Quote Originally Posted by TomOfSweden View Post
Let's create two possible hypothetical universes. One allows for the supernatural and the other doesn't. The non-supernatural is complex but has it's limitations and we can make plausible theories, while the supernatural one is infinate since the supernatural has no limits. This isn't a case against the supernatural, but if we believe in the supernatural then we can't say anything about it. That's where reason fails us.
That sounds good to me. Although I am not sure where it takes us, since ruling out the option of saying there is not a supernatural element to our world merely because it would be make our world too complex to understand, if clearly not sound.

As someone who has embraced a particular faith I do have the canon of sacred texts and a body of experience, published and unpublished to help make sense of the world. And I know I am stepping into the circular argument territory there, so will back off. Smiles.


We have no idea whether or not human evolution is unlikely or not. I belong to the camp who believes that given the right circumstances life springs up easily.
And given the same evidence I have decided to join the other camp.

Actually the story of creation was a mile stone in my accepting the Bible as a God inspired text. I know you quote dates for the when the Bible was written, but I believe that those are for when it was assembled. The first 5 books of the bible in particular are significantly older than the dates you quote. As a child I was taught the story of creation, never really challenged it, but never really accepted it either. It struck me one day, just how amazing it was that someone with little scientific knowledge beyond how to use the stars as a compass and sighs of nature to find water could so accurately predict the process of evolution as science has now shown us. Unlike some people, I cannot accept that creation took 7 days, but I understand that the term used in the original Hebrew not only means day, but also a period of time. That makes the first few chapters of the bible not only plausible, but also in line with scientific discoveries. (With apologies to all creationists.)

This is where christian logic fails. You're still stuck on trying to prove whether the supernatural can be true or not. That's only step one. Christianity isn't about having faith in any supernatural force. It's about atributing it a whole host of attributes that we have no reason what so ever to give it. That's not making a different interpretation, that's just deluding yourself. Interpretation is about actually looking at the data, not just making stuff up.
The core of Christianity is about having a relationship with God, everything else leads to or flows from that. Is this relationship delusional - perhaps - although to me, there is much more pointing in the direction that it is real, than pointing in the other direction. Why do I attribute certain attributes to God; a combination of what the Bible says, the experience of other trusted, level headed Christians, and my own critical experience.

I'll respect a "maybe christian". Somebody who would like the christian belief system to be true, but doesn't really know. Somebody who thinks the Bible is a great ethical system and who thinks the church is a great place to meet other nice people. It would be great if we went to heaven, but probably we won't. Going any further than this is deluding yourself or drawing erroneous conclusions.
It is a great ethical system, and the church can be a great place to meet nice people, but come to that so are many other places. My closest friends are Christians, but there are also people at my church whom I do not naturally warm to, and beyond the church walls there are oodles and oodles of wonderful people who are not Christians.

I have addressed the delusional aspect of it above, and as for erroneous conclusions, I can only say that mine seem logical to me.

That's just pretty words. Saying that christians don't claim to understand everything about god isn't the same thing as christians don't claim anything about god. Once you make any claims as to what god wants, ie the commandments you've invalidated that claim. Christians attribute a lot to god. Just the thing about going to heaven. That's a very definate claim of the nature of god and the supernatural.
Having read what CC wrote, I think the point he was making is that, from a Christian perspective, we do not make claims as to what God wants, e.g. the commandments, we let Him do that Himself.


Or it was all just make belief from the get go and then you've got what? The whole belief system hinges on nobody fibbing along the way. That's quite a number of assumtions. I'm not arguing on what's more likely or trying to talk you into anything. The non-supernatural theories have numbers. Things to measure. Things you and me,(with the proper training) can check for ourselves. It doesn't hinge on some dude in a beard 2000 years ago wasn't having a psychotic episode. If you're saying that it makes no difference to you then I'd say you where gullible.
I have asked myself these questions, and can only say that non-supernatural theories leave too many gaping holes which do not appear to be in the pattern of science to be able to fill. That leaves me with finding a supernatural answer, and of the systems I have looked at, the one which seems to best stand up to any test I choose to throw at it is Christianity.

That's what I don't like about the religious. It's if religion is about some personal journey. It just isn't. It's about the pursuit of truth. Working it out and comparing theories. Not buying into one theory when it has the same evidence as another. It's not the same thing as taking a personal journey and "finding yourself". That's psychology or something else. The supernatural claims in the world are completly seperate from the religions they come with.
Perhaps I am tired, but you have lost me in this paragraph, and I can't grasp the point you are making. After carefully consideration I have decided to have faith in one particular set of explanations. I could have avoided, on principle, going for any given set and played lucky dip taking bits from all faiths. That would certainly have been a fascinating study, but would not necessarily have lead me any closer to finding out the truths. Instead I choose to learn more about God by devoting such time to exploring the faith which I have decided to embrace.

I'm sure the religions of the world are great for humanity. They seem to fill some very important social function for people. Because they can aparently make people ignore the problems of the supernatural claims. I've got a friend who's the member of the world pantheist movement. He is adamantly atheist but needs some spiritual guidance and likes being with others who share his views. It's a religion and a church. They've just eliminated making any crazy claims they can't back up. I have no problems with that church.
I have briefly looked at that site, and superficially, to me, there are many unanswered questions, but that is only on the basis of about 10 minutes, but I am not tempted to explore further.

I don't think religions are good for humanity, I believe that we all have a need to find out answers for ourselves regarding the existence or otherwise of the supernatural, and if it does exist, the nature of it. From what I have seen however, religions cause conflict, because it is only a matter of time before the people involved in the organisation of religions become ambitious and work to find arguments from within their faith to justify extension to their power.

cariad