GLT: i dont have sound output set up on this computer, could you perhaps summerize the type of argument he use, i am quite certain i have heard at least the gist of it before?
Why do you believe the bible? or not?
by AiAi 86 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
tec
Bohm - Faith is trust and belief - in someone or something. If we have chosen the right thing to put our faith in, then I certainly think it can be a virtue. If we put our faith in something bad, then no... not a virtue.
Faith can indeed be worthless, depending upon what or who we put it in.
Tammy
-
GLTirebiter
It's hard to summarize a book in a brief posting. This book should be available in your local library, and it's still available in soft cover (as of a few months ago). This quotation is a sample of what Lewis said:
I know that some people say the idea of a Law of Nature or decent behaviour known to all men is unsound, because different civilisations and different ages have had quite different moralities.
But this is not true. There have been differences between their moralities, but these have never amounted to anything like a total difference. If anyone will take the trouble to compare the moral teaching of, say, the ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, Hindus, Chinese, Greeks and Romans, what will really strike him will be how very like they are to each other and to our own.
...
But the most remarkable thing is this. Whenever you find a man who says he does not believe in a real Right and Wrong, you will find the same man going back on this a moment later. He may break his promise to you, but if you try breaking one to him he will be complaining "It's not fair" before you can say Jack Robinson.
...
It seems, then, we are forced to believe in a real Right and Wrong. People may be sometimes mistaken about them, just as people sometimes get their sums wrong; but they are not a matter of mere taste and opinion any more than the multiplication table. Now if we are agreed about that, I go on to my next point, which is this. None of us are really keeping the Law of Nature.
-
satinka
I believe parts of the Bible, but not the way the JWs teach it. I have discovered my own "truths" from the scriptures that make a lot more sense to me than what the jws preached.
satinka
-
AiAi
There are definately a lot of responses here to consider.
to clarify i was more concerned about the reasons for your faith, not just the fact you have faith or points of why its okay to have (or not have) it. also, I am definately not gonna make my final decision (if there ever is one) based on others reasoning, but I do think outside points of views can be helpful; it definately seems so in a lot of experiences on here of how people left the borg.
with that being said, so far i have noticed most people that believe in the bible do so almost wholly because they cant bare to believe anything else. no one has given any real reason to believe the bible yet. I really would appreciate some. I do understand there can not be any proof either way but I did not ask for that.
But to be clear I really do appreciate all of the responses so far.
thank you :)
-
bohm
GLT: its a bit funny since i was thinking about starting exactly this kind of topic just yesterday, so here goes:
the problem is that CS Lewis introduce what i believe is a very good argument against the christian God, the existence of the moral standards we observe. The only way it come out as an argument for christianity is because CS Lewis ignore evolution, common sence and occams razor. Lets say there are two models: (A) christianity, (B) "No-God & evolution".
In model (B) everything is very easy to explain: Evolution make a society without harmfull actions inherently unstable and hence impossible, and at the same time, a society only dominated by harmfull actions would fall apart: People would be to busy eating their own children to produce viable offspring. You can go along this analysis through evolutionary psychology, and you end up with morals that are approximately like those humans are pre-programmed with: Be generally nice to others. When people are nice to you, be nice to them in return. When people do you wrong, begin to do them wrong.
I dont say we act like that all the time, the individual will try to modify its strategy of survival, however, i claim evolution program us to act like that, and evolution program us to react strongly to those who does not follow those maxims. In other words, without the christian model, the "right/wrong" follow entirely from evolution and hence from natural laws.
In model (A) the answer is: "God programmed us with Right/Wrong". The question is then: "Where did God get his sence of Right/Wrong from?" (side question: why the random capitalization?). Perry would argue from definition, "God IS good", but he could just as well be evil: As such (A) has one more problem than (B) with respect to occams razor. just saying "God made us with a sence of Right and Wrong" also open up the can of worms that are the Euthyprho dialogue.
So while (B) gave a perfectly fine explanation that fit the observations (and only the observation, it would never fit a society where everyone was perfectly good!), (A) need to assume one thing out of another while it does not really explain anything, it is a just-so story.
And then it only gets worse: Model (A) suddenly have to explain why a perfectly good and powerfull God allow his subjects (which he love) to be subject to so much evil -- enter the worst explanation ever deviced by humans, satan (thats one more huge assumption for occams razor), and all the problems of why a God want us to forgive other while he has arsed around for 6000 years (and counting) and so far only managed the occational genocide and killing his own son..
Any normal person would have send satan to mars to cool off and/or forgiven adam and eve in a heartbeat; im sure you would have.
CS Lewis is good with words, but i dont think his argument hold any water.
-
designs
Bohm-
You're always on top of your game with good questions and observations.
-
bohm
why thanks designs!
I think religion has tried to explain these things for so long, and come up with such complicated explanations, it naturally assume its self-contradictory half-working explanations are the right framework, and the problem must be posed in that language (Right/Wrong, Natural Law, etc.), and that the questions are fundamentally hard. Hence it is assumed they are a problem for atheism without checking if it is really so.
yes, atheism will never explain "Absolute Morals(TM)". But religion never even demonstrate it exist before it fail to explain it!
-
Terry
Obviously if any of us were born into a fine, loving family that taught us to worship a Tootsie Roll pop on a mountain top we wouldn't question it.
The love, care, consideration and warm concern for our well-being of our parents profoundly disables skepticism.
We'd have FAITH and BELIEF in the Mountain Top Pop and see "evidence" everywhere.
-
Heaven
I believe parts of the Bible, but not the way the JWs teach it. I have discovered my own "truths" from the scriptures that make a lot more sense to me than what the jws preached.
satinka
satinka... I think this is the only way you can approach the Bible. You must take from it that which aligns with principles that work -- what Stephen Covey calls "True North Principles".
Since the Bible has been shown to be error prone, inaccurate, and contradictory, it is an unjustice to all mankind to shove the theory down our throats that it is the 'inerrant word of God' like we all have to blindly accept everything in it as truth beyond reproach. There are ideals in the Bible that just don't work anymore. We've moved beyond them.
There is a saying that goes ... "The books we read choose us; we do not choose them". I have yet to be able to force myself to read all the way through the Bible from start to finish. And yet, I couldn't put down "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People" and "First Things First" by Covey just to name a couple. These books speak to me far more than the ancient Bible, where we have moved beyond many of its outdated ideals (eg. slavery) and are moving forward in ways that ancient man could not have imagined.