Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

Unreasonable Expectations

Johnicle
Posts: 888
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/8/2011 11:51:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I love DDO... It's the one place I can be honest with everyone and only face people who may disagree with my belief, and not with me as a person (I don't think this gets said enough)

ANYWAY... I was just thinking about the unreasonable expectations that "god" places upon humanity in order to gain access to his "kingdom".

Let's start a list:

1) Choosing the right religion (Note there are over 10,000 claimed gods, and even more religious sect's interpretation of those gods. The Christian god alone has over 100,000 religious sects (I believe) and many of them claim that choosing wrong not only results in failure to reach the "kingdom", but moreover, is worthy of eternal suffering).

2) Jacking it = eternal suffering... saying a 3 letter word inappropriately = eternal suffering... stoning gays and non-believers = reward

3) The unreasonable expectation that we will ignore science (actually, I think more appropriately, that we will see science as evil (I.E. A dirty liberal agenda)... But seriously, the Bible is clear that the earth is no more than 10,000 years old (which is generous), but that is clearly not true. I know this is only Christianity, but other religions have similar logic).
Logic_on_rails
Posts: 2,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2011 1:40:51 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
1 can be answered by the philosophy of inclusivism http://www.theopedia.com... . The legitimacy of inclusivism as being a proper interpretation is up to you to decide.

3 can be dealt with (to a point) by a rejection of biblical inerrancy (a recent debate of some note on the subject - http://www.debate.org... )

2 is rather tougher to answer, and requires a serious sustained discussion to refute (indeed, this is contentious for such reasons), much more than a simple forum post offers. It should be noted that Jesus is meant to have died to allow those who sin to get into Heaven within reason; people still are sent to Hell. I'll also state that we must consider the impact of divine proclamations. For example 'Thou shalt not kill' might not be as definitive a statement as would be needed to address when and if one should kill, but it's simple nature makes the command more effective than some long treatise on the subject.

I'm no scholar, so I do expect to be wrong, but let's hope this is a decent response.
"Tis not in mortals to command success
But we"ll do more, Sempronius, we"ll deserve it
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2011 1:46:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/9/2011 1:40:51 AM, Logic_on_rails wrote:
1 can be answered by the philosophy of inclusivism http://www.theopedia.com... . The legitimacy of inclusivism as being a proper interpretation is up to you to decide.

I'd talk about anti-realism instead of inclusivism, or even interior realism. It's becoming a larger movement faster.
3 can be dealt with (to a point) by a rejection of biblical inerrancy (a recent debate of some note on the subject - http://www.debate.org... )

2 is rather tougher to answer, and requires a serious sustained discussion to refute (indeed, this is contentious for such reasons), much more than a simple forum post offers. It should be noted that Jesus is meant to have died to allow those who sin to get into Heaven within reason; people still are sent to Hell. I'll also state that we must consider the impact of divine proclamations. For example 'Thou shalt not kill' might not be as definitive a statement as would be needed to address when and if one should kill, but it's simple nature makes the command more effective than some long treatise on the subject.

I'm no scholar, so I do expect to be wrong, but let's hope this is a decent response.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2011 7:19:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/8/2011 11:51:40 PM, Johnicle wrote:
I love DDO... It's the one place I can be honest with everyone and only face people who may disagree with my belief, and not with me as a person (I don't think this gets said enough)

ANYWAY... I was just thinking about the unreasonable expectations that "god" places upon humanity in order to gain access to his "kingdom".

Let's start a list:

1) Choosing the right religion (Note there are over 10,000 claimed gods, and even more religious sect's interpretation of those gods. The Christian god alone has over 100,000 religious sects (I believe) and many of them claim that choosing wrong not only results in failure to reach the "kingdom", but moreover, is worthy of eternal suffering).

2) Jacking it = eternal suffering... saying a 3 letter word inappropriately = eternal suffering... stoning gays and non-believers = reward

3) The unreasonable expectation that we will ignore science (actually, I think more appropriately, that we will see science as evil (I.E. A dirty liberal agenda)... But seriously, the Bible is clear that the earth is no more than 10,000 years old (which is generous), but that is clearly not true. I know this is only Christianity, but other religions have similar logic).

Your position is not logical on it face. You presume it is God who imposes, yet it is humans. A good test, used in religious studies, is to see if a particular religion changes its doctrine when Knowledge increases. eg. When science determines that there is mental illness, or that disease is caused by bacterium or a virus, does a religion still hold to "punishment from God" as the cause. Also, you may want to distinguish between sociological indicators and theological thesis. See Jungian Collective

The changes in the English language since Chaucer make it almost impossible to find anyone who can read middle English, yet all these people claim to understand ancient Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic....I think not. The bible, particularly the KJV, is a source belief, and that is usually, among bible fundamentalists, subjective (personal). Very few religions have a codified theology which incorporates historical, archeological, anthropological and textual criticisms of the biblical texts.
Johnicle
Posts: 888
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2011 9:04:28 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/9/2011 7:19:33 AM, logicrules wrote:

Your position is not logical on it face. You presume it is God who imposes, yet it is humans.

So you admit that the Bible is not the word of God?
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2011 9:11:25 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/9/2011 9:04:28 AM, Johnicle wrote:
At 12/9/2011 7:19:33 AM, logicrules wrote:

Your position is not logical on it face. You presume it is God who imposes, yet it is humans.

So you admit that the Bible is not the word of God?

I apologize I thought you were trying for discourse. I knowledge that proving belief is impossible absent reason and an understanding of its principles.