3 ms·

>> If I were to throw away one system of belief with that behavior, why would I adopt another? You seem comfortable with the arbitrariness of your faith now. S

>> If I were to throw away one system of belief with that behavior, why would I adopt another? You seem comfortable with the arbitrariness of your faith now. So why not any other? A hypothetical true-believer in the Flying Spaghetti Monster would (by most reasonable criteria) be moving in the right direction if he/she were to become a Christian instead. Even though both faiths may be unanchored, there are wider considerations too.

virmundi 11y ago
I do see how one can say it's arbitrary. There is a set of rules that we didn't make, that a god imposes on us. We may know why for some rules. We might not know others. The system could be called arbitrary. My reason is entirely based on experience. I have not felt the spirit of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, nor his noodlely appendage. I have felt the Spirit. This makes it not arbitrary. It's rooted in God. It's rooted in the absolute. That's why if I ever stopped believing in the Trinity, I would be a nihilist. It's a good starting point. It admits that everything is arbitrary. As such, I think we could build on it to a Utilitarian system. We all agree that core set of values is arbitrary, but that it's build on avoiding pain. Avoiding pain is an arbitrary metric, but well, the majority doesn't want to be kicked, so let's agree that we shouldn't do that to each other.
- lovemenot 11y ago
  This is a cordial conversation and I have no desire to be the first turn it mean. So please read the following in the most charitable light. You seem to apply two standards. To yourself, your personal experience is sufficient. Yet from others, a more rigorous justification is expected. By analogy: if I were Japanese, I would definitely prefer Buddhism over Shinto. Yet, I am not Japanese, which rather undermines my argument. Under such hypothetical circumstances my perspective would surely be other than it actually is now. The reason I pursue this point is that, historically, people with faith have argued unreasonably that the only viable alternative to their unique faith is [name_a_specific_extreme_and_scary_philosophical_position_here]. To be fair, if you are doing this at all, you are doing so only subtly.
notdonspaulding 11y ago
The Christian faith is anything but arbitrary. It is predicated on the Bible being true, and the Bible is a collection of documents, many of which are grounded in specific points of both space and time. In particular, the factual claims about Christ, his life, his death, his resurrection are central to any evangelical Christian's faith. Disprove them and it's game over for Christianity. Paul says as much in his letter to the early church in Corinth [0]. Beyond factual claims about Christ, there are many other sections of the Bible which would become fatal to the central Christian message were they proven false. (The flood, the plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew Exodus from Egypt, the prophecies in Ezekiel, Daniel, Isaiah, etc.)[1]. Start with any one of them and offer a credible disproof and you can go down in the history books as the person responsible for dismantling the arbitrary Christian faith. [0]: https://www.bible.com/bible/59/1co.15:14-19 https://www.bible.com/bible/59/1co.15:14-19 [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_messianic_prophecy#Verses_Christians_cite_as_fulfilled_prophecies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_messianic_prophecy#V...
- lovemenot 11y ago
  This will go nowhere. Any argument I make will likely be skewered on interpretations of "credible" or on which parts of the Bible you choose to defend or which parts should be taken literally and which figuratively. Anyway, let's try starting at one of the most obvious. I understand the Bible says the world was created in 7 days. Has that been credibly disproven yet?

virmundi 11y ago

I do see how one can say it's arbitrary. There is a set of rules that we didn't make, that a god imposes on us. We may know why for some rules. We might not know others. The system could be called arbitrary. My reason is entirely based on experience. I have not felt the spirit of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, nor his noodlely appendage. I have felt the Spirit. This makes it not arbitrary. It's rooted in God. It's rooted in the absolute. That's why if I ever stopped believing in the Trinity, I would be a nihilist. It's a good starting point. It admits that everything is arbitrary. As such, I think we could build on it to a Utilitarian system. We all agree that core set of values is arbitrary, but that it's build on avoiding pain. Avoiding pain is an arbitrary metric, but well, the majority doesn't want to be kicked, so let's agree that we shouldn't do that to each other.

lovemenot 11y ago
This is a cordial conversation and I have no desire to be the first turn it mean. So please read the following in the most charitable light. You seem to apply two standards. To yourself, your personal experience is sufficient. Yet from others, a more rigorous justification is expected. By analogy: if I were Japanese, I would definitely prefer Buddhism over Shinto. Yet, I am not Japanese, which rather undermines my argument. Under such hypothetical circumstances my perspective would surely be other than it actually is now. The reason I pursue this point is that, historically, people with faith have argued unreasonably that the only viable alternative to their unique faith is [name_a_specific_extreme_and_scary_philosophical_position_here]. To be fair, if you are doing this at all, you are doing so only subtly.

notdonspaulding 11y ago

The Christian faith is anything but arbitrary. It is predicated on the Bible being true, and the Bible is a collection of documents, many of which are grounded in specific points of both space and time. In particular, the factual claims about Christ, his life, his death, his resurrection are central to any evangelical Christian's faith. Disprove them and it's game over for Christianity. Paul says as much in his letter to the early church in Corinth [0]. Beyond factual claims about Christ, there are many other sections of the Bible which would become fatal to the central Christian message were they proven false. (The flood, the plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew Exodus from Egypt, the prophecies in Ezekiel, Daniel, Isaiah, etc.)[1]. Start with any one of them and offer a credible disproof and you can go down in the history books as the person responsible for dismantling the arbitrary Christian faith. [0]: https://www.bible.com/bible/59/1co.15:14-19 https://www.bible.com/bible/59/1co.15:14-19 [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_messianic_prophecy#Verses_Christians_cite_as_fulfilled_prophecies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_messianic_prophecy#V...

lovemenot 11y ago
This will go nowhere. Any argument I make will likely be skewered on interpretations of "credible" or on which parts of the Bible you choose to defend or which parts should be taken literally and which figuratively. Anyway, let's try starting at one of the most obvious. I understand the Bible says the world was created in 7 days. Has that been credibly disproven yet?