181–190 of 294 posts
XD
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who are some examples of the type of modern philosopher you mean?
Not OP, and it depends on how 'modern' (or alive) fits the bill, but Heidegger is pretty impenetrable as a novice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This is inside out. What evidence was presented to you that made you believe Christianity was right? I don't think this is really the right way to think about Christianity for many believers. C.S. Lewis says, "I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else." It's not so much that Christianity is just another fact lying out there that…
I don't have evidence someone is a psychic, but I have common sense that if they're predictions could apply to anyone, they are probably scamming me. Just like if someone chalks up inconsistencies in the Bible to "God testing us" or the fact that the Bible has been edited repeatedly, picking whatever parts supported their authority at the time, that I'm probably being scammed. Now Christianity is so fragmented and pe…
My point was not you, as an atheist, shouldn't ask "what evidence do you have that Christianity is true". Rather, my point was that a Christian, in thinking rationally, is not forced to ask "what evidence do I have for this belief?". You as a nonbeliever might see just as good evidence in other religions as Christianity, great, that's fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is literally impossible to prove that god does not exist. It is not a disprovable statement. I also can't prove Ra, Zeus, Thor, Unicorns, Ghosts, or Superman don't exist.
Well, there are some atheists that argue that God's omnibenevolence is incompatible with the evils in the world, meaning God cannot exist (or at least, is either not omnibenevolent or not omnipotent, and if these are part of the definition of God, then God insofar as the term refers to something with at least these two properties, does not exist). Theists have responses to this argument, but the point is that the sub…
It never has lead to a point that proves God exists or not. Unless philosophy has moved way beyond my readings and I missed it.
I think the more important question is, "How would I know if I were wrong?" As a thinking Christian, and I've thought very carefully on what kind of evidence could be presented to me to show that Christianity was wrong; I'd be interested in what kind of evidence Dennet would accept to show him that his atheism was wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This is inside out. What evidence was presented to you that made you believe Christianity was right? I don't think this is really the right way to think about Christianity for many believers. C.S. Lewis says, "I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else." It's not so much that Christianity is just another fact lying out there that…
> No - it's a belief that shapes the very way we understand the world. It's a worldview. For Christians. You kind of do have to grapple with the fact that billions of people do not have that worldview, and therefore you do have to compare the Christian worldview to the non-Christian worldview. > >they were told from a young age that this was real and just kept believing as they grew up. > This is true, but if the imp…
For the Christian, this is presumably part of asking "what would lead me to believe Christianity is false?". That is, asking whether other religions should lead one to conclude Christianity is not true.
>Maybe that's the case with Roman mythology (though I don't have the dates)
Well, more than just the dates, it's about the intellectual rigor of people thinking about the theology. There is no serious equivalent in Roman mythology to, for example, Aquinas's Summa Theologiae, which includes grappling with questions such as "Whether the existence of God is self-evident?", "Whether God is the supreme good?", and "Whether sacred doctrine is a matter of argument?".
>but what about Hinduism? Buddhism? Islam? Judaism?
These are all fine traditions! Far and above Roman mythology. You could replace "Christianity" with any of these in my original comment, and it would still apply. There's a world of difference between "a silly belief that people held when they were a child and continue to hold just because of inertia" and "a serious belief with a rich intellectual history, though one among several other such beliefs".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No - it's a belief that shapes the very way we understand the world. It's a worldview. For Christians. You kind of do have to grapple with the fact that billions of people do not have that worldview, and therefore you do have to compare the Christian worldview to the non-Christian worldview. > >they were told from a young age that this was real and just kept believing as they grew up. > This is true, but if the imp…
>therefore you do have to compare the Christian worldview to the non-Christian worldview. For the Christian, this is presumably part of asking "what would lead me to believe Christianity is false?". That is, asking whether other religions should lead one to conclude Christianity is not true. >Maybe that's the case with Roman mythology (though I don't have the dates) Well, more than just the dates, it's about the inte…
I'm genuinely curious - do you actually know this? Or are you just assuming this based on the age of the Roman empire, the fact that they were older generations, etc? Cause I personally don't know that much about it, but we know ancient civilizations grappled with these kinds of questions all the time.
> These are all fine traditions! Far and above Roman mythology. You could replace "Christianity" with any of these in my original comment, and it would still apply. There's a world of difference between "a silly belief that people held when they were a child and continue to hold just because of inertia" and "a serious belief with a rich intellectual history, though one among several other such beliefs".
Yes, but I think you misunderstood my meaning. I was saying, if you substitute "Roman Mythology" with e.g. "Islam" in the parent comment, you can't just as easily brush it aside by saying "there is not rich intellectual tradition there".
As a Christian believer, I think you do have to grapple with billions of people, some of them as smart and sophisticate as any Christian, who follow a different belief system. That's why you have to argue "from the inside" as it were about why Christianity is right - some reason it is more correct than any other belief, or that other beliefs are wrong.
An Atheist makes a simpler argument - all of these beliefs are wrong. That is applied equally and consistently to all the different beliefs. A Christian by definition agrees with the Atheist on 99% of religious beliefs - namely all non-Christian beliefs - and probably for the same reason (lack of evidence that they are correct).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I've thought very carefully on what kind of evidence could be presented to me to show that Christianity was wrong This is inside out. What evidence was presented to you that made you believe Christianity was right? I became an Atheist in large part because I took Latin my first year in high school and realized that the Roman's actually believed in their gods the same way that I believed in the Christian god. And I…
> This is inside out. What evidence was presented to you that made you believe Christianity was right? It sounds like maybe some people are taking this as a challenge from me to atheists. I'm not really; just like Dennet is in TFA, I'm talking about general principles for someone trying to live as a rational creature: each of us should examine our own beliefs, and not only ask "What if I'm wrong?" but "How would I kn…
Not at all, I'm engaging in good faith here.
> This seems a bit strange to me... so the Romans believed in supernatural beings, and the Christians also believed in supernatural beings (and of course so did the Greeks, and the Persians, and the Babylonians, and the Egyptians, and...); but instead of this being evidence that there were supernatural beings of some sort (with some people maybe being closer to the truth of the matter than the others), you decided this was evidence that there weren't supernatural beings?
This is a common misinterpretation. Rather it made me rethink why I thought Zeus was a myth and my God was real and that led to me realizing there was no evidence that God was real, I had been taking it on faith.
If there is one thing the explosion of popularity for fantasy stories has shown us is that it is really easy for people to invent the supernatural.
> If the entire world were atheists except Christians, wouldn't that be far stronger evidence against the supernatural? The fact that the Romans believed in the supernatural and the afterlife is evidence -- weak evidence, I grant, but evidence nonetheless -- that the supernatural and the afterlife exist.
Many people believe that vaccines cause autism. There is no evidence that it does and I don't lend the theory any credence. Lots of people believing in something says very little.
But at a basic level, religion has numerous aspects that make it useful, good and bad, to people in general and people in power in particular. Christianity has long been used to manipulate and control for instance; but it also provided community, a common moral code (again, good and bad), shared joy in weddings and births, solace in grief and purpose.
> What would satisfy your requirements for a "verifiable miracle"?
In an age where everyone has a very high quality video camera in their pocket the sasquatch, the loch ness monster and other such things have mostly disappeared but miracles have not appeared.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is inside out. What evidence was presented to you that made you believe Christianity was right? It sounds like maybe some people are taking this as a challenge from me to atheists. I'm not really; just like Dennet is in TFA, I'm talking about general principles for someone trying to live as a rational creature: each of us should examine our own beliefs, and not only ask "What if I'm wrong?" but "How would I kn…
I myself am an atheist, but I gotta say that this is very well put > so the Romans believed in supernatural beings, and the Christians also believed in supernatural beings (and of course so did the Greeks, and the Persians, and the Babylonians, and the Egyptians, and...); but instead of this being evidence that there were supernatural beings of some sort [...] you decided this was evidence that there weren't supernat…
Humans are REALLY good a creating stories and investing in them.