PDA

View Full Version : Worshipping the Bible or its author? (sf SSM)



Kevin Bonham
27-06-2013, 05:24 PM
I am extremely confident you could not do so, but I do not think it right to completely rule out the extremely unlikely hypothetical possibility.

I wasn't saying I could.


And I do not follow text, I follow the one who authored that text.

I actually doubt that very much, even in the form of you following an idea of God as opposed to a text account. If it was true you would be able to demonstrate why you believe in that author using evidence entirely independent from that text, and I've never seen you do that on any religion thread. More likely your belief and your methods of assessing those beliefs arise from the text and what you are actually worshipping is not a God but a book.

Oepty
27-06-2013, 05:52 PM
I actually doubt that very much, even in the form of you following an idea of God as opposed to a text account. If it was true you would be able to demonstrate why you believe in that author using evidence entirely independent from that text, and I've never seen you do that on any religion thread. More likely your belief and your methods of assessing those beliefs arise from the text and what you are actually worshipping is not a God but a book.

This is making me think, thank you for making me think.

Oepty
27-06-2013, 10:10 PM
I actually doubt that very much, even in the form of you following an idea of God as opposed to a text account. If it was true you would be able to demonstrate why you believe in that author using evidence entirely independent from that text, and I've never seen you do that on any religion thread. More likely your belief and your methods of assessing those beliefs arise from the text and what you are actually worshipping is not a God but a book.

No, I am not worshipping a book. When I pray I do not pray to the Bible, I pray to God, I direct my prayers towards the light that the Bible says surrounds God.

However I am not sure why I need to try and demonstrate anything completely independent of the Bible. The Bible is what God has told us, it reveals him, his plan with the earth and how we can be part of it.
So why do I need to demonstrate anything separate from that?

Kevin Bonham
27-06-2013, 11:56 PM
No, I am not worshipping a book. When I pray I do not pray to the Bible, I pray to God, I direct my prayers towards the light that the Bible says surrounds God.

So you believe God is surrounded by this light because the Bible tells you God is there. But if that is your source of evidence then you are praying to something you only believe is real because the book tells you it is, which is again a case of worshipping the book. Worshipping the book so much in fact that if it tells you to believe God is somewhere, you believe it because the book says so - rather than on the basis of whether there is actually evidence that it is true.


However I am not sure why I need to try and demonstrate anything completely independent of the Bible. The Bible is what God has told us, it reveals him, his plan with the earth and how we can be part of it.
So why do I need to demonstrate anything separate from that?

Because if the source of your views about God is the Bible and you cannot convincingly demonstrate God's existence independent of the Bible, then you are only worshipping the content of a book and doing what it tells you. That's especially so if you believe the Bible is God's word because the Bible says it is God's word.

Kevin Bonham
28-06-2013, 12:07 AM
Other Christians who believe the Bible is largely or entirely the word of God welcome to have a shot at this one too - do you believe in God because the Bible says God is real, or do you believe in God "independently" of the Bible and then deduce the Bible's status from there?

If the latter, does it bother you that if you had been born in a different culture you would probably have deduced that a different document like the Koran had that status?

Capablanca-Fan
28-06-2013, 12:31 AM
If the latter, does it bother you that if you had been born in a different culture you would probably have deduced that a different document like the Koran had that status?
That's akin to one of the Dawk's favorite arguments, but it's a genetic fallacy—it has no bearing on which, if any, of these books is true. A major difference is that the Bible was affirmed by one (http://creation.com/jesus-christ-on-the-infallibility-of-scripture) who rose from the dead (http://www.tektonics.org/rezhub.html), while the girl-marrying Mohammad (http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/prepubescent.htm) rotted in his tomb.

Kevin Bonham
28-06-2013, 12:44 AM
That's akin to one of the Dawk's favorite arguments, but it's a genetic fallacy—it has no bearing on which, if any, of these books is true.

I'm not saying it has any bearing on which of them is true (so the accusation of a fallacy is strawmanning); obviously my view is that none are. I'm just asking whether it causes people to question the soundness of their beliefs.


A major difference is that the Bible was affirmed by one (http://creation.com/jesus-christ-on-the-infallibility-of-scripture) who rose from the dead (http://www.tektonics.org/rezhub.html), while the girl-marrying Mohammad (http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/prepubescent.htm) rotted in his tomb.

And yet if you were Islamic this would probably not stop you believing that Jesus was just another important prophet while Muhammed was the final prophet.

Oepty
28-06-2013, 02:15 AM
So you believe God is surrounded by this light because the Bible tells you God is there. But if that is your source of evidence then you are praying to something you only believe is real because the book tells you it is, which is again a case of worshipping the book. Worshipping the book so much in fact that if it tells you to believe God is somewhere, you believe it because the book says so - rather than on the basis of whether there is actually evidence that it is true.

Because if the source of your views about God is the Bible and you cannot convincingly demonstrate God's existence independent of the Bible, then you are only worshipping the content of a book and doing what it tells you. That's especially so if you believe the Bible is God's word because the Bible says it is God's word.

I do not think it follows that worshipping something spoken about only in a book is the same as worshipping the book. There is clearly two different things to me.

Capablanca-Fan
28-06-2013, 09:05 AM
I'm not saying it has any bearing on which of them is true (so the accusation of a fallacy is strawmanning); obviously my view is that none are. I'm just asking whether it causes people to question the soundness of their beliefs.
It's even worse—whether in your hands or the Dawk's, it's a non-argument. The existence of false beliefs is not the slightest evidence against the true belief.


And yet if you were Islamic this would probably not stop you believing that Jesus was just another important prophet while Muhammed was the final prophet.
Only a Muslim would think something so illogical (e.g. the Koran rates Jesus higher than Muhammad in many ways, but still says that Muhammad is the final prophet). But since in Muslim-ruled countries, apostasy is punishable by death, they keep their doubts to themselves.

Kevin Bonham
28-06-2013, 12:23 PM
I do not think it follows that worshipping something spoken about only in a book is the same as worshipping the book. There is clearly two different things to me.

The question is whether you have any reason for believing the thing referred to in the book is true other than that you believe the book and the book says so.

If the answer is no then you are letting a book tell you how to interpret reality instead of doing the interpretation for yourself. That is what I meant by worshipping the book. You think you are worshipping God but in that case what you are actually "worshipping" is a figment you've constructed because the book told you to. Had the book told you to worship a different idea of God, you would have constructed a different figment.

Kevin Bonham
28-06-2013, 12:27 PM
It's even worse—whether in your hands or the Dawk's, it's a non-argument. The existence of false beliefs is not the slightest evidence against the true belief.

Keep strawmanning but all it's showing is your disinterest in answering the core question. (As I already indicated, I wasn't making that point as an argument but as a way of asking whether people have any discomfort with the social-context arbitrariness of their beliefs.) I was particularly interested in seeing how you respond to the core question since you supposedly hold the Bible to be axiomatic. You've responded by heading straight for the side-alleys, what a surprise.


Only a Muslim would think something so illogical (e.g. the Koran rates Jesus higher than Muhammad in many ways, but still says that Muhammad is the final prophet).

Even assuming this is a valid summary, I don't see any reason to consider such a combination of views innately illogical. And since all religious views are extremely illogical I hardly think it would be a unique flaw anyway. :lol:

Oepty
28-06-2013, 12:36 PM
The question is whether you have any reason for believing the thing referred to in the book is true other than that you believe the book and the book says so.

Yes and I have not answered that question yet.



If the answer is no then you are letting a book tell you how to interpret reality instead of doing the interpretation for yourself. That is what I meant by worshipping the book. You think you are worshipping God but in that case what you are actually "worshipping" is a figment you've constructed because the book told you to. Had the book told you to worship a different idea of God, you would have constructed a different figment.

This line of thinking is true if God does not exist.
However this line of thinking is false if God does exit. It is false because then God would not be a figment that I had created but a reality

Kevin Bonham
28-06-2013, 12:40 PM
This line of thinking is true if God does not exist.
However this line of thinking is false if God does exit. It is false because then God would not be a figment that I had created but a reality

Not correct. If God exists but is very different to the way God is described in the Bible then those who follow the Bible are still worshipping an imaginary God the Bible tells them to worship, one that is different to the real one.

Oepty
28-06-2013, 01:48 PM
Not correct. If God exists but is very different to the way God is described in the Bible then those who follow the Bible are still worshipping an imaginary God the Bible tells them to worship, one that is different to the real one.

I will amend my line to be a lot more specific,

However this line of thinking is false if the God described does exit and is described accurately in the Bible. It is false because then the God described in the Bible would not be a figment that I had created but a reality.

I suspect we are heading to very familiar territory.

Kevin Bonham
28-06-2013, 02:02 PM
However this line of thinking is false if the God described does exit and is described accurately in the Bible. It is false because then the God described in the Bible would not be a figment that I had created but a reality.


True. But there are a great many books, traditions and beliefs purporting to describe such a God and differing greatly in what that God is supposedly like. So if you believe God is a particular way only because the one of those books that you happen to follow says so, and God is in fact that particular way, then that would be an absolute fluke. It could just as easily have been any of the other books and traditions that got it right, or none of them.

Oepty
28-06-2013, 02:11 PM
True. But there are a great many books, traditions and beliefs purporting to describe such a God and differing greatly in what that God is supposedly like. So if you believe God is a particular way only because the one of those books that you happen to follow says so, and God is in fact that particular way, then that would be an absolute fluke. It could just as easily have been any of the other books and traditions that got it right, or none of them.

It seems you are assuming there is no way to evaluate the claims of each book determining which book has a greater likelihood to be correct. If one book can be shown to have a much better claim then it would not be an absolute fluke that God is actually as described in that book.

Kevin Bonham
28-06-2013, 02:17 PM
It seems you are assuming there is no way to evaluate the claims of each book determining which book has a greater likelihood to be correct. If one book can be shown to have a much better claim then it would not be an absolute fluke that God is actually as described in that book.

Ah yes. But to show that one book has a much better claim you will have to demonstrate it using arguments other than the book's own claims on its behalf. You would need to show that that book has the better claim using other sources.

Oepty
28-06-2013, 02:51 PM
Ah yes. But to show that one book has a much better claim you will have to demonstrate it using arguments other than the book's own claims on its behalf. You would need to show that that book has the better claim using other sources.

Of course.

Goughfather
30-06-2013, 01:12 PM
But since in Muslim-ruled countries, apostasy is punishable by death, they keep their doubts to themselves.

While on the other hand, if you expressed your doubts, you would be out of a job and would be unemployable anywhere else.

antichrist
30-06-2013, 01:40 PM
While on the other hand, if you expressed your doubts, you would be out of a job and would be unemployable anywhere else.

Like the Catholic priests and RG ingersoll stated 170 years ago

Capablanca-Fan
01-07-2013, 09:30 AM
While on the other hand, if you expressed your doubts, you would be out of a job and would be unemployable anywhere else.
Who knows? Apostates seem to have quite an easy time (cf. Charles Templeton (http://creation.com/death-of-an-apostate), Dan Barker (http://www.tektonics.org/af/barkerd02.html), Bart Ehrman (http://www.tektonics.org/books/ehrqurvw.html)), and they are certainly not killed as they would be if they had left Islam. But you have a point about the employment discrimination against anyone who dares question goo-to-you evolution (http://creation.com/expelled-new-movie-exposes-persecution-of-anti-darwinists).

antichrist
01-07-2013, 10:21 AM
When did Jesus become a Christian?