Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Outreach
Outreach
Exploring Christianity
Belief is not a choice
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="2PhiloVoid" data-source="post: 75782081" data-attributes="member: 167101"><p>Oh, I'm sure it "sounds" like special pleading, but the extent to which that will actually be the case will depend upon which epistemological assumptions you import into your chosen mode of analysis. It might also depend on how open any of us might be as well to various reconsiderations among a host of assorted philosophers of Epistemology, or History, or Science, etc., etc.</p><p></p><p>In what I've said previously, I'm not asking for special concessions in relation to your efforts to find the bible believable or not. Rather, in the same way that you're just pointing out that there are assertions some of us might take for granted about modern notions of belief in relation to Neuroscience, I'm simply pointing out that where belief is represented on a literary level within even just the pages of the New Testament alone, there is an espousal of an epistemological mode of thought, however piecemealed and hobbled together it is, that is not going to agree that belief is in total a "passive mental event." I suppose if Calvin was right, then maybe it is a passive event, but we can't be certain that Calvin's take on the epistemics in the N.T. are completely cogent either.</p><p></p><p> Nope. I'm not making THAT claim. I'm Existentially inclined and more in line with some of the ideas we find in the <strong>Philosophical Hermeneuticist</strong> camp. But I am making the claim that the content of the Bible doesn't provide us with an epistemic collection of notions that jive with our Modern assumptions. In fact, it doesn't even fully jive with various Post-modern assumptions for that matter.</p><p></p><p> Fortunately, I'm not making a bunch of religious claims which crumble under various logical constructs of analysis. No, I'm only making literary claims at the moment. And as far as I know, they're not really open to empirical scrutiny on the level of experimental science. They may be open to some measure of rational scrutiny, however.</p><p></p><p> I'm not sure that at this point you'd indeed be justified in saying that the claims of 'my faith' are huge being that in my mind, the whole Christian edifice sits and soaks in an unusual metaphysical void. But yes, Christians have made some huge claims over the last few millennia, haven't they?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="2PhiloVoid, post: 75782081, member: 167101"] Oh, I'm sure it "sounds" like special pleading, but the extent to which that will actually be the case will depend upon which epistemological assumptions you import into your chosen mode of analysis. It might also depend on how open any of us might be as well to various reconsiderations among a host of assorted philosophers of Epistemology, or History, or Science, etc., etc. In what I've said previously, I'm not asking for special concessions in relation to your efforts to find the bible believable or not. Rather, in the same way that you're just pointing out that there are assertions some of us might take for granted about modern notions of belief in relation to Neuroscience, I'm simply pointing out that where belief is represented on a literary level within even just the pages of the New Testament alone, there is an espousal of an epistemological mode of thought, however piecemealed and hobbled together it is, that is not going to agree that belief is in total a "passive mental event." I suppose if Calvin was right, then maybe it is a passive event, but we can't be certain that Calvin's take on the epistemics in the N.T. are completely cogent either. Nope. I'm not making THAT claim. I'm Existentially inclined and more in line with some of the ideas we find in the [B]Philosophical Hermeneuticist[/B] camp. But I am making the claim that the content of the Bible doesn't provide us with an epistemic collection of notions that jive with our Modern assumptions. In fact, it doesn't even fully jive with various Post-modern assumptions for that matter. Fortunately, I'm not making a bunch of religious claims which crumble under various logical constructs of analysis. No, I'm only making literary claims at the moment. And as far as I know, they're not really open to empirical scrutiny on the level of experimental science. They may be open to some measure of rational scrutiny, however. I'm not sure that at this point you'd indeed be justified in saying that the claims of 'my faith' are huge being that in my mind, the whole Christian edifice sits and soaks in an unusual metaphysical void. But yes, Christians have made some huge claims over the last few millennia, haven't they? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Outreach
Outreach
Exploring Christianity
Belief is not a choice
Top
Bottom