[Vision2020] Mere Christianity!

[Joe Campbell]

Interesting thoughts, Ted, worthy of contemplation! Likewise with Ralph's comments. Sorry but I don't have time to discuss the details, not that I would have anything particularly interesting to offer.

One thing that I want to say, though, is that I don't have "a great need to 'prove' that one religion or ideology is above all others," any more than I have a great need to prove that my wife is the most beautiful woman alive. In either case, for me at least, belief is enough!

And as I noted at the end of my last post, I am a bit of a skeptic in all matters and think that religious tolerance and respect should be practiced by all -- including respect for those who think that all religions are non-sense. I am anti-extremism and dogmaticism of any form, religious or otherwise.

Best, Joe

---- Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com> wrote: 

=============
Paul et. al.

The role of faith and fact in human life (or how to define either), the
varying probabilities of the truth of beliefs that are based on either
faith, fact or a combination of both, is a very difficult subject, the
complexities of which are sometimes used to muddy the waters regarding
the difference by those who wish to believe whatever they want.

Extremism in religious or secular belief (like Communism, Stalin or Pol Pot,
or even the belief that the capitalist marketplace follows laws of economics
that insure the best outcome for the human race) appears to involve a state
of mind so dogmatic the motto "Don't confuse me with the facts, my minds
made up!" is adopted.

What might (maybe) lessen the negative consequences (religious war, worship
of the ideology of the State, as in Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, or China,
suicide bombers, justifying torture, denial of important scientific
evidence, oppression of women or homosexuals, etc.) of extreme dogmatism
of belief is the widespread promotion of skepticism in the absolute truth of
belief, any belief.  Then belief would be based on a special definition of
"faith," hopefully (I have faith!) of the kind inducing humility and less
arrogance in behavior, less absolutism, rather than an attempt to prove one
religion is true above others based on indisputable documentation and
reason.  Certainly skepticism is in order for the circular reasoning of
those who insist their "faith" is sufficient "fact" to justify belief
in God, or some supernatural entity, when they offer anecdotal evidence they
are guided directly from "above," and lead others based on their claims.
This is how some religions start.  But even the most humble scientific
theory is based on assumptions about how the universe operates that must be
taken on "faith" of a special kind:

Here are the five postulates required to support the scientific method from
page 487 of Bertrand Russell's "Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits:"

a.  The postulate of quasi-permanence

b.  The postulate of separable causal lines.

c.  The postulate of spatial-temporal continuity in causal lines.

d.  The postulate of the common causal origin of similar structures ranged
about a center,
or, more simply, the structural postulate.

e.  The postulate of analogy.
------------------------------------------

However, there is obviously a great need to "prove" that one religion or
ideology is above all others.  This makes sense.  Many do not want to admit
that there is insufficient evidence that their belief system, which they use
to guide and give meaning to their lives, is more true than all others, but
rather that they believe absolutely based on mostly "faith."  Anyone can
justify their adherence to a variety of belief systems on "faith."  This
basis tends to weaken the insistence that a given religion is true above all
others.  The need for certainty about how to live, the overwhelming sadness
and grief of the losses of death, the need to passionately believe that
human life plays an ultimate and essential role in the universe, is
fulfilled by absolute belief in one religious ideology above others.  These
needs are obviously overwhelming...

I have discussed the divine revelation of the Koran and the Bible, with both
Muslims and Christians, and both present their arguments and evidence that
one or the other is the true revealed word of God.  In both sets of
discussions no one simply said they have "faith" that the Koran or the Bible
is the true revealed word of God, without making an appeal to facts and
reason.

With Christians and Muslims, their religious loyalty hinges centrally on
this belief.  If the Bible or the Koran (how could it be both in differing
ways for someone who absolutely believes in one religion or the other?) is
the true revealed divine word of the One Creator of the Universe, and
following the words of one or the other book is mandated for an eternal life
in heaven, or else...

Incredible actions can be justified for those who fervently believe in these
ideas, as well they should, assuming they are the absolute truth.

Ted Moffett

On 7/28/07, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:

> How do either of you reconcile your fact-based religion with faith?  If
> there turns out to be no non-biblical historical record that Jesus was
> resurrected, does that mean that you would stop believing it?  If faith is
> required, then how can it be fact-based?  If faith is required, then why
> criticize others for a religion based on emotion and hope?  How is faith
> different than emotion or hope?  If faith has to be "rooted in fact", then
> doesn't it cease to be faith?
>
> The reason I suggest "non-biblical" historical records is that trying to
> use the books of the Bible to prove the existence of Jesus is a little like
> using the books of Harry Potter to prove the existence of Albus Dumbledore.
> An objective source that talks about the resurrection of Jesus would be
> helpful.  I'm not a historian - for all I know there may be tens of
> thousands of such accounts, but what if they were shown to be forgeries or
> something?  Would that affect the level of your belief?
>
> Does Doug Farris really know that much about "all other religions",
> anyway?  Is there no historical basis for the prophets of Islam (peace be
> upon them), for example?
>
> Paul
>
> keely emerinemix wrote:
>
>
>
> I believe that Christianity is based on evidence of the existence,
> deity, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, but I also believe that a
> defense of Christianity from Doug Farris is a little like a defense of
> sharpened math skills from former Enron CEO Ken Lay.
>
> keely
> (who is so techno-inept that it's taken her an hour to figure out how to
> log onto her computer while in Canada)
>
> "And these women that you spit on as they try to change their worlds/
> Are immune to your consultations . . . they're quite aware of what they're
> going through"
> (With apologies to David Bowie)
>
>
> > From: thansen at moscow.com
> > To: heirdoug at netscape.net; joekc at adelphia.net; vision2020 at moscow.com
> > Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 05:51:53 -0700
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Mere Christianity!
> >
> > "As more and more heathens 'choose' to not have children the number of
> Godly
> > souls will increase. If the number of Christian births out number the
> number
> > of Islamic births the battle will be over in 3 or 4 generations."
> >
> > - Doug "No-Clue" Farris (March 10, 2007)
> >
> > Kinda gives you that old-time Christian, warm, fuzzy feeling, doesn't
> it,
> > Joe?
> >
> > Please continue, No-Clue. We're listening.
> >
> > Tom "Born Again Pagan" Hansen
> > Moscow, Idaho
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [
> mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com <vision2020-bounces at moscow.com>]
> > On Behalf Of heirdoug at netscape.net
> > Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 11:39 PM
> > To: joekc at adelphia.net; vision2020 at moscow.com
> > Subject: [Vision2020] Mere Christianity!
> >
> > Joe,
> >
> > Is this the sum total of your understanding. ..."something more than
> > mere religious beliefs; maybe they are based on facts rather than
> > emotion. "
> >
> > Do you think and/or believe that one who has mere religious beliefs is
> > fuctioning on emotion and not facts? Then you truly are mislead because
> > the Christian faith is based upon nothing but facts, ie Jesus died and
> > was buried and was raised from the dead on the third day. These are not
> > based upon feelings and emotion. These three things are based upon
> > facts. eye witness accounts of seeing Christ before during and after
> > his death. All of the other religions of the world are based upon
> > feelings and emotion but not Christianity.
> >
> > Doug!
> > ____________________________________________________________
>
>