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 > Fuzzy thinking on religion > Comments

Fuzzy thinking on religion : Comments

By Bill Muehlenberg, published 24/8/2006

We are currently undergoing a grand social experiment to see what life is like when we reject God.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 23
  10. 24
  11. 25
  12. All
I would like to add another comment.

The author (who, it says at the bottom, is a PhD candidate) has titled his article 'Fuzzy thinking on Religion'.

Here's an article by Professor Bart Kosko, Ph.D., J.D., one of the world's leading mathematical experts on fuzzy logic and author of the 1993 bestseller 'Fuzzy Thinking'. It's entitled 'the Future of God', and represents a real article on 'Fuzzy thinking on Religion':

http://sipi.usc.edu/~kosko/GodEssays.D05/Future_of_God.pdf
Posted by Ev, Thursday, 24 August 2006 11:08:38 AM
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
Kenny Kenny Kenny. Stop rewriting history. Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot were not religious. Any reading of their statements on whether they were religious or not make this quite clear.

Atheism has caused more death in one century than Christianity has in 2000 years. Deal with it.
Posted by Alan Grey, Thursday, 24 August 2006 11:19:59 AM
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
Kenny,

Yes we Christians have to answer for our lack of discipleship, we too are infected by individualism. We haven't answered the call of our baptism, but we can't remain deaf much longer time is running out. It was the Faith that saved Europe many times from conquest, lead to hospitals, universities, science, human rights, capitalism (the rise of reason) and it’s the only thing that will save it this time.

Niall Ferguson world famous Harvard historian and "incurable atheist" on the desperate need for Western Europe in particular to recover its faith in Christ. Though I lament his own lack of faith he has important things to say.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/07/31/do3102.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/07/31/ixopinion.html

Its smacks of desperation to equate that Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao with Christian supernaturalism. That’s like equating Scientology with Christianity and this thoughtlessness is Bill's point in the article – dense generalizations about religion by people who simply do not know what they are talking about. Aussies need to be more thoughtful its extremely important.

Secular humanists make no bones about their attempt to create a new religion.
"While this age does owe a vast debt to the traditional religions, . . . to establish such a religion is a major necessity of the present." Secular humanist manifesto http://www.jcn.com/manifestos.html

We are the densest age ever in relation to the transcendent.

We have been duped by National Socialism and its weird SS pagan rituals and chiliastic faith. Communism with Marx the archangel, Lenin the prophet, the revolution the Kindgom of God, economic determinism the creed. The perversion of right religion again now with the religion of materialism where God is not self existent the universe is, philosophical materialism ("the only valid knowledge is the scientific kind" a statement which itself cannot be proved scientifically) is the creed, scientists the priests initiating neophytes into the mysteries of the new faith. This all has nothing to do with science and everything to do with mystery religion – the ideological leap from facts to a particular philosophy (one can't derive values from mere scientific facts)
Posted by Martin Ibn Warriq, Thursday, 24 August 2006 11:26:06 AM
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 do not think there is a *demonstrative* proof (like Euclid) of
Christianity, nor of the existence of matter, nor of the good will & honesty
of my best & oldest friends. I think all three are (except the second) far
more probable than the alternatives. The case for Xtianity is well given by
Chesterton [in *The Everlasting Man*]; and I tried to do something in my
*Broadcast Talks*. As to *why* God doesn't make it demonstratively clear:
are we sure that He is even interested in the kind of Theism which wd. be a
compelled logical assent to a conclusive argument? Are *we* interested in it
in personal matters? I demand from my friend a trust in my good faith which
is *certain* without demonstrative proof. It wouldn't be confidence at all
if he waited for rigorous proof. Hang it all, the very fairy-tales embody
the truth. Othello believed in Desdemona's innocence when it was proved: but
that was too late. Lear believed in Cordelia's love when it was proved: but
that was too late. 'His praise is lost who stays till all commend.' The
magnanimity, the generosity which will trust on a reasonable probability, is
required of us. But supposing one believed and was wrong after all? Why,
then you wd. have paid the universe a compliment it doesn't deserve. Your
error wd. even be so more interesting & important than the reality. And yet
how cd. that be? How cd. an idiotic universe have produced creatures whose
mere dreams are so much stronger, better, subtler than itself?"

CS Lewis
Posted by Martin Ibn Warriq, Thursday, 24 August 2006 11:26:57 AM
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
CALLING GECKO

"Blind faith"...... You would know my position re The Faith...I hope anyway :)

Let me give you an example of the very thing that ALL Christians should flee from.

A nearby Church had a pastor who's wife developed Cancer. It was what we normally term a 'Charistmatic' fellowship. (not said to criticize all such fellowships) She said publically and repeatedly "God is going to HEAL me"....and then died.

The impact on the church was devastating, basically it collapsed and people left and went elsewhere.

That.... seems like the 'blind' faith + a liberal dose of "God is my number 1 servant to do my beck and call"-ism.

I've had confidence in things I believe God is going to do, but I prefer to keep my cards close to my chest. I don't want to be guilty of bringing shame to His name due to my presumptiveness. Even when I experienced absolutely stunning and miraculous intant healing, I still could not bring myself to rave about it. (But that is one reason for my ever present zeal and confidence here)

The 'reason' Bill is talking about is a sound confidence in the basic Gospel as expressed by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15

[Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand....

that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

...and last of all he appeared to me also.]

Now THAT...is confidence and sound reasoning.

You say you left Christianity, well I urge and encourage you to discover that which I believe you never left..... and find it for the first time mate. Find Him of whom it is said "For me... to live IS Christ" (Paul, in Galatians.)

Such confidence enables me to stand alone outside RMIT and share Christ with multitudes of students. To engage in street theatre and attend demonstrations and share with the organizers for the same reason. What a rush :)
Posted by BOAZ_David, Thursday, 24 August 2006 11:33:22 AM
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’m not familiar with the Pamela Bone article, but I am immediately suspicious of anyone who disagrees with anyone else calling the object of his or her censure, ‘ignorant’. According to Muehlenberg, Bone is ‘ignorant’ of religion and history. Bone also has a ‘hatred of all things religious’, according to this lecturer in ethics, and vice-president of the Australian Family Association.

It is odd, too, that a man with such lofty opinions of himself and his ideas can say that: ‘All the major blood-letting was the direct result, not of religion, but of anti-religion.’

What? What about the Crusades? What about Ireland? What about the Inquisition? What about the current murder and maiming being carried out in the name of Allah and Islam?

Perhaps all of these events result from individuals’ warped interpretations of religion, but it is clear that religion is wide open to any interpretation and is, therefore, guilty by default. Trying to ignore that and denigrate contrary opinions of religion is indicative of a closed mind, which produces epithets like ‘gross ignorance’ in an attempt to hurt, insult or defame a target.

Although I do not understand how anyone can believe in a higher power or any religious dogma, I have no problem with Christianity, if that’s what others want for themselves. But, people like Bill Muehlenberg leave me cold. I would like to believe that he is atypical of believers, and of the Australian Family Association. As for ‘ethics’ – well, they seem to be very much his own.
Posted by Leigh, Thursday, 24 August 2006 12:03:43 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. 23
  10. 24
  11. 25
  12. All

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