Our church briefly touched on the issue of authority on Sunday, in a most timely way, because it’s an issue that’s been on my mind lately, too. So, so many people wrestle with authority today and don’t know who to trust or what to place their trust in. Another name for “faith,” is “trust.” Who do you trust? Who you trust is going to have authority over you. Another name for authority is “love.” Yep, love. There is a reciprocity there, who we love is going to have authority over us.
Or what we love is going to have authority over us. Make sure that what you love is something good, because a lot of us love things like gambling, food, drama, drugs, celebrity, offense, pornography, I mean you name it, we love it. The problem being what we love is going to have authority over us. It will own us eventually.
Discipline means “to teach.” It’s the same word we get “disciple” from. So, Jesus is an authority, teaching the disciples, who must take a leap of faith and place their trust in Him. That’s a healthy example of the interplay between authority, trust, love, and discipline.
Children tend to trust their parents because they haven’t got much choice at first. That’s where the food is. When people are abused, when that trust is repeatedly violated, it creates a myriad of issues and social problems. One issue is revoked authority. If you can’t trust, you can’t receive love. You become unteachable. Defiant.
Some people will respond to that “might makes right” dynamic by becoming compliant, repressed, giving the illusion of cooperation, but that really is just an illusion. When someone has a gun to your head, you may go along to get along, but it isn’t love that motivates you, it isn’t freewill, it isn’t respect for authority at all. It also isn’t discernment. A lot of abuse victims go on to be exploited in new ways because they have a life script playing out, a set of learned behaviors and some damaged discernment skills.
I’m not trying to blame victims at all. Sometimes we are just the bug on somebody’s windshield, but sometimes the stage is built for people, the script is rolled out, and we don’t realize that we are like captives, replaying a role without even being aware of it. Jesus came to set the captives free.
My grandmother was a train wreck of a woman, but she taught me how to read when I was about 3 yrs old. She also taught me not to hate. I’m not sure why I accepted her authority on those two matters, but I totally did. Unfortunately she was shot and killed and I lost her presence in my life, but all these years later I remain convinced reading is an important skill and that hatred is wrong.
When I was very young, I had a few close encounters of the God kind. I have no idea why I accepted His authority, but I totally did, unconditionally. Pure trust, like only a child can have.
Those are the only two examples I have of simply voluntarily trusting authority, sight unseen, also called taking a leap of faith. Praise the Lord for making His presence known to me however, because without Him I would seriously be lost. Also, it’s somewhat comical, because when I say those are the only two times I ever accepted authority on any level, that’s no joke. Defiance is an art form apparently, one that must be carefully cultivated and nurtured.
I actually had a pretty good childhood on account of the fact that I never did anything my parents said. Ever. That strikes me as hysterically funny, only because my parents were really dysfunctional. So how do you survive such a thing? You just play opposite day and reverse everything they say.
To this day I can blink my eyes and revoke someone’s authority. That’s not a bad thing at all, because she who is under authority, has authority. I know who I love. I know who I serve. I know who owns me and He is good. Always.
We have to choose Who and what we are going to put our trust in. That is kind of the essence of faith. Atheists who are defying God, claiming He doesn’t exist, are still putting their trust in something. They are taking a leap of faith. They are believing on something. They are also revoking God’s authority. That’s what it means when they tell me God condones slavery or He’s mean, while also at the same time, He allegedly does not exist. That is called a no confidence vote, revoked authority, distrust, an act of defiance like playing opposite day. Flat out, most atheists don’t believe in God because they believe He is unworthy of His authority.
Never mind the atheists however, most of us Christians wrestle with some trust issues too, with faith, and with authority. Some of us are blessed to have some good earthy examples going on, but many are not. The world, abuse, confusion, chaos, all those things can mess with our understanding, leave us with trust issues, transform the very word “authority” into something negative, something you want to flee from. We create pictures in our mind of control, exploitation, bullies, brainwashing, all sorts of really negative things that seek to devour us.
Authority is love. That can be a hard leap for some to take, but authority actually hung on a cross for you, so you might be redeemed, saved, given life and life abundant, life eternal even. The very nature of that kind of authority is sacrificial, it has your best interests in mind. So the presupposition that says “God is good,” sometimes takes a real leap of faith to accept as a premise, but it stems from an awareness of what His authority actually looks like.
God is NOT a bully, God is NOT an abuser, God is NOT a control freak. God is NOT a narcissist. Those are unfortunate human conceptions of authority gone all wrong. People often cannot be trusted with absolute power, but God is Holy, God is good, God does NOT have hidden motivations or double mindedness going on.
Your trust is safe in His hands. Your faith is safe in His hands. He is worthy.
Every time I read Psalm 18:26, it makes me laugh out loud. Somebody like you is always going to see the true good nature of God.
However, when someone KNOWS they’re up to no good, God just seems like a total annoyance.
“Like, don’t EMBARRASS me, Dad. I TOTALLY, like, KNOW what I’m doing…” 😂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ha! That’s a perfect Psalm, Crafty.
When people would say, “God is mad at me,” I used to try to comfort them, reassure them that God loves them. Over the years however, I’ve let that go and just tried to ask questions instead. I don’t know, maybe God really is mad at you? What have you been up to? I mean He’s incredibly patient with me, but if you’ve been running about all crooked, you just might be in trouble. You should probably ask Him about that. All I know is that IF you’ve made Him mad, He’s the kind of God you should run towards and not away from. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
“We have to choose Who and what we are going to put our trust in. That is kind of the essence of faith. Atheists who are defying God, claiming He doesn’t exist, are still putting their trust in something. They are taking a leap of faith. They are believing on something. They are also revoking God’s authority. That’s what it means when they tell me God condones slavery or He’s mean, while also at the same time, He allegedly does not exist. That is called a no confidence vote, revoked authority, distrust, an act of defiance like playing opposite day. Flat out, most atheists don’t believe in God because they believe He is unworthy of His authority.”
As for me, having studied world religions, I have never found any credible evidence for any gods or supernatural beings. Are you claiming that there truly is a god and this is not just a belief of yours? There are some who say that atheists would need to be omniscient to know that there is no god but that would hold true against the theist as well.
But why stop at atheists? Why not blog about followers of Judaism, Islam, Hinduism and various god fearing religions and tell them they are in defiance of your Christian worldview?
LikeLike
David K, as I read it, I.B. is telling her story – her story of a beginning faith, continuing faith, comforting faith, sensible faith – as experienced by her. Her statement regarding atheists having a faith in something is interesting to me. Would you speak on that issue rather than challenge her beliefs. What do you believe in? How is it better than hers? How has your study of world religions made your life better? How has that study given you peace regarding your eternity? Perhaps you don’t believe you will live eternally, is that it? How does that fit with scientific principles of cause and effect? How does it fit with all things change but nothing that is can be completely obliterated? Her belief is definitely “not just a belief of hers.” Whatever started her belief must have been quite an intellect to get that ball rolling! So tell me – how is your belief better, more comforting, more scientific, or of more use to the world than I.B.s?
LikeLiked by 2 people
I can totally understand she is telling her story and what she believes but sometimes belief does not equal reality. There are so many misconceptions about atheists, in part, I wanted to address that.
It may be her belief that atheists are defying “God”, which is not a truth statement to atheists but on the same thought process, the same thing could be said of anyone who does not follow her specific theistical worldview. Similar to the various theistical worldviews, there are many different schools of thoughts from atheist to atheist. Some are adamant that there is no god. Others have never found credible evidence to support the theist view and as such they reject it. (or may be open in the future if credible evidence is produced)
On to your questions… On faith: To an atheist, there is a reason atheists look to define terms ahead of time so there is no misunderstanding of the term later on. Most times one will start out with something like “faith,” is “trust.” … and once we agree to that term, later on in the conversation “faith” is defined differently. I have a different view than sklyjd below. I’m okay with using the term faith but disassociate the term from the theistical definition. “I have faith that my car will get me to work today” but I would be more apt to say “I trust my car will get me to work today”.
I do not have a “faith” in a higher power but I can trust (to a certain extent) that the local Police, Government, Science, Teachers have our best interests. Any person or entity can be fallible.
My “Beliefs”: I’m not saying my worldview is any better than anyone else’s. Having gained knowledge of world religions, they all pretty much have a common theme, many have branched off from one another. Each one of them not only target “atheists” as being heretical but they each claim their belief to be the true belief and all others are false. My life is better because without following any one religion, philosophy or worldview, I can take from each what I find useful and leave most of the supernatural behind. I do not have “Faith/Trust” 🙂 in the supernatural.
Eternity: I wanted to address one thing. The lack of belief in a god does not necessarily mean god is replaced with science. The belief in a god does not mean one does not believe in science. Taking into consideration, what I know from observation, One way or another, our body will remain part of this planet. Like all matter, it will become part of the earth. Perhaps our cells will become part of other plants and beings. I’m not one who thinks our consciousness continues after our death. We just become the hummus of the earth.
Dave
LikeLiked by 1 person
There are good philosophical proofs God exists. The Bible and the record of history provides quite solid evidence that Jesus was born, lived, died, and rose from the dead. So I don’t have much difficulty believing you have rejected God. I just don’t know why. Each of us is different, has a different history and different desires. Pride, however, is what motivates most of us to reject God. To accept the authority of God, we must love Him more than we love our self. I cannot say I find that easy. I don’t believe any of us do, but I guess that explains why the Bible speaks of spiritual immaturity (Hebrews 5:12-14).
LikeLike
“Philosophical proofs” are not evidence. There are many “Philosophical proofs”, logical arguments that make the argument for a creator but that’s all they are, arguments for a creator. If there was demonstrable proof/evidence of a god, or for a specific religion, we wouldn’t be discussing this today.
There are many who believe that if there was a historical Jesus, that he was more or less an inspirational teacher or rabbi. There have been many resurrection stories that existed prior to the Jesus narrative and we also find Christian interpolation in some works of the time. What is the purpose of interpolation if the “evidence” is true?
The rest of your message is just an appeal to your own religious worldviews and as such does not apply to my worldview. It’s really not debate worthy.
LikeLike
@David K
I doubt you realize the relationship between Philosophy and what we now call Science. Science is an offspring of Philosophy. That is why Ph.D stands for Doctor of Philosophy.
Philosophers invented the rules of logic that made Science possible. Mathematics is simply a complex expression of the rules of logic. Epistemology, a division of Metaphysics, deals with the study or a theory of the nature and grounds of knowledge especially with reference to its limits and validity. Thanks to Christianity, Epistemologists — scientists — decided there was only One God, and that God had created a universe that followed logical rules. Hence, they decided to glorify the Creator by carefully studying His Creation.
What is the point? There is not much point in respecting Science and not respecting Philosophy and logical proofs. Science owes its existence to Philosophy.
The New Testament was written by people who either saw Jesus or talked to people who saw Jesus. The Books of Luke and Acts was written by a fellow who carefully investigated the matter of Jesus’ life and what happened immediately afterwards. That is, we have contemporary accounts that have been passed onto us as well and explanations of what Jesus did and taught. Moreover, we know that the followers of Jesus Christ refused to recant, even on the pain of death. But if you don’t want to believe, no one will make you.
Since He rose from the dead, Jesus’ teachings have had of huge effect on history. Because our public schools largely ignore the Bible and its effect on history, many don’t appreciate it, but that does not make it any less true. Check out => https://citizentom.com/2017/03/30/who-is-this-man-by-john-ortberg-part-7/.
LikeLike
I do understand the relationship between Philosophy and Science. Science/Philosophy/Logic cannot and does not prove the existence of a god. Your example of Epistemology is a great example. You claim that “Thanks for Christianity, Epistemologists –scientists– decided there was only One God”. Right off the bat, you need to admit this is not General Epistemology but rather Theistic Epistemology. This would be a really long topic if we start discussing the various branches of Epistemology and Existentialism. Bottom line, Epistemology is the search for truth and knowledge as opposed to opinion and belief… somewhere down the line, people attempt to blur that with their belief. And wow! a Christian deciding “there was only One God” through theistic Epistemology.. who would have thought?
“…we know that the followers of Jesus Christ refused to recant…”
“…Because our public schools largely ignore the Bible and its effect on history, many don’t appreciate it,.”
Again, this is based on you’re belief and has nothing to do with anything I wrote.
LikeLike
@David K
Put a label on it. Then discount it because of the label you put on it?
The logical proofs for God’s existence lead to the conclusion that there is one God. All that matters is whether the proofs are logical.
The whole idea that logic is is useful presumes an orderly universe. The Greek philosophers were the first to start heading down that road. However, Christians support that notion because the Bible says God is not the author of confusion. During the Renaissance, when the ideas of the Greeks and Romans had been revived, folks like Thomas Aquinas started developing logical proofs for God’s existence. Prior to that, people just assumed that the universe did not create itself. Too orderly for that.
So what is the case for skepticism? What it comes down to is how much do you trust what you know. Are you:
–Lying in your bed dreaming?
–Deceived by an evil demon?
–A mere brain-in-a-vat (a BIV)?
–In the matrix world?
–Or some other such thing?
Well, if you are seriously concerned about such possibilities….
The basic problem with most Atheists is that they demand more proof — evidence — than anyone can provide. However, God did not create us so we could make demands and order Him present Himself and prove Himself. So that approach doesn’t seem likely to get you anywhere.
If you need evidence outside of logic, you can find it by examining the world, that moral law in your heart and in the hearts of others, and in the Bible.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Put a label on it. Then discount it because of the label you put on it?”
You put the label on it, it was “Christianity, Epistemologists — scientists”. Hmm, would “Secular, Epistemologist —scientists” believe there is one god? on that matter, to get a little silly, would a “Pagan, Epistemologist –scientist” believe there was one god? There are many areas of Science that get blurred by people who label themselves a Christian Scientists – instead of trying to look for the truth, they are only interested in promoting god in science. Can you admit to that?
“The logical proofs for God’s existence lead to the conclusion that there is one God. All that matters is whether the proofs are logical.”
Let’s see how much you understand about logic. Can you give me examples of in what conditions, the above logic fails? It’s pretty easy, can you do it?
and again, for the rest of your response you are moving the goal posts on the conversation. I will say that none of your 5 scenarios fit me so I’m not concerned about such possibilities.
There are no problems with Atheists. They simply disagree with the theists claim of a god. If there evidence, we wouldn’t have thousands of religions, philosophies and world views all claiming something different. It’s great that you point to your god and bible but there is no shortage of other religions doing the same. Your religious views are no more special than the next persons.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@David K
I put the label on it? No. I put the label on the epistemologists, but why is it important who offered the proof? The proof for God is either logical is it is not.
Why did I refer to Christian epistemologists? Christians pursued the development of science, looking for the rules by which Creation operates, because they believe God is orderly.
Is this a debate or a test? Why don’t you argue your own case? As it is, all you have done is complain the evidence is insufficient and that our hostess is picking on atheists.
Note: I did not assert there are problems with Atheists (Everyone does have problems, including Atheists, but that’s another subject.). Those five scenarios deal with one of the problems with making a logical proof for God. If we cannot trust the evidence of our senses, then we are going to have a difficult time proving anything. Hence, I have already done what you asked.
LikeLike
“I put the label on the epistemologists, but why is it important who offered the proof?
and I covered that by pointing out the flaw in that thinking. Of course a Christian Epistemologist will conclude there is only one god – on the other hand a “secular” Epistemologist will not conclude the same thing. I’m kind of surprised by your stance on this subject since if you are familiar with this subject (including existentialism) you should be able to see all sides, instead you are insisting only your belief is correct.
“Christians pursued the development of science,”
First and for most, a very sincere, whoop dee doo. I will defer to sklyjd answer below but will add, that Christianity did indeed assist in the pursuit of science, they didn’t invent it, but some religions were very active in education and science was part of that.
“Is this a debate or a test? Why don’t you argue your own case?”
I see that you don’t answer questions and I have argued my own case. The first paragraph I wrote pointed out the flaw in accepting Theistical Epistomology as your proof. With that in mind, in my second paragraph I quoted you:
“The logical proofs for God’s existence lead to the conclusion that there is one God. All that matters is whether the proofs are logical.”
and asked you if you saw the flaw in your logic. Why is it that I can answer these questions and then redirect by saying “all you have done is complain the evidence is insufficient and that our hostess is picking on atheists.”
The point is, the evidence is insufficient! To every point, there is a counterpoint .
LikeLike
@David K
Hello again. I hope you rested well.
You say:
What is at issue? Why did each epistemologist reached his conclusion? Who the epistemologist does not matter. When we make an issue of “who” instead considering the logic and evidence on its own merit, we commit a logical fallacy, we make an ad hominem attack.
Whether we decide to be a Christian, a Hindu, a Muslim,….., or an Atheist should be on the basis of the quality and quantity of the logic or evidence, not based upon who makes the case.
Do we trust some people more than others? Yes, of course. However, that just gives cause to listen and believe the personal testimony of the people we most trust. Otherwise, logic and evidence has a merit all of its own.
You say there is always a counterpoint? I agree. Yet the mere fact that a counterpoint exists does not mean we should throw out an otherwise sound argument. Consider this absurdity. At some level, we each say to ourselves: “I think. Therefore, I exist.” There is a counterpoint. Do we throw out the logic and the evidence of our senses because the source, “ME”, has a considerable prejudice in this matter? No. Because it is the best logic and evidence available, we each believe: “I exist”. In time, because each day brings additional confirmation, we have faith in the belief “I” do exist. Still, there remains that possibility. “I” may be nothing more than a programming glitch in some machine.
Hence, I threw out those five scenarios.
–Lying in your bed dreaming?
–Deceived by an evil demon?
–A mere brain-in-a-vat (a BIV)?
–In the matrix world?
–Or some other such thing?
Is it difficult to objectively consider logic and evidence? Yes. We always risk deceiving ourselves. We each must contend for the truth with a finite intelligence, a limited understanding, and fearfully infinite possibilities, but that is not the worst of it. Each of us is possessed by a demon. To believe what is true instead of what we most want to believe, we must set aside that which fuels the fires of Hell, our own pride.
LikeLike
“When we make an issue of “who” instead considering the logic and evidence on its own merit, we commit a logical fallacy, we make an ad hominem attack.”
Not answering questions AND deflecting. In this instance it is not an ad hominem, I am showing a flaw in your logic. It may SOUND logical to “Christianity, Epistemologists — scientists” but the logic fails when viewed by non-theistic “scientists”.
“Each of us is possessed by a demon.”
Wait, you haven’t shown any evidence for a “God” yet and you’ve already moved on to demons!?!? 🙂 and “fires of hell”. I know people who believe in ghosts, aliens, big foot, the Loch Ness, the Government is making traffic circles so they can use them as “check points”, lol. Like the above claims, you are making claims that I reject because there is no reasonable evidence for such claims.
In my previous responses, I asked you a few questions or attempted to get you to acknowledge the faulty logic you are using. Instead of answering questions or staying focused, you are redirecting. I don’t have time for that so this will be my last response.
LikeLike
@David K
Is this is suppose to be a debate or an interrogation? Why do expect me your work for you? I could try to answer your questions, but I don’t see the point. The only answer you would accept is surrender. So I think I will argue my case, and I let you argue your case.
I think you making marvelous efforts to deflect. Let’s consider the way I used the term “demon”. I equated “demon possession” with pride. Because it interferes with our judgement, I equated excessive pride with the fires of Hell. And look at how you responded.
😆
You are just making a fool out of yourself. Do you actually have a case to make? Then where is the evidence of it? If you don’t have a case, then that should concern you, not anything I have said.
Note that Christians can also ask Atheists for evidence. You too have a belief in which you have faith. You too proselytize. That’s why you commented here. Pride demands you justify yourself. Well, if you can justify your Atheism, then please do so, but don’t expect me to make your case for you. I have no reason to prop up Atheists. I believe in the God of the Bible.
LikeLike
Beautifully expressed Truth, IB! I love this!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well said. Pointed Doug to your post. No point in trying to express it better.
https://citizentom.com/2018/04/30/netanyahu-says-iran-lied/comment-page-1/#comment-80721
LikeLike
“Atheists who are defying God, claiming He doesn’t exist, are still putting their trust in something. They are taking a leap of faith.”
There is no faith, faith is not in our vocabulary, atheists such as I believe in scientific evidence and the facts of real things, not invisible gods.
“They are believing on something. They are also revoking God’s authority. That’s what it means when they tell me God condones slavery or He’s mean, while also at the same time, He allegedly does not exist.”
Your invisible professed God has no authority for obvious reasons, it is all in your mind. The Christian God according to your Bible is guilty of mean and violent things that Christians usually ignore but are often annoyed when atheists refer to it.
“Flat out, most atheists don’t believe in God because they believe He is unworthy of His authority.”
Wrong again, it is because we do not believe any gods exist, can you remember that because most theists cannot? However, if your God were to exist he would be unworthy of any authority due to the fact he has a violent criminal past.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@sklyjd
Everytime we do something we put our trust in someone or something. Christians strive to live in accordance with the teachings of the Bible because they trust in the God who inspired it.
Your statement, because you don’t understand the meaning of faith, contradicts itself. You put your faith in science and facts, but that is probably because you understand the limitations of science about as well as you understand the word “faith”.
If you are going to put your faith in science, you may wish to spend more time understanding what scientists can do. There is a lot of “scientific” speculation out there that passes for “science”, but even when it is described as scientific, speculation remains speculation, not factual.
Spend a little time trying to understand what is required to prove something scientifically. Then ask yourself this question.What does science have to do with the study of God? How can I use science to answer the questions that are important to me?
Science is a handy tool, but it is not a good foundation for a philosophy of life, not even if one insists upon being an Atheist. Science can only be used to study cause and effect, and even in this application it is of limited use.
LikeLiked by 1 person
CT I and many others have faith, trust and confidence in science that has proven many things with bonafide evidence and facts. Of course, I have faith, trust and confidence that science will progress and answer many of the questions into the future.
There are two definitions for faith, “complete trust or confidence in someone or something.” (Ref Google) The second definition is “strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof. (Ref Google)
This spiritual conviction is your definition of faith and rather a lot different from mine and this is where I am coming from.
You say, “If you are going to put your faith in science, you may wish to spend more time understanding what scientists can do.”
I have, and much of it is way over the head of most people including myself. I also have an understanding of what science has to present and undertake for a peer review before publication. I also understand much of the “scientific” speculation” you mention that is based on what is already known in science and is a starting point for future hypotheses, such as Stephen Hawking’s last paper the “no-boundary proposal,” before the Big Bang, that has been peer reviewed and published because it is based on what is known within this field, and I might add it is open for debate, changes and adjustments for more advanced scientific research.
“Then ask yourself this question. What does science have to do with the study of God? How can I use science to answer the questions that are important to me?”
Science is in direct conflict with God, science has very little to do with God, but it answers the important questions asked by modern man. The study of God cannot be science, gods have always been a conception originating from ancient man used to explain scientific events with no foundation in the physical world because God is a spiritual entity that manifests only in the minds of those wanting to believe.
“Why am I here? What is right and wrong? What brings me meaning? What happens to a human being when I die?”
All these questions are answered by science or in the process of being answered. The fact that you are a living person is reality and you should make the best of it while you can and not screw your brain into unknown ideologies.
You should also ask yourself why do I need a God to guide me from sin and pressure me to be a moral person through a promise of eternal life? Is this why I believe in heaven and hell and other impossible stories that were made up by man or of myths adapted from other more ancient religions etc.?
“Science is a handy tool, but it is not a good foundation for a philosophy of life,”
Why do theists overthink things? My philosophy is to live an honest, moralistic and good life, look after my family, work hard to survive etc. I do not need to complicate my world with emotional beliefs of ancient idols that make life even more complicated. Life is often very hard for most of us in one way or another and we have to deal with that the best we can, it is quite simple really. Of course, we are not all cut of the same cloth, therefore we deal with difficult things and problems in very different ways, however one belief that works for a certain group of people does not make it exclusive, the one true god, or anything to do with the saviour of mankind.
LikeLike
@sklyjd
What you are doing is trying to define me, not explain your arguments. That’s not logical. It is not even good psychoanalysis.
The Bible has much to say about faith. Chapter 11 in Hebrews provides a good example. Here how that chapter begins.
We cannot see the air, but we have evidence of it. When we fly we know what holds us up. So even though we see nothing under us, the more we fly the more our confidence grows in airplanes.
The Bible does not ask us to suspend our reason, but it does demand that we put our faith in God just the way a child trusts a good parent. Such a faith is built up over time. We put complete trust and confidence in someone because of evidence, not the lack of it.
Is Science in direct conflict with a belief in God? No. Science does not provide the tools to study God. Check out my reply to David K, (=>https://insanitybytes2.wordpress.com/2018/05/01/authority-trust-and-defiance/comment-page-1/#comment-62199). You have had the opportunity to reply to much of this material before on Mel Wild’s blog. For some reason you did not, but here is as good a place as any.
You say science is going to answer all these important questions? “Why am I here? What is right and wrong? What brings me meaning? What happens to a human being when I die?” No. Not happening. Not going to happen. Science is just a tool for modeling cause and effect. Science is just a subset of Philosophy. Science does not have the capacity for modeling God. In fact, logic dictates that we cannot use science to study God.
You ask a question. Then you give us your approach to the simple life.
Christians don’t make it complicated. We have evidence. We trust the Creator who gave us that evidence and intellects to make use of it. So we confidently strive to live honest, morally upright lives, look after our families, worship God with our works, and seek comfort in the knowledge a Creator cares about us. We have the capacity to defend the hope that is within us. We can give logical reasons for what we do.
Your philosophy is a mystery. If there is no God — if science explains everything, then how do you answer those questions?
Can you explain your philosophy? If you don’t agree with the beliefs of Christians, then what do you have to offer in their place? Science? Science is just a modeling tool invented by Christians. Have you made science your idol?
LikeLiked by 1 person
“We put complete trust and confidence in someone because of evidence, not the lack of it.”
OK what exactly is this evidence? Do not try and tell me it is through events that naturally happen to theists and atheists that you would call miracles, and please do not expect me to believe God listens to your prayers as these have been understood to basically be emotional feel good and wellbeing exercises for believers but not measurable events.
“Science is just a tool for modeling cause and effect. Science is just a subset of Philosophy.”
Ha, ha, good try. This sentence identifies your contempt for science. There is a connection of course, but the main difference is in the way they work and treat knowledge. Science is concerned with natural phenomena, while philosophy attempts to understand the nature of man, existence, and the relationship that exists between the two concepts. (Ref Wikipedia)
“Your philosophy is a mystery. If there is no God — if science explains everything, then how do you answer those questions?”
No mystery at all if science answers the questions is it? Reality cannot exist for you without your God being responsible for everything making this is an indoctrinated mindset. Do you actually think atheists have to believe in something like a god to make us complete humans? I have always been an atheist, it is the default position for all animals, therefore, you must realise that it is only if you want a god to believe in, to assist mentally and to revolve around all aspects of your life, you will find one.
“Science is just a modeling tool invented by Christians. Have you made science your idol?”
Ha, ha, very funny, sorry to deflate your pride but Christians did not invent science, the Greeks were at it well before Christianity was heard of, however an Anglican priest, English philosopher and historian of science William Whewell gets the honour of coining the term scientist in 1833, and it first appeared in print in Whewell’s anonymous 1834 review of Mary Somerville’s “On the Connexion of the Physical Sciences “one of the biggest selling science books in the 19th century.
Is it not a reasonable consideration that when God gives you a sign or provides some assistance to you that he is located inside your head such as in your brain and in your thoughts? It is well understood by neuroscientists that your brain changes in accordance with learning, beliefs and emotions etc. And these things can be as real as they possibly can get to the individuals.
Why do so many religions thrive, and have you ever thought about why that is? The fact is practitioners of all other religions experience the same realistic effects exactly as Christians do. Does not being exclusive in this respect concern you?
LikeLike
@sklyjd
What is the evidence for Christianity? That is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Apostle Paul explains that in 1 Cor. 15. However, I think most Christians gain confidence in the God of the Bible by letting Christ live through them. When we live as Christ taught, we see that it works. When we obey the teachings of the Bible, we are happier.
Some credit Aristotle with the invention of Science. Aristotle was an astute observer, and he did seek to apply logic to his understanding of the world, but he did very little experimentation. Since Aristotle was an astute observer, some credit him with the beginning of science. What we can gain from observation alone, however, does not exactly jive with what we call scientific knowledge.
What distinguishes scientific knowledge? What distinguishes a scientific theory? A scientific theory has been tested through experimentation. When we know something to be true, we know it because we have tested what we understand to be true. The scientific method, which is the testing methodology employed by scientists to evaluate and validate their theories was developed during the Renaissance.
Here is the etymoly of the term science => https://www.etymonline.com/word/science.
What you are trying to say is that what I believe is wrong because there is something wrong with me. Supposedly, I have a common delusion. You, however, have overcome being human? And the evidence for that is that you don’t believe in God?
You have never established that the logic for and the evidence for the existence of God is insufficient. You have just declared it insufficient for you. Just because it is your choice, that makes it the right choice?
Whether God exists is not about you. It is not about me. God either is, or He is not. What is at issue for us is whether we can answer those questions. “Why am I here? What is right and wrong? What brings me meaning? What happens to a human being when I die?” Christians believe logic and evidence lead us to the Bible. We see it is the best alternative we have, one supported by logic, history, and the evidence that the teachings of Christ work. You can scoff at that, but you still have not explained your own philosophy. You have not pointed to anything better. If you have not got anything better, what is the point of complaining about the choices of others?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like your idea that except one is under authority, he/she has no authority and is really lost as fog regarding just about everything.
As to the people who btcih why you speak of one worldview over others, ha! The carpenter’s level has no competition, and exposes every kind of foul opinion as to what is straight and true. True science btw.
We just tell the truth. So keep tellin it msb, in your own flavoured way, and you can be sure that God has your back against all the flaming missiles which miss their target. 😉
LikeLiked by 2 people
Whom we love we trust. In trusting God we show that we love Him. And in loving Him, we show we trust Him. He is the only one that deserves our absolute trust.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Now, hold everything, elder insane one. Let’s not confuse love with lust or appetite. Just because we crave consuming something does not make our feeling love. Addiction isn’t love, even if Robert Palmer pitched one could be addicted to love. Addiction and any item, activity or force that draws us like moths to lights does not stimulate love; it stimulates obsession, maybe, and fascination, most likely. But, not love. Love comes of free will and of two living forces joined together by some inexplicable bond. Even if people say they love chocolate, it’s an inaccurate cry of physical and chemical satisfaction. Just as sex satisfies the appetites of some, it is not equal to love.
As for hatred, who ever thinks it is right instead of wrong? I think those who use it willingly are aware of how it is generally perceived. Yet, hate is just one of those forces that continues to plague mankind. And, as much as we may will it to be gone, unless the majority gets on board, we may still succumb to it.
Faith, trust, authority and respect for elders have all been big issues in my life. But, while you did not listen to your parents, I prided myself on being the good boy. I wasn’t going to do the foolish things my siblings did. Yet, it was inevitable, it seems. And, even with all my effort to be good, my mother–pressuring my father to consent on her judgment–occasionally deemed me the boy crying wolf. In some cases, it might have been true; after all, I took after them who I later realized were really good at dodging confrontation, dodging responsibility and concocting excuses. It was only after numerous years of blindly following my parents and my faith that I found reason to get loud, get mad and pretty much throw the old me out the window–which probably roused a few cheers from the forces of darkness who anticipated my joining of the Dark Side (of the Force) and all its literary cousins. It was at that crucial time in my life that I could have been one of these mad shooters or bombers. But, I fought those temptations in my own meek way. I survived.
Yet, one does have to or has good reason to question their “authority figure” (god) when so many questionable and horrifying things happen around them. But, if I had to boil down all the racing thoughts that come into play with such pondering, I’d say there is more than one force moving the pawns in our world. Good and bad. And, as much as we think we understand, there is so much more we don’t. [But, how many times and how many ways can we repeat this logic?] Can we blame just one god? Do we know for sure the one god is all good or playing both sides? We think we have his “shape” all worked out, if we are “devoted disciples,” but what do we really know? Could it be all the “wisdom” we got from the infamous tree was just an illusion?
The tree of asking questions. I think that’s the apple we got.
LikeLiked by 2 people
A great read for skeptics:
The Cure, imagine there’s no religion.
A novel from David Millett
#Novel #SciFi #DMP http://davidmillett.net/Books/TheCure/TheCure.aspx
LikeLike
Powerful.
LikeLiked by 1 person