Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 55

Thread: Do INTjs think that the "Holy Trinity" is logical?

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Do INTjs think that the "Holy Trinity" is logical?

    Do INTj's think that the Trinity is illogical?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Depends on the INTJ I think. Most (who are Christian) would probably say something like it is "beyond reason" not illogical. I for one take the position that it can be apprehended not comprehended.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    Depends on the INTJ I think. Most (who are Christian) would probably say something like it is "beyond reason" not illogical. I for one take the position that it can be apprehended not comprehended.
    But is it not the INTj's position to reject anything that is illogical?

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yes but some do not view it as contradictory to logic but as something beyond which that which logic can describe. This is what influenced Hegel, Kirkegaard, and all the other existentialists who were essentially Christian in their mindset at the beginning. Also, most INTJs recognize that people (including themselves) do not believe things because they are "logical" but because of behavioralist trends that have "forced us" to view things a certain way. It's not that simplisitic but that's the crux of the arguement.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    ... some do not view it as contradictory to logic but as something beyond which that which logic can describe.
    What do you mean by this?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I believe it was Kirkegaard that divided the world into two basic realms that of "the rational" and that of "the non-rational."

    He basically said that the rational area is useful in defining things but strips everything of value that the idea of value comes from the non-rational which is given via a "leap of faith." (NOTE: this did not have the same meaning as it does today) So we have 2 worlds that NEVER intersect the rational and the non-rational. Things can be described by the first or the second but the two cannot be combined.

    I think he would have laughed his ass off at the way his ideas are being used today. Belief in ANYTHING is seen as non-rational in that form of system you can only describe how things are if certain premises are true but you can never validate the premises. In that system all premises are equally valid.

    "Unicorns are our secret overlords from outerspace" has the same amount of "objective proof" (ie none from a rationalistic view) as does the statement "The sun rotates about the earth roughly once every 365.25 days."

    So in his view you can believe whatever you want because all premises have equal validity and only the non-rational can provide "meaning" for your life (which you will provide yourself or end up commiting suicide).

    Some people took his ideas and focused on the supremacy of the rational which led to nihilism, logical positivism, etc. Some focused on the non-rational aspect and developed the existenialist philosophies, mysticism, and relativistic morality ideas.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    100
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default :)

    Trinity is beyond our perception.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: :)

    Quote Originally Posted by drake_not_logged_in
    Trinity is beyond our perception.
    But surely there must be some logic to it. Why would anyone believe in it if it cannot be understood?

  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is easy... If you you belong to the Christian faith (INTJ or otherwise) you would certainly believe in the Holy Trinity. And if you weren't, the simple matter is that it requires faith! in believing something like the Holy Trinity or for that matter anything religious. So Rationalism doesn't in my opinion cover much ground in this area.

    Because God is transcendent, it is beyond the logic of this world... so I think an INTJ would consider it something of a paradox (therefore be religiously speaking be an agnostic, because it is something you can neither totally prove nor disprove it).

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Prometheus
    If you you belong to the Christian faith (INTJ or otherwise) you would certainly believe in the Holy Trinity.
    It would be wrong to believe in something without questioning it.

    It would be wrong to accept the Christian faith or the Trinity without questioning it first.

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The basis of all human thought cannot be touched and is inherently unquestioned.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    28
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    The basis of all human thought cannot be touched and is inherently unquestioned.

    excuse me?

    One may not be able to directly 'touch' a thought but I've never seen the Greenbay Packers with my own eyes but I can make informed wagers on how they'll do next season.


    sorry for hopping into the thread but it seemed to have going where a previous discussion went down.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Not exactly what I mean but meh *shrugs*

  14. #14
    MysticSonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,993
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    One essence, three different forms. How is that illogical?

    Take Joe. He's a manager of a corporation, and both a farther and a son. Three different manifestations of the same individual.

    Granted, I'm not a religious fellow, but you guys seem to be rambling on about nothing.

  15. #15
    Cone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,717
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I love this kid! :wink:
    Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MysticSonic
    One essence, three different forms. How is that illogical?

    Take Joe. He's a manager of a corporation, and both a farther and a son. Three different manifestations of the same individual.
    As far as I am aware the Trinity states that there is one God, but that God is 3 entities. Therefore:

    1 entity = 3 entities

    This is the first thing that seems illogical.

    The example by Mystic does not match the Trinity in my opinion.

    According to the Trinity, the father is the son of the father, and the son is the father of the son. It's like saying I am my own father and I am my own son. That obviously is illogical.

    In Mystic's example, Joe is the father of one person and the son of another person. Joe is not the father and the son of the same person.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The discussion should not even get as far as the "holy trinity". Belief in God is illogical, the very concept of God is alogical i.e. outside logical explanation.

    The very idea of an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent entity is illogical, but by it's very nature of being all-powerful can do as it wishes, therefore it cannot be argued within any normal logical framework.

    Bleh, as an INTJ* I would not even go as far as the holy trinity, the concept is logically undebatable before you even get that far.

    *I eventually went with INTJ simply because the profiles fit very well, even if I am still unsure about the relative dominance of my Ti over Ne.
    INTJ/ENTP

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    [quote="Lee"]Belief in God is illogical, the very concept of God is alogical[quote]

    Why do you think it is illogical? Please explain.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee
    Belief in God is illogical, the very concept of God is alogical.
    Why do you think it is illogical? Please explain.

    I disagree with you completely.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anonymous
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee
    Belief in God is illogical, the very concept of God is alogical.
    Why do you think it is illogical? Please explain.

    I disagree with you completely.
    Belief in something that cannot be proven is illogical, to claim that there is no God would also be illogical because God cannot be disproven.

    No logical reason can be given where God necassarily exists, presuming God does exist there is no way we can know or understand what form God takes, all debate on the matter would be pure speculation.

    And that is before you even get to the holy trinity question, which renders the question unanswerable.

    But please, I am ready to be proven wrong, I would much prefer to know there is a God.
    INTJ/ENTP

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,246
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Although I am not religious by any stretch, I think belief in a higher power is completely logical.

    Just look around at the stars and try to comprehend infinity. What drives the universe? What is mankind's role in the universe? Just because something doesn't stand up to our limited scientific scrutiny doesn't mean there isn't an underlying logic.
    Entp
    ILE

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Just because the universe is big and complicated does not mean there is a God... that's not logic.

    I am not even denying that God mat exist, I am simply stating that you ain't gonna prove it or provide an argument where God necassarily exists, therefore I am not going to believe, it is illogical to believe.

    I really hope there is a God, then when I die I can moan to him about causing all this confusion.... and I am kinda fond of the idea of heaven and eternal life.
    INTJ/ENTP

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee
    Belief in something that cannot be proven is illogical
    Technically, that is not true. Logic and illogic is separate from being able to prove something.

    If you murder someone and you deny it, you can provide a logical explanation for why you deny murdering someone, even though it is not true.

    Discussing whether God can be proven or not, is seperate from discussing whether the existence of God is logical or not.

  24. #24

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee
    Belief in something that cannot be proven is illogical
    This is the only statement that Lee made that confounded me. At first I read it as "Belief that nothing can be proven is illogical" which flows from the assertion but then I read it correctly.... In my opinion associating any concept with another is illogical and that's what makes all human thought illogical. Believing in something that cannot be proven to exist is no different than going outside your door everyday and interacting with a world that may or may not be there. We technically cannot offer proof for anything we believe but we still believe it which is why I find the "objective rationalist" to be in an interesting situation. Some say faith is a crutch for simpletons but how pathetic is the man who interacts with a world that he cannot prove is? I dunno just some thoughts to consider.

  25. #25

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anonymous
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee
    Belief in something that cannot be proven is illogical
    Technically, that is not true. Logic and illogic is separate from being able to prove something.

    If you murder someone and you deny it, you can provide a logical explanation for why you deny murdering someone, even though it is not true.

    Discussing whether God can be proven or not, is seperate from discussing whether the existence of God is logical or not.
    Ok, you are right here, logic was the wrong choice of words.

    But nobody can provide a convincing logically sound, rational argument that proves God's existence, other than "just because".
    INTJ/ENTP

  26. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee
    Ok, you are right here, logic was the wrong choice of words.

    But nobody can provide a convincing logically sound, rational argument that proves God's existence, other than "just because".
    As I said before logic and proof are two seperate things.

    You can provide a logical argument for anything. Providing proof is something else.

  27. #27

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee
    Belief in something that cannot be proven is illogical
    This is the only statement that Lee made that confounded me. At first I read it as "Belief that nothing can be proven is illogical" which flows from the assertion but then I read it correctly.... In my opinion associating any concept with another is illogical and that's what makes all human thought illogical. Believing in something that cannot be proven to exist is no different than going outside your door everyday and interacting with a world that may or may not be there. We technically cannot offer proof for anything we believe but we still believe it which is why I find the "objective rationalist" to be in an interesting situation. Some say faith is a crutch for simpletons but how pathetic is the man who interacts with a world that he cannot prove is? I dunno just some thoughts to consider.
    Your right, technically I do not "believe" anything, but I cannot act on that heh.. belief :wink: so we act as though we believe it anyway.
    INTJ/ENTP

  28. #28

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anonymous

    As I said before logic and proof are two seperate things.

    You can provide a logical argument for anything. Providing proof is something else.
    Yes they are two seperate things, a logically sound argument would just be a factor that I would require in any explanation in favour of the existence of God.
    INTJ/ENTP

  29. #29

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee
    Your right, technically I do not "believe" anything, but I cannot act on that heh.. belief :wink: so we act as though we believe it anyway.
    That is the problem I have with people they accept the lack of evidence for "reality" unquestioningly but not for God. At least you see the idea I am trying to relate. As for the logical side of it there is the whole logical necessity idea but obviously it comes from certain premises that are just as questionable as the ones it repudiates so meh...

  30. #30

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,246
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee
    Just because the universe is big and complicated does not mean there is a God... that's not logic.

    I am not even denying that God mat exist, I am simply stating that you ain't gonna prove it or provide an argument where God necassarily exists, therefore I am not going to believe, it is illogical to believe.

    I really hope there is a God, then when I die I can moan to him about causing all this confusion.... and I am kinda fond of the idea of heaven and eternal life.
    Some say there's evidence for the existence of God all over the place . . .

    What I'm saying is that logic in and of itself is limited and flawed. Some things transcend logic. Logic is only mechanistic.
    Entp
    ILE

  31. #31

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,246
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "Logic is great stuff. We like it. We still like it. It is not by chance we were given the power to reason, to examine the evidence of our sense, and to draw conclusions. That is one of man's magnificent attributes. We agnostically inclined would not feel satisfied with a proposal which does not lend itself to reasonable approach and interpretation. Hence we are at pains to tell why we think our present faith is reasonable, why we think it more sane and logical to believe than not to believe, why we say our former thinking was soft and mushy when we threw up our hands in doubt and said, "We don't know."

    When we became alcoholics, crushed by a self-imposed crises we could not postpone or evade, we had to fearlessly face the proposition that either God is everything or else He is nothing. God either is or He isn't. What was our choice to be?

    Arrived at this point, we were squarely confronted with the question of faith. We couldn't duck the issue. Some of us had already walked far over the Bridge of Reason toward the desired shore of faith. The outlines and the promise of the New Land had brought lustre to tired eyes and fresh courage to flagging spirits. Friendly hands had stretched out in welcome. We were grateful that Reason had brought us so far. But somehow, we couldn't quite step ashore. Perhaps we had been leaning too heavily on reason that last mile and we did not like to lose our support.

    That was natural, but let us think a little more closely. Without knowing it, had we not been brought to where we stood by a certain kind of faith? For did we not believe in our own reasoning? did we not have confidence in our ability to think? What was that but a sort of faith? Yes, we had been faithful, abjectly faithful to the God of Reason. So, in one way or another, we discovered that faith had been involved all the time!

    We found, too, that we had been worshippers. What a state of mental goose-flesh that used to bring on! Had we not variously worshipped people, sentiment, things, money, and ourselves? And then, with a better motive, had we not worshipfully beheld the sunset, the sea, or a flower? Who of us had not loved something or somebody? How much did these feelings, these loves, these worships, have to do with pure reason? Little or nothing, we saw at last. Were not these things the tissue out of which our lives were constructed? Did not these feelings, after all, determine the course of our existence? It was impossible to say we had no capacity for faith, or love, or worship. In one form or another we had been living by faith and little else.

    Imagine life without faith! Were nothing left but pure reason, it wouldn't be life. But we believed in life of course we did. We could not prove life in the sense that you can prove a straight line is the shortest distance between two points, yet, there it was. Could we still say the whole thing was nothing but a mass of electrons, created out of nothing, meaning nothing, whirling on to a destiny of nothingness? Or course we couldn't. The electrons themselves seemed more intelligent than that. At least, so the chemist said.

    Hence, we saw that reason isn't everything. Neither is reason, as most of us use it, entirely dependable, thought it emanate from our best minds. What about people who proved that man could never fly? Yet we had been seeing another kind of flight, a spiritual liberation from this world, people who rose above their problems. They said God made these things possible, and we only smiled. We had seen spiritual release, but liked to tell ourselves it wasn't true.

    Actually we were fooling ourselves, for deep down in every man, woman, and child, is the fundamental idea of God. It may be obscured by calamity, by pomp, by worship of other things, but in some form or other it is there. For faith in a Power greater than ourselves, and miraculous demonstrations of that power in human lives, are facts as old as man himself.

    We finally saw that faith in some kind of God was a part of our make-up, just as much as the feeling we have for a friend. Sometimes we had to search fearlessly, but He was there. He was as much a fact as we were. We found the Great Reality deep down within us. In the last analysis it is only there that He may be found. It was so with us.

    We can only clear the ground a bit. If our testimony helps sweep away prejudice, enables you to think honestly, encourages you to search diligently within yourself, then, if you wish, you can join us on the Broad Highway. With this attitude you cannot fail. the consciousness of your belief is sure to come to you.

    In this book you will read the experience of a man who thought he was an atheist. His story is so interesting that some of it should be told now. His change of heart was dramatic, convincing, and moving. Our friend was a minister's son. He attended church school, where he became rebellious at what he thought an overdose of religious education. For years thereafter he was dogged by trouble and frustration. Business failure, insanity, fatal illness, suicide these calamities in his immediate family embittered and depressed him. Post-war disillusionment, ever more serious alcoholism, impending mental and physical collapse, brought him to the point to self-destruction.

    One night, when confined in a hospital, he was approached by an alcoholic who had known a spiritual experience. Our friend's gorge rose as he bitterly cried out: "If there is a God, He certainly hasn't done anything for me!" But later, alone in his room, he asked himself this question: "Is it possible that all the religious people I have known are wrong?" While pondering the answer he felt as though he lived in hell. Then, like a thunderbolt, a great thought came. It crowded out all else:

    "Who are you to say there is no God?"

    This man recounts that he tumbled out of bed to his knees. In a few seconds he was overwhelmed by a conviction of the Presence of God. It poured over and through him with the certainty and majesty of a great tide at flood. The barriers he had built through the years were swept away. He stood in the Presence of Infinite Power and Love. He had stepped from bridge to shore. For the first time, he lived in conscious companionship with his Creator.

    Thus was our friend's cornerstone fixed in place. No later vicissitude has shaken it. His alcoholic problem was taken away. That very night, years ago, it disappeared. Save for a few brief moments of temptation the though of drink has never returned; and at such times a great revulsion has risen up in him. Seemingly he could not drink even if he would. God had restored his sanity.

    What is this but a miracle of healing? Yet its elements are simple. Circumstances made him willing to believe. He humbly offered himself to his Maker then he knew.

    Even so has God restored us all to our right minds. To this man, the revelation was sudden. Some of us grow into it more slowly. But He has come to all who have honestly sought Him.

    When we drew near to Him He disclosed Himself to us!"

    From

    Alcoholics Anonymous

    Cool, eh?

    :-)
    Entp
    ILE

  32. #32
    Cone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,717
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's always great to see an idea achieve something so very important and wonderful. It's things like this that show the true potential of religion.


    Your INTp friend,

    Cone
    Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)

  33. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In the Qur’an, which was revealed 14 centuries ago at a time when the science of astronomy was still primitive, the expansion of the universe was described like this:

    "And it is We who have constructed the heaven with might, and verily, it is We who are steadily expanding it." (Surat adh-Dhariyat: 47)

    The word “heaven”, as stated in this verse, is used in various places in the Qur’an with the meaning of space and universe. Here again, the word is used with this meaning. In other words, in the Qur’an, it is communicated that the universe “expands”.

    And this is the very conclusion that science has reached today.

    Until the dawn of the 20th century, the only view prevailing in the world of science was that “the universe has a constant nature and it has existed since infinite time”. The research, observations, and calculations carried out by means of modern technology, however, revealed that the universe in fact had a beginning and that it constantly expands.

    At the beginning of the 20th century, the Russian physicist Alexander Friedmann and the Belgian cosmologist Georges Lemaitre theoretically calculated that the universe is in constant motion and that it is expanding.

    This fact was proved also by observational data in 1929. While observing the sky with a telescope, Edwin Hubble, the American astronomer, discovered that the stars and galaxies were constantly moving away from each other. A universe where everything constantly moves away from each other implied a constantly expanding universe. The observations carried out in the following years verified that the universe constantly expands. This fact was explained in the Qur’an when it was yet unknown by anyone. This is because the Qur’an is the word of God, the Creator, and the Ruler of the entire universe.

  34. #34
    Cone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,717
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That's a shaky, literal correlation, but whatever.
    Binary or dichotomous systems, although regulated by a principle, are among the most artificial arrangements that have ever been invented. -- William Swainson, A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Animals (1835)

  35. #35

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Just as the correlation for the earth being the center of the universe according to the bible was shaky.

  36. #36

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze
    Some say there's evidence for the existence of God all over the place . . .

    What I'm saying is that logic in and of itself is limited and flawed. Some things transcend logic. Logic is only mechanistic.
    Okay, when I said logic originally, I was more referring to the logic in my mind, not logic as a tool. In my mind, based on everything I know, belief in God is irrational, likewise is disbelief in God.

    Nobody can provide for me a satisfactory explanation that proves God's existence, without redefining what God is.
    INTJ/ENTP

  37. #37

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blaze
    "Logic is great stuff. We like it. We still like it. It is not by chance we were given the power to reason, to examine the evidence of our sense, and to draw conclusions.
    That's an assumption, even if it were not by chance because God created it, wouldn't God's existence also have been chance? but because of the nature of the concept of God you can apply whatever rules you like, it's completely speculative yet nobody seems to be bothered by this.

    That is one of man's magnificent attributes. We agnostically inclined would not feel satisfied with a proposal which does not lend itself to reasonable approach and interpretation. Hence we are at pains to tell why we think our present faith is reasonable, why we think it more sane and logical to believe than not to believe, why we say our former thinking was soft and mushy when we threw up our hands in doubt and said, "We don't know."
    Some people are more prone to belief than others, it can actually be traced back to the individuals genetic make-up, upbringing and the resulting neurophysiology, brain scans have been conducted to figure out what physiological differences cause one person to believe and another not to.

    Evolution has crafted us as a species of believers, it suites a social purpose and many feel incomplete without that belief in a higher being. I am reminded of Jung curing a young woman of her problems and worries when he simply asked her to believe in God, some people are hardwired.

    When we became alcoholics, crushed by a self-imposed crises we could not postpone or evade, we had to fearlessly face the proposition that either God is everything or else He is nothing. God either is or He isn't. What was our choice to be?
    Nobody has to face the question that God is everything or nothing, especially when they feel (as I do) that they have insufficient information to make that judgement. Why does a judgement have to made? i'll let you know my answer when I am dead, it might still be "I do not know".

    Arrived at this point, we were squarely confronted with the question of faith. We couldn't duck the issue. Some of us had already walked far over the Bridge of Reason toward the desired shore of faith. The outlines and the promise of the New Land had brought lustre to tired eyes and fresh courage to flagging spirits. Friendly hands had stretched out in welcome. We were grateful that Reason had brought us so far. But somehow, we couldn't quite step ashore. Perhaps we had been leaning too heavily on reason that last mile and we did not like to lose our support.
    Again the idea that we MUST answer the question as YES or No arises, why?

    That was natural, but let us think a little more closely. Without knowing it, had we not been brought to where we stood by a certain kind of faith? For did we not believe in our own reasoning? did we not have confidence in our ability to think? What was that but a sort of faith? Yes, we had been faithful, abjectly faithful to the God of Reason. So, in one way or another, we discovered that faith had been involved all the time!
    Only fools would have faith in thier own reason, I do not know this God of reason they speak of, unless they equate God and existence? if thier definition of God is simply existence then I am a believer... I know that something existes.

    We found, too, that we had been worshippers. What a state of mental goose-flesh that used to bring on! Had we not variously worshipped people, sentiment, things, money, and ourselves? And then, with a better motive, had we not worshipfully beheld the sunset, the sea, or a flower? Who of us had not loved something or somebody? How much did these feelings, these loves, these worships, have to do with pure reason? Little or nothing, we saw at last. Were not these things the tissue out of which our lives were constructed? Did not these feelings, after all, determine the course of our existence? It was impossible to say we had no capacity for faith, or love, or worship. In one form or another we had been living by faith and little else.
    Feelings and emotions are just evolved biological mechanisms that aid us in our lives, whether it be to steer us from dange, fight an enemy or just manipulate the social game.

    They do not prove anything, they simply give egotistical reasons as to why we should behave in a perticular way.

    Imagine life without faith! Were nothing left but pure reason, it wouldn't be life. But we believed in life of course we did. We could not prove life in the sense that you can prove a straight line is the shortest distance between two points, yet, there it was. Could we still say the whole thing was nothing but a mass of electrons, created out of nothing, meaning nothing, whirling on to a destiny of nothingness? Or course we couldn't. The electrons themselves seemed more intelligent than that. At least, so the chemist said.
    This paragrath says nothing useful other than "I believe and have not real argumento other than because I want to".

    Hence, we saw that reason isn't everything. Neither is reason, as most of us use it, entirely dependable, thought it emanate from our best minds. What about people who proved that man could never fly? Yet we had been seeing another kind of flight, a spiritual liberation from this world, people who rose above their problems. They said God made these things possible, and we only smiled. We had seen spiritual release, but liked to tell ourselves it wasn't true.
    What about people who "proved man couldn't fly? what on earth is tha supposed to mean? it doesn't mean anything in this context, the comparison being drawn is a different scenario.

    Actually we were fooling ourselves, for deep down in every man, woman, and child, is the fundamental idea of God. It may be obscured by calamity, by pomp, by worship of other things, but in some form or other it is there. For faith in a Power greater than ourselves, and miraculous demonstrations of that power in human lives, are facts as old as man himself.
    This simply applies meaning where ther is none, never mind the assumptions it makes. Why is it important to worship anything? and the "facts" are hardly facts, if for no other reason than what Pedro said a few posts ago.

    We finally saw that faith in some kind of God was a part of our make-up, just as much as the feeling we have for a friend. Sometimes we had to search fearlessly, but He was there. He was as much a fact as we were. We found the Great Reality deep down within us. In the last analysis it is only there that He may be found. It was so with us.
    THe great reality deep down within us? they mean feelings, what a reliable and great thing feelings are *rollseyes*

    We can only clear the ground a bit. If our testimony helps sweep away prejudice, enables you to think honestly, encourages you to search diligently within yourself, then, if you wish, you can join us on the Broad Highway. With this attitude you cannot fail. the consciousness of your belief is sure to come to you.
    erm.. no.

    In this book you will read the experience of a man who thought he was an atheist. His story is so interesting that some of it should be told now. His change of heart was dramatic, convincing, and moving. Our friend was a minister's son. He attended church school, where he became rebellious at what he thought an overdose of religious education. For years thereafter he was dogged by trouble and frustration. Business failure, insanity, fatal illness, suicide these calamities in his immediate family embittered and depressed him. Post-war disillusionment, ever more serious alcoholism, impending mental and physical collapse, brought him to the point to self-destruction.
    Well if it worked for him great, he is free to believe as he wishes. The fact that he was certain in his Athiesm speakes volumes. But an example of one man's life means nothing.

    One night, when confined in a hospital, he was approached by an alcoholic who had known a spiritual experience. Our friend's gorge rose as he bitterly cried out: "If there is a God, He certainly hasn't done anything for me!" But later, alone in his room, he asked himself this question: "Is it possible that all the religious people I have known are wrong?" While pondering the answer he felt as though he lived in hell. Then, like a thunderbolt, a great thought came. It crowded out all else:

    "Who are you to say there is no God?"
    Yes, the man with who had consumed too much of a mind altering drug was a great source of "truth"...lol.

    Anyway, again this is full of absolutes akin to any devout religious person. He is not in a position to say there is no God, but this does not mean that he is in a postiton to say there is one either.

    This man recounts that he tumbled out of bed to his knees. In a few seconds he was overwhelmed by a conviction of the Presence of God. It poured over and through him with the certainty and majesty of a great tide at flood. The barriers he had built through the years were swept away. He stood in the Presence of Infinite Power and Love. He had stepped from bridge to shore. For the first time, he lived in conscious companionship with his Creator.
    Why do I not experience this, why does God care if I believe or not? why does he pick special people? why does God not just reveal him/herself?

    Thus was our friend's cornerstone fixed in place. No later vicissitude has shaken it. His alcoholic problem was taken away. That very night, years ago, it disappeared. Save for a few brief moments of temptation the though of drink has never returned; and at such times a great revulsion has risen up in him. Seemingly he could not drink even if he would. God had restored his sanity.
    If he needed God to cure his alcoholism then so be it, it does not mean anything other than that he needed a belief in a higher power to make him happy... good for him.

    What is this but a miracle of healing? Yet its elements are simple. Circumstances made him willing to believe. He humbly offered himself to his Maker then he knew.
    Again, whatever makes him happy, I am sure every successful surgical operation is a miracle *rolleyes*

    Even so has God restored us all to our right minds. To this man, the revelation was sudden. Some of us grow into it more slowly. But He has come to all who have honestly sought Him.

    When we drew near to Him He disclosed Himself to us!"
    So the almighty God, who created me wishes me to believe? it shoudn't be hard, he is all-powerful after all.


    I am aware that my own responses are open to scrutiny, I know that we could go down the subjective reality, nothing provable route... but that, the above responses and a heel of a lot more are why I am undecided on the question of God, I very much doubt I will ever been satisfied enough to answer in my life time.
    INTJ/ENTP

  38. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro-the-Lion
    Just as the correlation for the earth being the center of the universe according to the bible was shaky.
    But the earth is not the centre of the Universe. (Or is it?)

  39. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cone
    That's a shaky, literal correlation
    Please explain how?

  40. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The Sex of the Child

    Until fairly recently, it was thought that a baby's sex was determined by the mother's cells. Or at least, it was believed that the sex was determined by the male and female cells together. But, we are given different information in the Qur'an, where it is stated that masculinity or femininity is created out of "a drop of sperm which has been ejected."

    He (God) has created both sexes, male and female from a drop of semen which has been ejected. (Qur'an, 53:45-46)

    The developing disciplines of genetics and molecular biology have scientifically validated the accuracy of this information given by the Qur'an. It is now understood that sex is determined by the sperm cells from the male, and that the female has no role in this process.

    The Y chromosome carries characteristics of masculinity, while the X chromosome carries those of femininity. In the mother's egg, there is only the X chromosome, which determines female characteristics. In the semen from the father, there are sperms that include either X or Y chromosomes. Therefore, the sex of the baby depends on whether the sperm fertilising the egg contains an X or Y chromosome. In other words, as stated in the verse, the factor determining the sex of the baby is the semen, which comes from the father. This knowledge, which could not have been known at the time when the Qur'an was revealed, is evidence to the fact that the Qur'an is the Word of God.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •