Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Discussion > Religion & Philosophy
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Religion & Philosophy Discuss Is Christianity something other than a religion? at the General Discussion; Originally Posted by foundit66 A person can observe / experience wind and recognize objective truths like air pressure and wind ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 09-19-2017, 11:04 PM
Joe Shoe's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,092
Thanks: 770
Thanked 1,511 Times in 1,026 Posts
Default Re: Is Christianity something other than a religion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
A person can observe / experience wind and recognize objective truths like air pressure and wind velocity.
To claim that god sent that wind would be a subjective truth.

"Belief" in a "religion" would be a subjective truth.
"observation and experience" can be objective or subjective.
The problem for you here is that if you go far enough back, it's only ever going to be subjective ANYWAY. For example, a religious person would be far more likely to see and know that air pressure and velocity of air moving around in the atmosphere is what causes wind; however they might still believe what governs the physical laws or put them in place to make all that possible is a Creator. And since science can't prove anything if you go far enough back to a first cause (pre-big bang, abiogenesis, etc.) there's not any reason to conclude differently. This glaring failure in science to be able to truly arrive at first cause a priori is a reason I still DO believe in God.

Furthermore, there are people who claim to have observed things that led them to believe in a higher power--what they saw or experienced as miraculous events, for instance, in their own life. The most a skeptic toward this can say in rebuttal to this is that it is unlikely in terms of how often it has happened to others.
__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???

Last edited by Joe Shoe; 09-19-2017 at 11:12 PM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Joe Shoe For This Useful Post:
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 09-20-2017, 12:01 PM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Tennessee
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,973
Thanks: 9,078
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,327 Posts
Default Re: Is Christianity something other than a religion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo View Post
The stone was removed the same way it got there. Either by a bunch of big strong men pushing it there, or it is purely a non objective recounting of someone repeating something he thinks he may have seen or heard. A myth in other words.
If one posits that the stone was removed by "a bunch of big strong men," then one is advocating a conspiracy theory.

I think I would rather believe in the grassy-knoll theory of JFK's assassination than to believe in that...
__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 09-20-2017, 12:04 PM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Tennessee
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,973
Thanks: 9,078
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,327 Posts
Default Re: Is Christianity something other than a religion?

Let me just say that I do not believe in anything that relies merely on subjectivity.

And (apparently) neither does my former pastor...
__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 09-20-2017, 12:21 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,040
Thanks: 9,901
Thanked 14,992 Times in 9,093 Posts
Default Re: Is Christianity something other than a religion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
The problem for you here is that if you go far enough back, it's only ever going to be subjective ANYWAY.
Do you understand what the difference between "subjective truth" and "objective truth" is in the first place?

Your comments reveal you don't.
"How far back" has nothing to do with subjective vs objective truth.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
For example, a religious person would be far more likely to see and know that air pressure and velocity of air moving around in the atmosphere is what causes wind; however they might still believe what governs the physical laws or put them in place to make all that possible is a Creator. And since science can't prove anything if you go far enough back to a first cause (pre-big bang, abiogenesis, etc.) there's not any reason to conclude differently.
Your comments are meaningless regarding classification for subjective truth vs objective truth.

Just because a person does not have enough information to identify an objective truth does not change the fact that a subjective truth is still a subjective truth.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
This glaring failure in science to be able to truly arrive at first cause a priori is a reason I still DO believe in God.
ROFLMAO!
I am perpetually amused by people who look at scenarios, like what you describe and proclaim it's a deficiency in science.

If I conceal a dice under a hat and ask people (who didn't see the dice beforehand) what number is face up...
Objective truth: Answer of "I don't know".
Subjective truths:
a) Guessing it's six.
b) Guessing that god has changed it into a beetle.
c) Guessing ...

The fact that you don't know something would justify an honest admission that you don't know.
When people just start making up crap, that's not objective truth.
And your ignorance is not a deficiency of science or objective truth. In fact, it can be perfectly justified to not know.

But when people refuse to seek out the truth and instead seek to integrate unknowns into an imagined unknown house of cards?
That's not an objective truth.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
Furthermore, there are people who claim to have observed things that led them to believe in a higher power--what they saw or experienced as miraculous events, for instance, in their own life. The most a skeptic toward this can say in rebuttal to this is that it is unlikely in terms of how often it has happened to others.

The odds to become a lightning strike in a year are 1 in 700,000.
If somebody gets hit by lightning, does that mean god judged them?

People who have cancer still have chances for remission or to become "cured" of cancer.
Does that mean god did something when an immune system successfully pulls something off and does its job?


Subjective truth does not become objective truth just because a person wants to believe it really, really badly.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 09-20-2017, 01:03 PM
Manitou's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Gender: Male
Posts: 18,043
Thanks: 190
Thanked 5,387 Times in 3,912 Posts
Default Re: Is Christianity something other than a religion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikeyy View Post
I think that Jesus lived. I think the majority of the bible are a reincarnation of fairy tales that have been repeated long before Jesus. Jesus certainly inspired people and there has grown a cult following. Funny though that as most as these followers claim Jesus almost none follow his teachings in their own lives and they use his death as cover for this sin. There are many stories that predate Jesus of Gods born to virgins (Never understand the need for all of these woman to be virgins). Most of them did miracles, cured the sick, raised themselves from the dead. Horus for example

"Born of a virgin, Isis. Only begotten son of the God Osiris. Birth heralded by the star Sirius, the morning star. Ancient Egyptians paraded a manger and child representing Horus through the streets at the time of the winter solstice (about DEC-21). In reality, he had no birth date; he was not a human. Death threat during infancy: Herut tried to have Horus murdered. Handling the threat: The God That tells Horus’ mother “Come, thou goddess Isis, hide thyself with thy child.” An angel tells Jesus’ father to: “Arise and take the young child and his mother and flee into Egypt.” Break in life history: No data between ages of 12 & 30. Age at baptism: 30. Subsequent fate of the baptiser: Beheaded. Walked on water, cast out demons, healed the sick, restored sight to the blind. Was crucifed, descended into Hell; resurrected after three days."

And there are many others

10 Christ-like Figures Who Pre-Date Jesus - Listverse
You left out where William Shakespeare wrote the King James Version, golly.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 09-20-2017, 10:48 PM
Lollie's Avatar
Elle qui tolère Trump
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: NW Ohio
Gender: Female
Posts: 18,066
Thanks: 14,705
Thanked 13,831 Times in 8,493 Posts
Default Re: Is Christianity something other than a religion?

__________________
Everyone feels benevolent if nothing happens to be annoying him at the moment.
- C.S. Lewis
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 09-21-2017, 12:14 AM
Joe Shoe's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,092
Thanks: 770
Thanked 1,511 Times in 1,026 Posts
Default Re: Is Christianity something other than a religion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Do you understand what the difference between "subjective truth" and "objective truth" is in the first place?

Your comments reveal you don't.
"How far back" has nothing to do with subjective vs objective truth.
What is clearly understandable and revealed (with that reply) is that you clearly didn't understand what I was getting at. If you go back far enough, there can be nothing obtained objectively. Because there's nothing that can be observed in terms of evidence. You can't objectively opine about first cause a priori, therefore the distinction you've made doesn't matter. It's can't be objective for the scientist because there's nothing to know to be objective about, if you go far enough back. The point being, your distinction is meaningless. The only thing LEFT is biases, interpretations, feelings [from the definitions in YOUR posted article] ... or conversely, no opinion at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Just because a person does not have enough information to identify an objective truth does not change the fact that a subjective truth is still a subjective truth.
This actually only helps make MY point, because I'm not arguing first cause determination is objective, but rather that it can only ever be SUBJECTIVE. Yet more evidence inadvertently given on your part that you didn't even understand what I was getting at.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
ROFLMAO!
I am perpetually amused by people who look at scenarios, like what you describe and proclaim it's a deficiency in science.
Has science determined a definitive first cause? No. Therefore, it's a deficiency. Logic is not your friend, I see.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
The fact that you don't know something would justify an honest admission that you don't know.
When people just start making up crap, that's not objective truth ...

... Subjective truth does not become objective truth just because a person wants to believe it really, really badly.
Again, as you've had to be told repeatedly lately, reply to what people actually SAY rather than what you want them to have said. I never SAID what people believe about first cause is "objective truth". I argued the opposite: that it can ONLY be subjective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
The odds to become a lightning strike in a year are 1 in 700,000.
If somebody gets hit by lightning, does that mean god judged them?

People who have cancer still have chances for remission or to become "cured" of cancer.
Does that mean god did something when an immune system successfully pulls something off and does its job?
You're only using examples for which there is general consensus on the natural causes of these events. That's not even the sort of thing I'm taking about.
__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 09-21-2017, 11:31 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,040
Thanks: 9,901
Thanked 14,992 Times in 9,093 Posts
Post Re: Is Christianity something other than a religion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
What is clearly understandable and revealed (with that reply) is that you clearly didn't understand what I was getting at. If you go back far enough, there can be nothing obtained objectively.
I disagree profoundly with that claim.
Such a claim on your part demonstrates you don't understand the difference between subjective truth and objective truth.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
Because there's nothing that can be observed in terms of evidence. You can't objectively opine about first cause a priori, therefore the distinction you've made doesn't matter.
And again, you perpetuate your problem.
Just because you cannot make a desired objective truth claim does not suddenly change the distinction between what is objective truth and subjective truth.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
It's can't be objective for the scientist because there's nothing to know to be objective about, if you go far enough back. The point being, your distinction is meaningless. The only thing LEFT is biases, interpretations, feelings [from the definitions in YOUR posted article] ... or conversely, no opinion at all.
Again, this claim is just plain wrong.
You seem to want to assume that because science does not yet have the desired answers, that suddenly makes it okay (or even magically objective truth) for religion to make up answers.

Furthermore, you are dealing with abstracts with these claims.
Provide an actual concrete example of what you claim.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
This actually only helps make MY point, because I'm not arguing first cause determination is objective, but rather that it can only ever be SUBJECTIVE. Yet more evidence inadvertently given on your part that you didn't even understand what I was getting at.

Because I argue apple, you think that proves orange?

And your claim that it can only ever be subjective is only further evidence YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND what science is putting forth.
If you plug square root of five into a calculator you get 2.236...
Just because you may not have that calculator available thousands of years ago does not make it valid for you to claim it's 2.1.
Just because you don't know how that number is arrived at does not make it "subjective".


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
Has science determined a definitive first cause? No. Therefore, it's a deficiency. Logic is not your friend, I see.
Again, you're failing to understand.
The big bang theory is established. Trying to judge science by religion's standards is nonsensical.

It is not a "deficiency" to admit that there may be areas which are not yet established. Not yet known.
It's a serious problem to make up claims just because it fits your agenda / beliefs.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
Again, as you've had to be told repeatedly lately, reply to what people actually SAY rather than what you want them to have said. I never SAID what people believe about first cause is "objective truth". I argued the opposite: that it can ONLY be subjective.
Learn reading comprehension.
I never said you said that.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
You're only using examples for which there is general consensus on the natural causes of these events. That's not even the sort of thing I'm taking about.
Then try to actually say something concrete instead of these vague claims with no real solid example.
I realize that not having a solid opinion is safer for you as you can rely on your old tricks, but it essentially means you have nothing real to say.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln

Last edited by foundit66; 09-21-2017 at 12:12 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 09-21-2017, 02:56 PM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Tennessee
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,973
Thanks: 9,078
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,327 Posts
Default Re: Is Christianity something other than a religion?

There are many, many logical fallacies--one of which is the fallacy of magical thinking--and it would appear that some on this board think that a belief in the veracity of Christianity falls into that category.

I do not.

Otherwise, I would reject it. Wholeheartedly!
__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 09-21-2017, 07:03 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,040
Thanks: 9,901
Thanked 14,992 Times in 9,093 Posts
Post Re: Is Christianity something other than a religion?

Words have meaning...

magic:
2 - a : an extraordinary power or influence seemingly from a supernatural source

supernatural:
1 : of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe; especially f or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
christianity, other, religion, something, than

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0