Can anyone explain how this wasn't God?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-05-2015, 02:19 PM
RE: Can anyone explain how this wasn't God?
(04-05-2015 01:54 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Sure, there are a variety of theologians and writers who are accessible, are more open to being understand by wider audiences, like G. K. Chesterton, C.S Lewis, Herbert Mccabe, Timothy Keller, etc...

Why do the Christians always seem to ignore Karl Barth oft regarded as the greatest Protestant theologian of the twentieth century? It's that Universal Reconciliation business isn't it?

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
04-05-2015, 02:28 PM
RE: Can anyone explain how this wasn't God?
(04-05-2015 02:19 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(04-05-2015 01:54 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Sure, there are a variety of theologians and writers who are accessible, are more open to being understand by wider audiences, like G. K. Chesterton, C.S Lewis, Herbert Mccabe, Timothy Keller, etc...

Why do the Christians always seem to ignore Karl Barth oft regarded as the greatest Protestant theologian of the twentieth century? It's that Universal Reconciliation business isn't it?

I'd put Karl Bath on that list too.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2015, 02:33 PM
RE: Can anyone explain how this wasn't God?
(04-05-2015 01:54 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Sure, there are a variety of theologians and writers who are accessible, are more open to being understand by wider audiences, like G. K. Chesterton, C.S Lewis, Herbert Mccabe, Timothy Keller, etc...

But I think your problem is not this, but that you want someone who has you in mind as their audience, who takes in your various objections and criticism, addressing your particular unique concerns. Who caters to your own quirks and sensibilities. In this regards there's likely to be none.

Those folks are not considered experts in anything that is accepted as proven fact. I know many experts in the Game of Thrones HBO series, but so what. What you do not comprehend is that those scientists do not care about the nature of the audience, do not have your unique criticism in mind, and do not cater to individual sensibilities - that is what religious leaders and so called authorities do quite well.

Your quirks, sensibilities, gulibilities, and need to feel uniquely special have caused you to hold "feels" and "magic" superior to evidence and undeniable facts.

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Timber1025's post
04-05-2015, 02:41 PM
RE: Can anyone explain how this wasn't God?
(04-05-2015 02:12 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  No, the real problem of why Christianity cannot produce the same caliber of advocates that Science can, is because religion is unable to form a consensus the way science can.

And this consensus agrees on everything? Jerry Coyne believes human consciousness is on-off, while Simon Morris believes it was inevitable. Both sides have their own particular supporters, and opponents.

And there are other who question the status quo all together, Rupert Sheldrake, Thomas Nagel, heretics of sort.

Quote:Each one of those aforementioned authors are going to have varying opinions on any number of theological topics, and they can all quote scripture to support their often contradictory positions.

They have a number of difference, but more similarities. In fact though they all belong to different traditions, any one of them could have picked up each others books and found themselves in a great deal of agreement with the rest of them.

Quote:No one in Christianity is capable of doing that, because it is a religion.

Except of course when they do, like C.S Lewis, G.K Chesterton, who appeals to christian traditions across the spectrum, and denominational lines.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2015, 02:44 PM
RE: Can anyone explain how this wasn't God?
(04-05-2015 02:33 PM)Timber1025 Wrote:  [ What you do not comprehend is that those scientists do not care about the nature of the audience.

They're primarily educators, so concern for their audience is of vital importance, there ability to articulate their views, in accessible ways to the general populace, to the sensibilities of their students is why we hold them in high regard. In fact, that's the very reason why they were highlighted previously.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2015, 02:57 PM
RE: Can anyone explain how this wasn't God?
(04-05-2015 02:41 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Except of course when they do, like C.S Lewis, G.K Chesterton, who appeals to christian traditions across the spectrum, and denominational lines.

Fair enough. And Ingersoll appeals to humanist ideals across the spectrum, including religious lines. The New Atheists and the "Four Horsemen of the Non-Apocalypse" are more concerned with promoting a political agenda than a metaphysical one. That political agenda is worth pursuing much like the FFRF and ACLU agendas, but it's far less interesting to Girly than metaphysics.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2015, 03:00 PM
RE: Can anyone explain how this wasn't God?
(04-05-2015 02:41 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(04-05-2015 02:12 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  No, the real problem of why Christianity cannot produce the same caliber of advocates that Science can, is because religion is unable to form a consensus the way science can.
And this consensus agrees on everything? Jerry Coyne believes human consciousness is on-off, while Simon Morris believes it was inevitable. Both sides have their own particular supporters, and opponents.

And there are other who question the status quo all together, Rupert Sheldrake, Thomas Nagel, heretics of sort.


Consensus =/= Unanimous

It is science, not the fucking Borg. Dodgy

Science has facts, and evidence can be evaluated and interpreted, but it always comes back to the facts.

The problem with religious claims is that they are always not evidently true, or evidently not true.


(04-05-2015 02:41 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(04-05-2015 02:12 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Each one of those aforementioned authors are going to have varying opinions on any number of theological topics, and they can all quote scripture to support their often contradictory positions.
They have a number of difference, but more similarities. In fact though they all belong to different traditions, any one of them could have picked up each others books and found themselves in a great deal of agreement with the rest of them.


Yeah, but the core problem is that there exists different traditions, seemingly for no better reason than that someone a long time ago disagreed with another person's subjective interpretation of an ancient myth. Notice how in science there isn't a tradition of legitimate astrologers who co-mingle with the cosmologists. One group is based on unfounded bullshit, and the other is based on evidence. It's why Tyson is the host of Cosmos and runs the Hayden planetarium and not a psychic hotline.


(04-05-2015 02:41 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(04-05-2015 02:12 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  No one in Christianity is capable of doing that, because it is a religion.
Except of course when they do, like C.S Lewis, G.K Chesterton, who appeals to christian traditions across the spectrum, and denominational lines.


Yeah, but the fact that the denominational lines exist at all is the very problem. Even here they don't build consensus by amassing a solid foundation of evidence and observations, they can't use logic and reason to convince those disagree with their positions; because they didn't use evidence, logic, or reason to reach their positions. They might think they have, but it's only because they don't know just how much they don't know. I've yet to meet an honest theologian who knew what made good evidence, and could objectively apply that same evaluation across the board without making exception for his own presuppositions.


Oh come on, you also cut out the interesting bits! Dodgy


(04-05-2015 02:12 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  No, the real problem of why Christianity cannot produce the same caliber of advocates that Science can, is because religion is unable to form a consensus the way science can. Each one of those aforementioned authors are going to have varying opinions on any number of theological topics, and they can all quote scripture to support their often contradictory positions. You don't see that with Tyson or Dawkins because they're advocates for science, the best method we have for determining what is factually accurate. Tyson can get on stage, give an interview, or make an episode of Cosmos and know that he has 95%+ of the scientific community at his back, because he's using facts. No one in Christianity is capable of doing that, because it is a religion.

It's the fundamental difference between knowledge and faith. Religions shard into ever increasing factions, science builds understanding and consensus.


Maybe the other reason is because a doctorate in Christian theology has as much basis in facts as a doctorate in Spider-Man...

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
04-05-2015, 03:13 PM
RE: Can anyone explain how this wasn't God?
(04-05-2015 02:44 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(04-05-2015 02:33 PM)Timber1025 Wrote:  [ What you do not comprehend is that those scientists do not care about the nature of the audience.

They're primarily educators, so concern for their audience is of vital importance, there ability to articulate their views, in accessible ways to the general populace, to the sensibilities of their students is why we hold them in high regard. In fact, that's the very reason why they were highlighted previously.

They care about conveying the facts behind how biology, physics, and chemistry work - period. I have been learning science since I was a child and my quirks and sensibilities are for me to manage, not the scientist presenting his/her knowledge on a subject. Yes they need to articulate the information to folks who want to learn how the world works, but the information is not altered to cater to any individual. In your world, your quirks and wishful thinking lead you to believe in a concept that has thousands of versions, and no real knowledge of its existence. So yeah, keep throwing out your baseless digs to scientists (anti-science weasels are the friggin worst).

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Timber1025's post
04-05-2015, 08:26 PM
RE: Can anyone explain how this wasn't God?
(04-05-2015 12:58 PM)Chas Wrote:  [quote='Tomasia' pid='775738' dateline='1430693280']

No, their particular education doesn't at all, in fact in might even be problematic in making observations in the human sphere, because their professional carriers tend to inoculate them from the everyday problems of human life.

And you still have not responded to my questions:

"Have you even read Breaking the Spell? Do you even understand Dennett's point?"

And Dennett is not speaking outside his area of expertise in that book - he's a philosopher. So there's that.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-05-2015, 11:41 PM
RE: Can anyone explain how this wasn't God?
(04-05-2015 01:54 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  You mean are their particularly good articulators of christianity and christian perspective and beliefs, the way Tyson and Dawkins are regarding their particular sciences?

Sure, there are a variety of theologians and writers who are accessible, are more open to being understand by wider audiences, like G. K. Chesterton, C.S Lewis, Herbert Mccabe, Timothy Keller, etc...

But I think your problem is not this, but that you want someone who has you in mind as their audience, who takes in your various objections and criticism, addressing your particular unique concerns. Who caters to your own quirks and sensibilities. In this regards there's likely to be none.

OK now wer'e on the same wavelength. Now here's my problem. Take Brian May for example. He starts telling you about the Large Hadron Collider. He explains in some kinda basic way how it works. He shows you some of the experiments. He explains what the physics says and interviews some of the guys working there. It's *interesting stuff*. Anyone can be grabbed by it and their attention held. And they *trust* what he's saying as not being bullshit. Why? Because they can *fact check* it.

Now take CS Lewis. I happen to have read a lot of his stuff. Some was good. Particularly the stuff that was not overtly Christian. But that aside. Anyway. He perhaps explains pretty well. But if you're a Christian you read his stuff and *either* a lot of the time he defers to "people who are much more clever than me". *Or* he says something bullshitty... And you being the good Christian that you are think "Hang on a sec, that sounds dodgy as fuck"... And there's *no recourse*. There's no way to check if what he's saying is sound or not because it's *all* opinion. So you either go find some scripture on your own and pray for guidance - another dodgy method for determining truth - or you ask your pastor his *opinion* - or you find some other method... but ja, it's just... not ideal.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like morondog's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: