Dear Jayb,

In Judaism, the maternal lineage only determines whether one is Jewish or not. With regards to priesthood, Levi-hood and royalty, only the paternal lineage counts.

---

Dear Banjo,

It seems to me that when you use the term 'rational', you actually mean 'empirical'.

While we are generally capable of rational thinking, we are NOT rational beings: whether we base our life on empirical evidence, on faith, on myth or whatever, that primary choice of what we base our life on, is always irrational. It is only once that choice is made that we can proceed and draw from it logical conclusions in a rational way.

Obviously I cannot answer for Rhian, whom you asked:

"In other words, what role do you attribute to rational argumentation in determining your belief (faith) in the gospel narratives of the resurrection (of Jesus)?"

But if I were to believe in the gospel narratives, then my answer would be along the lines of: "I sense that those who believe and follow the gospel are better people, less selfish, less arrogant, less lustful, less greedy, less materialistic, more pure, more content, etc., so since I want to be like them, I better believe in the gospel myself".

In other words, my answer to your question: "what rational arguments can you provide to justify that belief", would be "it is good (for me) to have that belief".

Yuyutsu,

That’s not a rational reason to believe something.

<<In other words, my answer to your question: "what rational arguments can you provide to justify that belief", would be "it is good (for me) to have that belief".>>

The only rational reason to believe something is because it is true, and whether or not those who belief something are, “less selfish, less arrogant, less lustful, less greedy, less materialistic, more pure, more content, etc.”, says nothing about the truth of a claim.

Aside from that, I think you’ll find, particularly in the US, that the opposite is more often the case.

Dear AJ Philips,

You wrote: "The only rational reason to believe something is because it is true, and whether or not those who belief something are, “less selfish, less arrogant, less lustful, less greedy, less materialistic, more pure, more content, etc.”, says nothing about the truth of a claim."

If one can show a proposition is true by facts or reason there is no need for belief. Belief is only necessary when there is no evidence to support the truth of a claim. There is no rational reason to believe something.

.

Dear Yuyutsu,

.

I appreciate your drawing my attention to the difference between rational and empirical and indeed both terms have application to a certain degree in the context of the arguments put forward by Rhian to justify his non-belief in (the supposed) bodily resurrection (of Jesus).

You also remarked :

« But if I were to believe in the gospel narratives, then my answer would be along the lines of: "I sense that those who believe and follow the gospel are better people, less selfish, less arrogant, less lustful, less greedy, less materialistic, more pure, more content, etc., so since I want to be like them, I better believe in the gospel myself" »
.

It’s nice to know that you sense that, Yuyutsu, though I must confess that I, personally, have very serious doubts that what you sense corresponds to reality. I fear that you are being much too optimistic and far too idealistic for that to be true of human nature.

Unfortunately, those who profess to be fervent believers in the gospels are, almost invariably, exactly the opposite to what you describe. In my experience, modesty and goodness are more often to be found in very simple people who never set a foot in a place of worship and have very little or no knowledge of the message of the gospels.

That said, Yuyutsu, I do not, by any means, exclude the possibility that there may well be a few exceptional individuals (such as yourself, perhaps) who live their daily lives in accordance with the moral values expounded in the gospels.

In any event, ethics and morality are, by no means, the monopoly of religion or religious faith. Materialists (those who support the theory that nothing exists except matter) are not necessarily more materialistic (considering material possessions and physical comfort more important than ethical or moral values) than theists or deists.

.

Dear david f,

We’re probably going to start splitting hairs here, but to say that belief is no longer necessary when knowledge has been acquired is, I think, to define belief too narrowly or confuse it with faith.

Knowledge is a subset of belief. So, for example, while it’s possible for one to believe something to be true but not know it to be true, it is not possible to know something but still not believe it to be true, since belief is the acceptance of a proposition as true.

(I suppose some may enter a deep state of denial in which they try to convince themselves that they don’t believe something that they know to be true, but in a sense, they still need to believe it to have accepted it as true in the first place.)

If belief were a state of mind only ever necessary in the absence of evidence, then it would be indistinguishable from faith. Faith is no longer necessary once knowledge is acquired and, in fact, it would be contradictory for one to say that they know something to be true while still having faith that it is, because they’re mutually exclusive concepts. I don’t think that exclusivity exists with belief and knowledge since belief is essentially just the acceptance of a proposition as true, and we generally all accept the truth of what it is that we know.

Granted, though, many will use belief as an excuse for an opinion that they don’t have a good reason to hold.

Yuyutsu wrote: “But if I were to believe in the gospel narratives, then my answer would be along the lines of: "I sense that those who believe and follow the gospel are better people, less selfish, less arrogant, less lustful, less greedy, less materialistic, more pure, more content, etc., so since I want to be like them, I better believe in the gospel myself".”

Let’s look at the record of Christian believers. After Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire they persecuted and killed pagans and heretics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_persecution_of_paganism_under_Theodosius_I tells that story.

“... Theodosius I reiterated Constantine's ban on pagan sacrifice, prohibited haruspicy on pain of death, pioneered the criminalization of magistrates who did not enforce anti-pagan laws, broke up some pagan associations and destroyed pagan temples.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priscillian tells about the first Christian executed by Christians.

The fifth century Jesus Wars (http://www.christianbook.com/the-jesus-wars-philip-jenkins/9780061768941/pd/768941) tells how violence determined the doctrines Christians adopted.

Fletcher’s “The Conversion of Europe from Paganism to Christianity: 371-1386” tells how Europe was Christianised after the Roman Empire adopted Christianity. With the exception of Ireland the conversion was achieved by violence. eg. Charlemagne gave the pagan Gauls the choice of Christianity or beheading.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades tells the Crusaders not only slaughtered Muslims but also non-Catholic Christians, heretics and Jews. Crusaders sacked Orthodox Christian Constantinople and massacred the Christian inhabitants, massacred the Albigensians who they regarded as heretics, massacred Jews in the Rhineland. “Participation in such a war was seen as a form of penance which could counterbalance sin.”

The Wars of the Reformation saw Christians slaughtering Christians. Martin Luther hoped Jews would accept his new faith. When they didn’t he preached against them and advocated their destruction. His diatribes were reprinted in the Nazi newspapers.

The War against science was exemplified by the murders of Hypatia, Michael Servetus and Giordano Bruno.

The Inquisition persecuted many.

The imperialist European powers massacred and enslaved the indigenous people of the Americas, Africa and Asia. This was justified as bringing the benefits of Christianity.

The Holocaust was the outcome of centuries of Christian hate.

Christianity has been an instrument of unparalleled evil.