truth as they know God too, cannot be convinced otherwise. Jesus said "the father has given them to me, and no-one can snatch them from my hand". Remember that Satan challenged God to demonstrate this with Job.