Author Topic: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?  (Read 14636 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« on: October 25, 2010, 03:59:08 PM »
This is a continuation of the last several posts of this thread here: https://www.dreamtheaterforums.org/boards/index.php?topic=17249.0

The "water baptism" thread dealt specifically with the difference between philosophy and Christian theology (or lack thereof), but any religion is fair game here.

This is the last post of the thread, by j:

It seems that your definition of philosophy is different than mine, which is why we're having issues.  I don't regard reading the Bible and believing it as philosophy, but you seem to.

If you use reason and logic, then you use philosophy.  Maybe you don't, I don't know.  But I can't imagine that scenario.

And have you never asked yourself WHY you believe the bible as absolute truth?

Quote
Reading the book, and saying "These facts are true" is completely different than saying, "I wonder what this could possibly mean?"

But how did you conclude that "these facts are true"?  Don't you have to understand what things mean in order to "believe" in them, or apply them to your life?

Quote
You're making something incredibly simple and twisting it into something introspective and mystical.  Which is what most Christians do, by the way, and which is why the Christian church as a whole is a mess.

Incredibly simple?  We're talking about a collection of massively varied writings, with different authors, writing styles, intents, and time periods, among other things.  Inspired by God or not, you're delusional if you think that any honest person can just sit down and immediately understand what they read.  It's a popular idea among Christians who don't want to give too much consideration to things, but it's obviously and demonstrably false.

If you're a strict biblical "literalist" (can't remember the term, sorry :lol), which I get the feeling you might be, it's easy for things to seem simpler, but there are much bigger problems with that view that are probably beyond the scope of this thread.  Not that we're not far beyond it already.

Anyway, there are a lot of reasons Christianity is a mess.  People thinking "too much" is not one of them. :lol

Quote
You base a lot of your ideas around the fact that there are so many methods and views on interpreting Scripture.  So many people come to so many different conclusions.  But you know why?  It's because they took something out of something simple that wasn't there in the first place.  If you approach the Bible with a believing heart, interpreting the Bible as meaning what it says, and saying what it means (in other words, literally, then yes, you will run into problems, but not nearly to the extent of a Roman Catholic, for example.

See above.  Of course people over-analyze things, but "under-analysis" and a demonizing of knowledge and reason is a much bigger problem.

-J
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2010, 04:04:04 PM »
J, you're missing the point.  I'm not telling you that knowledge or reason are bad.  I am telling you that knowledge or reason outside of God's revelation will lead to no concrete answers, contradictions, and inevitably, a lost of trust in logic.  When two philosophers present their arguments, and there don't seem to be any flaws in either of them, and they arrive at opposite conclusions, what does that tell you?  That human logic and reason is not enough.
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline Seventh Son

  • Posts: 2496
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #2 on: October 25, 2010, 04:05:53 PM »
Yes and no, but that doesn't stop people from combining them together.

Both Philosophy and Religion aim to answer questions in life. Some philosophy is secular, some is spiritually inspired. Some will use their faith when philosophizing, others won't use any faith at all.

So, it is possible to use philosophy without using religion, but religion doesn't have to be devoid of philosophy.
Every time someone brings up "Never Enough", the terrorists win.

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #3 on: October 25, 2010, 04:14:58 PM »
J, you're missing the point.  I'm not telling you that knowledge or reason are bad.  I am telling you that knowledge or reason outside of God's revelation will lead to no concrete answers, contradictions, and inevitably, a lost of trust in logic.  When two philosophers present their arguments, and there don't seem to be any flaws in either of them, and they arrive at opposite conclusions, what does that tell you?  That human logic and reason is not enough.

This is not an opinion that is very conducive to debate.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #4 on: October 25, 2010, 04:20:54 PM »
*snip*
« Last Edit: October 25, 2010, 04:38:00 PM by BrotherH »
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline j

  • Posts: 2794
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #5 on: October 25, 2010, 04:31:11 PM »
This is not an opinion that is very conducive to debate.

You're right--it's not an opinion, it's a fact.  Care to argue with it?

Come on, Brother. ::)

J, you're missing the point.  I'm not telling you that knowledge or reason are bad.  I am telling you that knowledge or reason outside of God's revelation will lead to no concrete answers, contradictions, and inevitably, a lost of trust in logic.

So you agree that it's good and necessary to apply reason to "God's revelation", whatever you may consider that to be?  Even if you don't, you inevitably use it whether you realize it or not.

Quote
When two philosophers present their arguments, and there don't seem to be any flaws in either of them, and they arrive at opposite conclusions, what does that tell you?  That human logic and reason is not enough.

It tells me that there are actually flaws in one or both lines of reasoning, despite what it may seem.  Why would you make the huge leap from there to your italicized conclusion?

Also, the question could simply be unanswerable.  The bounds of logic are abstract, but universal.  Surely you agree that there are questions that cannot be answered, even if you hold that the bible is God's revelation?

-J

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #6 on: October 25, 2010, 04:32:45 PM »
J, you're missing the point.  I'm not telling you that knowledge or reason are bad.  I am telling you that knowledge or reason outside of God's revelation will lead to no concrete answers, contradictions, and inevitably, a lost of trust in logic.  When two philosophers present their arguments, and there don't seem to be any flaws in either of them, and they arrive at opposite conclusions, what does that tell you?  That human logic and reason is not enough.

This is not an opinion that is very conducive to debate.

You're right--it's not an opinion, it's a fact.  Care to argue with it?

Because even if you went with the fundamental assumptions that:

a. there is a God
b. the Bible is 100% God's revelation

you would be extremely restricted in what you could achieve.  There is so much knowledge outside of what the Bible covers.  


But the point I was getting at is that is when your opinion rests upon the unverifiable, there is no way to debate it.  If you start with the belief that x is 100% true and everything else is wrong, there's no room for discussion, especially when x is something that, fundamentally, is unverifiable through scientific, historical, etc. means.

I mean, I'm sure I could produce a long-winded argument why we shouldn't rely on the Bible for investigating geologic history, but I doubt that would shake your beliefs one iota.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #7 on: October 25, 2010, 04:36:13 PM »
I can't say I've ever seen the situation where two people present impenetrable arguments of opposing opinions.
The problem with arguing with religion is that the axioms are not only ad hoc, they're not even demonstrable.

"I liked when Myung looked like a women's figure skating champion."

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #8 on: October 25, 2010, 04:37:30 PM »
Yeah, I was kind of being a douche.  Usually I make fun of people for grammatical errors (which it wasn't, but I thought it was), but in hindsight it probably not a good idea on the P/R section.

I apologize.
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #9 on: October 25, 2010, 04:43:50 PM »
This is not an opinion that is very conducive to debate.

You're right--it's not an opinion, it's a fact.  Care to argue with it?

Come on, Brother. ::)

J, you're missing the point.  I'm not telling you that knowledge or reason are bad.  I am telling you that knowledge or reason outside of God's revelation will lead to no concrete answers, contradictions, and inevitably, a lost of trust in logic.

So you agree that it's good and necessary to apply reason to "God's revelation", whatever you may consider that to be?  Even if you don't, you inevitably use it whether you realize it or not.

Quote
When two philosophers present their arguments, and there don't seem to be any flaws in either of them, and they arrive at opposite conclusions, what does that tell you?  That human logic and reason is not enough.

It tells me that there are actually flaws in one or both lines of reasoning, despite what it may seem.  Why would you make the huge leap from there to your italicized conclusion?

Also, the question could simply be unanswerable.  The bounds of logic are abstract, but universal.  Surely you agree that there are questions that cannot be answered, even if you hold that the bible is God's revelation?

-J

Ah...maybe I'm not being as clear as I should be.  My point is that universal logic exists, yes.  But my point is also that there always seems to be some kind of flaw in a philopher's argument that one of his opponents will be able to identify.  No one has been able to conclusively prove something, where there can be no rebuttal.  Even asserting something as fundamental as 2=2 will have some skeptics in doubt.

There's just no answers in philosophy, just questions.  That tells me that if I am interested in finding truth, I've got to look elsewhere, since thousands of years of philosophy haven't accomplished anything.
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline Seventh Son

  • Posts: 2496
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #10 on: October 25, 2010, 04:48:42 PM »
This is not an opinion that is very conducive to debate.

You're right--it's not an opinion, it's a fact.  Care to argue with it?

Come on, Brother. ::)

J, you're missing the point.  I'm not telling you that knowledge or reason are bad.  I am telling you that knowledge or reason outside of God's revelation will lead to no concrete answers, contradictions, and inevitably, a lost of trust in logic.

So you agree that it's good and necessary to apply reason to "God's revelation", whatever you may consider that to be?  Even if you don't, you inevitably use it whether you realize it or not.

Quote
When two philosophers present their arguments, and there don't seem to be any flaws in either of them, and they arrive at opposite conclusions, what does that tell you?  That human logic and reason is not enough.

It tells me that there are actually flaws in one or both lines of reasoning, despite what it may seem.  Why would you make the huge leap from there to your italicized conclusion?

Also, the question could simply be unanswerable.  The bounds of logic are abstract, but universal.  Surely you agree that there are questions that cannot be answered, even if you hold that the bible is God's revelation?

-J

Ah...maybe I'm not being as clear as I should be.  My point is that universal logic exists, yes.  But my point is also that there always seems to be some kind of flaw in a philopher's argument that one of his opponents will be able to identify.  No one has been able to conclusively prove something, where there can be no rebuttal.  Even asserting something as fundamental as 2=2 will have some skeptics in doubt.

There's just no answers in philosophy, just questions.  That tells me that if I am interested in finding truth, I've got to look elsewhere, since thousands of years of philosophy haven't accomplished anything.
If someone doubts that 2 is equal to itself, that doesn't mean that 2=2 isn't true. It just means someone is an idiot.

Anyway, then why all the different denominations that can't agree on which interpretation of the bible is correct? That to me implies the very same thing you are talking about.
Every time someone brings up "Never Enough", the terrorists win.

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #11 on: October 25, 2010, 04:51:20 PM »
This is not an opinion that is very conducive to debate.

You're right--it's not an opinion, it's a fact.  Care to argue with it?

Come on, Brother. ::)

J, you're missing the point.  I'm not telling you that knowledge or reason are bad.  I am telling you that knowledge or reason outside of God's revelation will lead to no concrete answers, contradictions, and inevitably, a lost of trust in logic.

So you agree that it's good and necessary to apply reason to "God's revelation", whatever you may consider that to be?  Even if you don't, you inevitably use it whether you realize it or not.

Quote
When two philosophers present their arguments, and there don't seem to be any flaws in either of them, and they arrive at opposite conclusions, what does that tell you?  That human logic and reason is not enough.

It tells me that there are actually flaws in one or both lines of reasoning, despite what it may seem.  Why would you make the huge leap from there to your italicized conclusion?

Also, the question could simply be unanswerable.  The bounds of logic are abstract, but universal.  Surely you agree that there are questions that cannot be answered, even if you hold that the bible is God's revelation?

-J

Ah...maybe I'm not being as clear as I should be.  My point is that universal logic exists, yes.  But my point is also that there always seems to be some kind of flaw in a philopher's argument that one of his opponents will be able to identify.  No one has been able to conclusively prove something, where there can be no rebuttal.  Even asserting something as fundamental as 2=2 will have some skeptics in doubt.

There's just no answers in philosophy, just questions.  That tells me that if I am interested in finding truth, I've got to look elsewhere, since thousands of years of philosophy haven't accomplished anything.
If someone doubts that 2 is equal to itself, that doesn't mean that 2=2 isn't true. It just means someone is an idiot.

Anyway, then why all the different denominations that can't agree on which interpretation of the bible is correct? That to me implies the very same thing you are talking about.

That's what it means to me too.  :lol  But you still have people that claim that.

I'm not really sure what you mean by the denominational differences, and differences in interpretation.  I assume you are making the claim that since interpretations are debated constantly, there's really no assurance there either?  Well, my answer to that would be that a literal interpretation ends that type of debate. (or at least, interpretational debate)
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline Seventh Son

  • Posts: 2496
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #12 on: October 25, 2010, 04:56:27 PM »
This is not an opinion that is very conducive to debate.

You're right--it's not an opinion, it's a fact.  Care to argue with it?

Come on, Brother. ::)

J, you're missing the point.  I'm not telling you that knowledge or reason are bad.  I am telling you that knowledge or reason outside of God's revelation will lead to no concrete answers, contradictions, and inevitably, a lost of trust in logic.

So you agree that it's good and necessary to apply reason to "God's revelation", whatever you may consider that to be?  Even if you don't, you inevitably use it whether you realize it or not.

Quote
When two philosophers present their arguments, and there don't seem to be any flaws in either of them, and they arrive at opposite conclusions, what does that tell you?  That human logic and reason is not enough.

It tells me that there are actually flaws in one or both lines of reasoning, despite what it may seem.  Why would you make the huge leap from there to your italicized conclusion?

Also, the question could simply be unanswerable.  The bounds of logic are abstract, but universal.  Surely you agree that there are questions that cannot be answered, even if you hold that the bible is God's revelation?

-J

Ah...maybe I'm not being as clear as I should be.  My point is that universal logic exists, yes.  But my point is also that there always seems to be some kind of flaw in a philopher's argument that one of his opponents will be able to identify.  No one has been able to conclusively prove something, where there can be no rebuttal.  Even asserting something as fundamental as 2=2 will have some skeptics in doubt.

There's just no answers in philosophy, just questions.  That tells me that if I am interested in finding truth, I've got to look elsewhere, since thousands of years of philosophy haven't accomplished anything.
If someone doubts that 2 is equal to itself, that doesn't mean that 2=2 isn't true. It just means someone is an idiot.

Anyway, then why all the different denominations that can't agree on which interpretation of the bible is correct? That to me implies the very same thing you are talking about.

That's what it means to me too.  :lol  But you still have people that claim that.

I'm not really sure what you mean by the denominational differences, and differences in interpretation.  I assume you are making the claim that since interpretations are debated constantly, there's really no assurance there either?  Well, my answer to that would be that a literal interpretation ends that type of debate. (or at least, interpretational debate)

Not really. I mean, you will always have those that think the bible was never meant to be taken literally, and those (like yourself) that think it should be taken literally. I don't think you're going to be able to eliminate the first group just because you think it should be interpreted literally. Its human nature to interpret things differently, and I doubt that will change.
Every time someone brings up "Never Enough", the terrorists win.

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #13 on: October 25, 2010, 04:58:43 PM »
How can literalism end anything if everything you have was at least 5 decades after the purported event?  I know, I know, supposedly the writers were all divinely inspired, that's not based on anything more than theological wishful thinking. And, you would have to know who the writers even were.

rumborak
"I liked when Myung looked like a women's figure skating champion."

Offline Seventh Son

  • Posts: 2496
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #14 on: October 25, 2010, 05:01:41 PM »
Also, what's to say that the writers that were "Divinely Inspired" couldn't have simply misinterpreted what God was trying to tell them? After all, humans are not perfect and its possible that human biases meshed with divine inspiration, no?
Every time someone brings up "Never Enough", the terrorists win.

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #15 on: October 25, 2010, 05:03:33 PM »
Also, what's to say that the writers that were "Divinely Inspired" couldn't have simply misinterpreted what God was trying to tell them? After all, humans are not perfect and its possible that human biases meshed with divine inspiration, no?

I know people hate this word but....dictation.  Leaves out human error.  But that's just my view.
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #16 on: October 25, 2010, 05:03:53 PM »
And what if the writers of the Bible were divinely inspired, but someone edited their work?  What if Jesus was actually the son of Gob?
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline j

  • Posts: 2794
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #17 on: October 25, 2010, 05:12:07 PM »
I'm not really sure what you mean by the denominational differences, and differences in interpretation.  I assume you are making the claim that since interpretations are debated constantly, there's really no assurance there either?  Well, my answer to that would be that a literal interpretation ends that type of debate. (or at least, interpretational debate)

As I stated in the other thread, this is demonstrably false.

I do agree that philosophy rarely answers questions, though.  And while you're right that in a technical sense, nothing can ever be "proven" per se, that's not really relevant.  We can know things with near absolute certainty, and practically, that's good enough.  There comes a point, like Seventh Son said, where doubting something with vast evidence in its favor makes you less of a "cautious skeptic" and more of an "idiot".

-J

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #18 on: October 25, 2010, 05:14:00 PM »
Actually, mathematics is the only absolute.  There's a reason that the best bet for making contact with an alien civilization is by broadcasting/receiving a series of prime numbers.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline rumborak

  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 26664
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #19 on: October 25, 2010, 05:14:06 PM »
And what if the writers of the Bible were divinely inspired, but someone edited their work?  What if Jesus was actually the son of Gob?

Well, the argument goes that everybody along the line was inspired too, including the pagan Germanic tribes that developed the English language you're reading your version of the Bible in.

rumborak
"I liked when Myung looked like a women's figure skating champion."

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #20 on: October 25, 2010, 05:15:14 PM »
Didn't we have a debate a while back where someone was claiming that the King James version was the Bible because it said it was?
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Seventh Son

  • Posts: 2496
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #21 on: October 25, 2010, 05:15:56 PM »
Also, what's to say that the writers that were "Divinely Inspired" couldn't have simply misinterpreted what God was trying to tell them? After all, humans are not perfect and its possible that human biases meshed with divine inspiration, no?

I know people hate this word but....dictation.  Leaves out human error.  But that's just my view.
Please elaborate. From my understanding, humans are prone to error and bias. Does God hack into the person and write everything down then?
Every time someone brings up "Never Enough", the terrorists win.

Offline Philawallafox

  • ManChild
  • Posts: 208
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #22 on: October 25, 2010, 05:17:15 PM »
This is a continuation of the last several posts of this thread here: https://www.dreamtheaterforums.org/boards/index.php?topic=17249.0

The "water baptism" thread dealt specifically with the difference between philosophy and Christian theology (or lack thereof), but any religion is fair game here.

This is the last post of the thread, by j:

It seems that your definition of philosophy is different than mine, which is why we're having issues.  I don't regard reading the Bible and believing it as philosophy, but you seem to.

If you use reason and logic, then you use philosophy.  Maybe you don't, I don't know.  But I can't imagine that scenario.

And have you never asked yourself WHY you believe the bible as absolute truth?

I believe the Bible is true because so much of it is historically verifiable. the amount that is historically verifiable actually goes up more and more each day.

Quote
Quote
Reading the book, and saying "These facts are true" is completely different than saying, "I wonder what this could possibly mean?"

But how did you conclude that "these facts are true"?  Don't you have to understand what things mean in order to "believe" in them, or apply them to your life?

if there is something in the bible you don't understand it's usually explained somewhere else. Some stuff like Revelation 2:17 isn't. We have no idea what the point is about the stone but it's not a doctrinal statement so it doesn't really matter. I assume it meant something to the church of Smyrna which is good enough for me. You'll find most things that you can't find explained in other scripture don't have doctrinal value (I think, I haven't really done a survey of the bible focussing specifically on this sort of thing.) If you find one let me know.

Quote
Quote
You're making something incredibly simple and twisting it into something introspective and mystical.  Which is what most Christians do, by the way, and which is why the Christian church as a whole is a mess.

Incredibly simple?  We're talking about a collection of massively varied writings, with different authors, writing styles, intents, and time periods, among other things.  Inspired by God or not, you're delusional if you think that any honest person can just sit down and immediately understand what they read.  It's a popular idea among Christians who don't want to give too much consideration to things, but it's obviously and demonstrably false.
and languages, don't forget languages. However, If it's all divinely inspired by an unchangeable God it must all fit together...Remember it's a progressive unfolding of revelation.

I will concede that no one can "immediately" understand the whole bible perfectly. that's why we have pastors that go to bible colleges so that they can learn as much as they can and help us understand. That's why prominent pastors write commentaries for other pastors. eventually we'll get better and better.

In the meantime those of us who don't know the bible that well have the main point of the bible in the Gospels. That's what christians everywhere agree on. Jesus died for our sins and rose again in victory 3 days later. He was God incarnate and sinless which is why his sacrifice was effective.

Quote
If you're a strict biblical "literalist" (can't remember the term, sorry :lol), which I get the feeling you might be, it's easy for things to seem simpler, but there are much bigger problems with that view that are probably beyond the scope of this thread.  Not that we're not far beyond it already.

Anyway, there are a lot of reasons Christianity is a mess.  People thinking "too much" is not one of them. :lol

Quote

Actually there's only one reason why Christianity is a mess.
Sin. because of sin we're all selfish. Because of selfishness people take out the stuff they don't like from the bible. because of selfish laziness people don't read their bible and meditate on it as much as they should and as a result they aren't as open to God's work in their lives.
You base a lot of your ideas around the fact that there are so many methods and views on interpreting Scripture.  So many people come to so many different conclusions.  But you know why?  It's because they took something out of something simple that wasn't there in the first place.  If you approach the Bible with a believing heart, interpreting the Bible as meaning what it says, and saying what it means (in other words, literally, then yes, you will run into problems, but not nearly to the extent of a Roman Catholic, for example.

See above.  Of course people over-analyze things, but "under-analysis" and a demonizing of knowledge and reason is a much bigger problem.

-J

Offline Philawallafox

  • ManChild
  • Posts: 208
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #23 on: October 25, 2010, 05:22:53 PM »
How can literalism end anything if everything you have was at least 5 decades after the purported event?  I know, I know, supposedly the writers were all divinely inspired, that's not based on anything more than theological wishful thinking. And, you would have to know who the writers even were.

rumborak

Actually like I demonstrated in another thread: The gospels were written no later than 30 years after Jesus death.

Paul's letters were actually written even earlier than the earliest gospel. (Mark) some of Paul's stuff clocks in around the 40's. that's roughly 10 years after Jesus death.

Mark wrote What peter told him. Peter was one of Jesus inner circle (Peter, James and John)

Matthew was one of Jesus 12 Disciples

Luke travelled with Paul

John was also one of Jesus inner 3.

2 eye witnesses, 1 faithful reporter of an eyewitness and Luke. if you doubt Luke's authenticity read his introduction. Then compare and contrast him with other gospels.

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #24 on: October 25, 2010, 05:26:26 PM »
Also, what's to say that the writers that were "Divinely Inspired" couldn't have simply misinterpreted what God was trying to tell them? After all, humans are not perfect and its possible that human biases meshed with divine inspiration, no?

I know people hate this word but....dictation.  Leaves out human error.  But that's just my view.
Please elaborate. From my understanding, humans are prone to error and bias. Does God hack into the person and write everything down then?

That God reached into the library of their vocabulary, selected the words to be used, and told the writers what to write.  That's why a lot of the prophets didn't even understand what they wrote themselves.
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #25 on: October 25, 2010, 05:27:46 PM »
Also, what's to say that the writers that were "Divinely Inspired" couldn't have simply misinterpreted what God was trying to tell them? After all, humans are not perfect and its possible that human biases meshed with divine inspiration, no?

I know people hate this word but....dictation.  Leaves out human error.  But that's just my view.
Please elaborate. From my understanding, humans are prone to error and bias. Does God hack into the person and write everything down then?

That God reached into the library of their vocabulary, selected the words to be used, and told the writers what to write.  That's why a lot of the prophets didn't even understand what they wrote themselves.

OK, even if this were true, which version is definitive?  We don't have their first drafts.  We have a dozen or so prominent translations.  Which one is the Bible?
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Online hefdaddy42

  • Et in Arcadia Ego
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 52786
  • Gender: Male
  • Postwhore Emeritus
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #26 on: October 25, 2010, 05:28:18 PM »
Actually like I demonstrated in another thread: The gospels were written no later than 30 years after Jesus death.

Paul's letters were actually written even earlier than the earliest gospel. (Mark) some of Paul's stuff clocks in around the 40's. that's roughly 10 years after Jesus death.

Mark wrote What peter told him. Peter was one of Jesus inner circle (Peter, James and John)

Matthew was one of Jesus 12 Disciples

Luke travelled with Paul

John was also one of Jesus inner 3.

2 eye witnesses, 1 faithful reporter of an eyewitness and Luke. if you doubt Luke's authenticity read his introduction. Then compare and contrast him with other gospels.
None of that is fact.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline Philawallafox

  • ManChild
  • Posts: 208
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #27 on: October 25, 2010, 05:29:40 PM »
Actually, mathematics is the only absolute.  There's a reason that the best bet for making contact with an alien civilization is by broadcasting/receiving a series of prime numbers.

except for the imaginary number system. And algebra. And the number 0 does it exist?

The speed of light is the only physical absolute...so they say. I have heard arguments to the contrary though.

Also...are they doing it in series of beeps or are they just assuming that an alien that has had absolutely no contact with Earth will understand the human language(s) it's being transmitted in?

Offline j

  • Posts: 2794
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #28 on: October 25, 2010, 05:30:49 PM »
Actually, mathematics is the only absolute.  There's a reason that the best bet for making contact with an alien civilization is by broadcasting/receiving a series of prime numbers.

I might hesitate to say that even it is "absolute", but it's certainly the only discipline for which it can be considered.  And for all practical purposes, it is anyway.

@Phil: I think you missed a quote or /quote tag somewhere. :lol

-J

Offline Seventh Son

  • Posts: 2496
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #29 on: October 25, 2010, 05:32:21 PM »
Also, what's to say that the writers that were "Divinely Inspired" couldn't have simply misinterpreted what God was trying to tell them? After all, humans are not perfect and its possible that human biases meshed with divine inspiration, no?

I know people hate this word but....dictation.  Leaves out human error.  But that's just my view.
Please elaborate. From my understanding, humans are prone to error and bias. Does God hack into the person and write everything down then?

That God reached into the library of their vocabulary, selected the words to be used, and told the writers what to write.  That's why a lot of the prophets didn't even understand what they wrote themselves.
Well, what if those words were not meant to be taken literally? Again, if no one is able to understand God, there is no way of knowing if those words were meant to inspire imagery or to be taken word-for-word. I personally say go with what makes the most sense to you. That's what I did!  :biggrin:

Actually, mathematics is the only absolute.  There's a reason that the best bet for making contact with an alien civilization is by broadcasting/receiving a series of prime numbers.

except for the imaginary number system. And algebra. And the number 0 does it exist?

The speed of light is the only physical absolute...so they say. I have heard arguments to the contrary though.

Also...are they doing it in series of beeps or are they just assuming that an alien that has had absolutely no contact with Earth will understand the human language(s) it's being transmitted in?

Are you seriously doubting 0 being an actual number? Really? Really?
Every time someone brings up "Never Enough", the terrorists win.

Offline Philawallafox

  • ManChild
  • Posts: 208
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #30 on: October 25, 2010, 05:32:37 PM »
Actually like I demonstrated in another thread: The gospels were written no later than 30 years after Jesus death.

Paul's letters were actually written even earlier than the earliest gospel. (Mark) some of Paul's stuff clocks in around the 40's. that's roughly 10 years after Jesus death.

Mark wrote What peter told him. Peter was one of Jesus inner circle (Peter, James and John)

Matthew was one of Jesus 12 Disciples

Luke travelled with Paul

John was also one of Jesus inner 3.

2 eye witnesses, 1 faithful reporter of an eyewitness and Luke. if you doubt Luke's authenticity read his introduction. Then compare and contrast him with other gospels.
None of that is fact.
Prove it. I'm starting to get sick of people on here taking a well backed up post and just saying something equivalent to "nuh uhhhhhh"

Offline Philawallafox

  • ManChild
  • Posts: 208
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #31 on: October 25, 2010, 05:34:06 PM »
Actually, mathematics is the only absolute.  There's a reason that the best bet for making contact with an alien civilization is by broadcasting/receiving a series of prime numbers.

I might hesitate to say that even it is "absolute", but it's certainly the only discipline for which it can be considered.  And for all practical purposes, it is anyway.

@Phil: I think you missed a quote or /quote tag somewhere. :lol

-J

:lol yeah sorry about that :P

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #32 on: October 25, 2010, 05:34:34 PM »
Actually, mathematics is the only absolute.  There's a reason that the best bet for making contact with an alien civilization is by broadcasting/receiving a series of prime numbers.

except for the imaginary number system. And algebra. And the number 0 does it exist?

The speed of light is the only physical absolute...so they say. I have heard arguments to the contrary though.

Also...are they doing it in series of beeps or are they just assuming that an alien that has had absolutely no contact with Earth will understand the human language(s) it's being transmitted in?

No, all those examples you cited are absolute.  Imaginary numbers are not "imaginary", they're just ways we represent more abstract concepts.  They have very real implications in many disciplines of science and mathematics.

The speed of light is, according to our contemporary understanding of physics, an absolute, yes.  

As for a transmission, it would probably be a series of tones.  If | was a tone, a transmission would take the form of:

|   ||    |||    |||||    |||||||    |||||||||||    |||||||||||||    |||||||||||||||||
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #33 on: October 25, 2010, 05:35:19 PM »
Also, what's to say that the writers that were "Divinely Inspired" couldn't have simply misinterpreted what God was trying to tell them? After all, humans are not perfect and its possible that human biases meshed with divine inspiration, no?

I know people hate this word but....dictation.  Leaves out human error.  But that's just my view.
Please elaborate. From my understanding, humans are prone to error and bias. Does God hack into the person and write everything down then?

That God reached into the library of their vocabulary, selected the words to be used, and told the writers what to write.  That's why a lot of the prophets didn't even understand what they wrote themselves.

OK, even if this were true, which version is definitive?  We don't have their first drafts.  We have a dozen or so prominent translations.  Which one is the Bible?

That's an interesting question.  Well, all the originals today are probably destroyed.  Even in the New Testament, a lot of the Old Testament documents were destroyed.  Yet Jesus and a bunch of others still refer to the transcriptions they had as "Scripture."  And they probably had the Septuagint, which is the main Greek translation of the Hebrew.  If they had access to "the word of God", then we probably do too...but Scripture isn't 100% clear as to how we are supposed to know what's what.  But I'm sure if you worked on it hard enough, you'd be able to.  Most of the versions agree with each other, for the most part, anyway.
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Online hefdaddy42

  • Et in Arcadia Ego
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 52786
  • Gender: Male
  • Postwhore Emeritus
Re: Can religion and philosophy exist independently?
« Reply #34 on: October 25, 2010, 05:37:23 PM »
Actually like I demonstrated in another thread: The gospels were written no later than 30 years after Jesus death.

Paul's letters were actually written even earlier than the earliest gospel. (Mark) some of Paul's stuff clocks in around the 40's. that's roughly 10 years after Jesus death.

Mark wrote What peter told him. Peter was one of Jesus inner circle (Peter, James and John)

Matthew was one of Jesus 12 Disciples

Luke travelled with Paul

John was also one of Jesus inner 3.

2 eye witnesses, 1 faithful reporter of an eyewitness and Luke. if you doubt Luke's authenticity read his introduction. Then compare and contrast him with other gospels.
None of that is fact.
Prove it. I'm starting to get sick of people on here taking a well backed up post and just saying something equivalent to "nuh uhhhhhh"

Fine, get sick of it.  There is nothing wrong with what I said.  None of what you posted is fact.  It is supposition.

Are there reasons to accept some of them as probable?  Yes.  But none of them are facts. 
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.