The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The rationality of faith > Comments

The rationality of faith : Comments

By Peter Sellick, published 16/1/2008

Our focus can no longer be on the survival of the Church, but on how the Church, weak as it is, can work towards the survival of society.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. All
"The fatal mistake made by those who initiated the so called “Age of Reason” was that they did not understand that reason can only exist in a tradition that shares common premises and is directed towards certain goals." - Peter Selleck [Sells]

-- It is also true that contemporary scientific and other academic disciplines adopt traditions. The idea of a good thesis is challenge propositions, while hopefully not stepping altogether outside of the discipline. Herein, was it Dirac (?) who had to express an radical aletnative idea as a footnote to a text across eighteen versions of the text, before he felt he could rightfully place the idea in body of the text? That is, he felt right all along, but was aware of the protocols of advancing a disciple, slowly.

Contrarily, in undergraduate, masters and PhD studies in the past, I have been burnt crossing a borrowed, proven contruct from one discipline to another: Typically, the behavioural sciences or cultural-anthropology into business studies. Here, one can demonstrate that a construct in known, [tentatively] proved and [tentatively] accepted by another legitimate body of academia; yet, the other discipline -in focus- does not listen. Relatedly, sinologist, Joseph Needham, calculated it can take two hundred years to fuse disciplines.

In the above vein, I find that current adherentst Newtonian classical mechanical style science, resist say quantum mechanics; where things are a bit fuzzy
Posted by Oliver, Wednesday, 16 January 2008 6:05:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
-Cont--

are a bit fuzzy...

Similarly, I feel that the faithful to their faith, wherein, perhaps familial influence is a stronger factor than a Holy Spirit. Also, any religion has much to learn from the history of its times, anthropology, ecology, politics and the behavioural sciences, as probing entities. Herein, for example, if wishes to reason though their belief in God, an early question should be, which God? The surely turns on evidence, not own society values and family values. Else, we have different answers to whom God is.

p.s. Dawkins, I find is like the preachers he criticises, in-so-much-as, he adopts preconceived ideas and targets the converted converted to Atheism. Bias is not good in Theism or Atheism. We should aim for knowledge discovery by broader evaluative means.

p.p.s. Without a scientific reasoning, we, in the West, might find ourselves like China across most dynasties, good at technology, yet, often without understanding the underlying principles.
Posted by Oliver, Wednesday, 16 January 2008 6:24:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Runner claims: "Jesus words and teachings are superior to any other and we don't need to apologise for that."

I would like to suggest to you Runner, as I almost certain that you haven't read it, that the example of Socrates in Plato's "Last Days of Socrates" are both morally and ethically superior and less ambigious. Not to mention written a few hundred years prior.
Posted by Lev, Wednesday, 16 January 2008 6:34:24 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
TAking Runners point one more step.... It's not so much that Jesus words and teaching were superior... though indeed they were to me... it was his works...

-Sight to the blind,
-Hearing to the deaf,
-Cripples walking,
-Demon possessed set free
-Storms calmed, winds obeying him
-Walking on water,
-Water into wine..
-Raising the dead...

Does one need to continue ? It was these things which pointed to His messiahship... and that's the central issue.
We don't need to re-think the role of the Church, it's the same as it has always been.. "proclaim the Kingdom of God, and call men to repentance and faith in Christ"

Luke24:46 <<He told them, "Thus it is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things.>>

For we who have heard the message.. -one thing remains.. repentance and faith.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Wednesday, 16 January 2008 7:02:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
BOAZ, then we should also judge the Persian figures Mithra by his works:

* Being born from a rock
* Slaying a bull to produce vines, wheat, and each type of useful animal
* Protecting men from darkness and evil spirits
* Accompanying souls to paradise
* Rising from the dead

Similar lists can be provided for Horus, Krishna, and even Buddha, depending on what sources you refer to (many of them are almost certainly the mythological basis for Jesus).

Were someone able to demonstrate before me the ability to grant sight to the blind, hearing to deaf, and turn water into wine, and no evidence of fraud or deception could be found, and careful examination showed me to be of sound mind and not hallucinating, then (and only then) I would seriously consider his "messiahship".
As long as all you have to go on are multiply-translated and oft-contradictory second and third-hand accounts from 2000 years ago, then your "evidence" is singularly unimpressive.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Posted by wizofaus, Wednesday, 16 January 2008 7:30:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I suspect many miss the point - if Rationality is so great how come the world is in such a mess? Clearly the religion of the Rational is no better than the one it claims to replace.

However - in thinking about Christianity it seems not to have kicked as many own goals.
Posted by rivergum, Wednesday, 16 January 2008 7:38:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy