Trailblazer
Veteran Member
But it would be false hope if what he hoped for was false.
What good is false hope?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do you believe the Bible is God's word?
- Thread starter Starlight
- Start date
What good is false hope?
Dao Hao Now
Active Member
Well, let’s examine it.
They start of with the presupposition:
“We know that God is all good and all loving.”
“God is good, and it’s never morally acceptable to intentionally destroy an innocent person”
“We also know that God is all good.”
Then proceed to coach how to qualify how to rationalize the contrary evidence in order to align with the presupposition of “We know that God is all good and all loving” etc., with a time honored;
“Yikes! These do not sound like the words of a God who “is love.” Troublesome passages like this remind us why it is so important to understand how to interpret Scripture”
“it’s easy to see why someone might think that God commands evil. If we are to understand what is happening here, then we need to keep in mind the following criteria for biblical interpretation”
Continuing to quote St. Augustine:
“… if in the Scriptures I meet anything which seems contrary to truth, I shall not hesitate to conclude either that the text is faulty, or that the translator has not expressed the meaning of the passage, or that I myself do not understand”
Which is essentially saying:
“If I come across anything in the scriptures that doesn’t jibe with my favored presupposition I shall not hesitate to assume there is something faulty in that particular part of the text that contradicts my presupposition, or that the translator has failed to express the actual meaning (in other words, that meaning which conforms to my presupposition), or it’s my inability to grasp what they mean because I can’t see anything but the contradiction based on what they say …..so since that can’t be correct (since it doesn’t correspond to my presupposition) I’ll write it off as a mystery I’m unable to resolve.”
It’s important to note that nowhere is it suggested that the presupposition is ever subjected to the same scrutiny:
It is simply accepted as (dare I say) gospel.
They do not conclude “either that the text is faulty, or that the translator has not expressed the meaning of the passage, or that I myself do not understand”
From the link you provided:
Confirmation bias - Wikipedia
Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values. People display this bias when they select information that supports their views, ignoring contrary information, or when they interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing attitudes. The effect is strongest for desired outcomes, for emotionally charged issues, and for deeply entrenched beliefs. Confirmation bias is insuperable for most people, but they can manage it, for example, by education and training in critical thinking skills.
As per confirmation bias;
They plainly state their prior beliefs/values, their presuppositions……..
they ignore and/or interpret contrary evidence as supporting that presupposition.
In this particular case they are actively coaching the reader and offering rationalizations.
Look at the quote from St. Augustine….
and look at the definition of confirmation bias.
It’s self-evidently recognizable, wouldn’t you say?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Yeah, I can see it now. She starts out with what she believes we know:Well, let’s examine it.
They start of with the presupposition:
“We know that God is all good and all loving.”
“God is good, and it’s never morally acceptable to intentionally destroy an innocent person”
“We also know that God is all good.”
Then proceed to coach how to qualify how to rationalize the contrary evidence in order to align with the presupposition of “We know that God is all good and all loving” etc., with a time honored;
“Yikes! These do not sound like the words of a God who “is love.” Troublesome passages like this remind us why it is so important to understand how to interpret Scripture”
“it’s easy to see why someone might think that God commands evil. If we are to understand what is happening here, then we need to keep in mind the following criteria for biblical interpretation”
Continuing to quote St. Augustine:
“… if in the Scriptures I meet anything which seems contrary to truth, I shall not hesitate to conclude either that the text is faulty, or that the translator has not expressed the meaning of the passage, or that I myself do not understand”
Which is essentially saying:
“If I come across anything in the scriptures that doesn’t jibe with my favored presupposition I shall not hesitate to assume there is something faulty in that particular part of the text that contradicts my presupposition, or that the translator has failed to express the actual meaning (in other words, that meaning which conforms to my presupposition), or it’s my inability to grasp what they mean because I can’t see anything but the contradiction based on what they say …..so since that can’t be correct (since it doesn’t correspond to my presupposition) I’ll write it off as a mystery I’m unable to resolve.”
It’s important to note that nowhere is it suggested that the presupposition is ever subjected to the same scrutiny:
It is simply accepted as (dare I say) gospel.
They do not conclude “either that the text is faulty, or that the translator has not expressed the meaning of the passage, or that I myself do not understand”
From the link you provided:
Confirmation bias - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values. People display this bias when they select information that supports their views, ignoring contrary information, or when they interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing attitudes. The effect is strongest for desired outcomes, for emotionally charged issues, and for deeply entrenched beliefs. Confirmation bias is insuperable for most people, but they can manage it, for example, by education and training in critical thinking skills.
As per confirmation bias;
They plainly state their prior beliefs/values, their presuppositions……..
they ignore and/or interpret contrary evidence as supporting that presupposition.
In this particular case they are actively coaching the reader and offering rationalizations.
Look at the quote from St. Augustine….
and look at the definition of confirmation bias.
It’s self-evidently recognizable, wouldn’t you say?
“We know that God is all good and all loving.”
“God is good, and it’s never morally acceptable to intentionally destroy an innocent person”
“We also know that God is all good.”
Then she searches for scriptures that confirm what she believes we know.
Gotcha!
Dao Hao Now
Active Member
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
What good is a life without hope? And since hope is an aspiration for a future which hasn’t happened yet, how can it ever be false?
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
Well, let’s examine it.
They start of with the presupposition:
“We know that God is all good and all loving.”
“God is good, and it’s never morally acceptable to intentionally destroy an innocent person”
“We also know that God is all good.”
Then proceed to coach how to qualify how to rationalize the contrary evidence in order to align with the presupposition of “We know that God is all good and all loving” etc., with a time honored;
“Yikes! These do not sound like the words of a God who “is love.” Troublesome passages like this remind us why it is so important to understand how to interpret Scripture”
“it’s easy to see why someone might think that God commands evil. If we are to understand what is happening here, then we need to keep in mind the following criteria for biblical interpretation”
Continuing to quote St. Augustine:
“… if in the Scriptures I meet anything which seems contrary to truth, I shall not hesitate to conclude either that the text is faulty, or that the translator has not expressed the meaning of the passage, or that I myself do not understand”
Which is essentially saying:
“If I come across anything in the scriptures that doesn’t jibe with my favored presupposition I shall not hesitate to assume there is something faulty in that particular part of the text that contradicts my presupposition, or that the translator has failed to express the actual meaning (in other words, that meaning which conforms to my presupposition), or it’s my inability to grasp what they mean because I can’t see anything but the contradiction based on what they say …..so since that can’t be correct (since it doesn’t correspond to my presupposition) I’ll write it off as a mystery I’m unable to resolve.”
It’s important to note that nowhere is it suggested that the presupposition is ever subjected to the same scrutiny:
It is simply accepted as (dare I say) gospel.
They do not conclude “either that the text is faulty, or that the translator has not expressed the meaning of the passage, or that I myself do not understand”
From the link you provided:
Confirmation bias - Wikipedia
Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values. People display this bias when they select information that supports their views, ignoring contrary information, or when they interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing attitudes. The effect is strongest for desired outcomes, for emotionally charged issues, and for deeply entrenched beliefs. Confirmation bias is insuperable for most people, but they can manage it, for example, by education and training in critical thinking skills.
As per confirmation bias;
They plainly state their prior beliefs/values, their presuppositions……..
they ignore and/or interpret contrary evidence as supporting that presupposition.
In this particular case they are actively coaching the reader and offering rationalizations.
Look at the quote from St. Augustine….
and look at the definition of confirmation bias.
It’s self-evidently recognizable, wouldn’t you say?
You’re overthinking it. Faith doesn’t require anything like that sort of convoluted rationalisation; whereas it seems one has to expend considerable conscious effort to refute faith. There might be a message there, for those that care to see it.
Last edited:
Dao Hao Now
Active Member
I’m not the one who offered up the convoluted rationalization.
I merely identified it as such.
The problem with faith is that, since it’s not based in reason or evidence.
When reason or evidence plainly contradicts what is held by faith, the adherent to that faith is forced to either abandon it (the rational thing to do), or come up with a way to rationalize away the contradictory evidence.
This requires a cognitive bias.
“A cognitive bias is a systematic pattern of deviation from norm or rationality in judgment.Individuals create their own "subjective reality" from their perception of the input. An individual's construction of reality, not the objective input, may dictate their behavior in the world. Thus, cognitive biases may sometimes lead to perceptual distortion, inaccurate judgment, illogical interpretation, and irrationality.”
(Cognitive bias - Wikipedia)
So, it doesn’t require “over thinking” as you suggest……but it does require rational thinking.
The antithesis of faith.
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I don't don't think you've understood faith at all, but you have illustrated the limits of reason exercised without intuition or experience.
Dao Hao Now
Active Member
I don’t find it surprising that your interpretation of faith is different than mine.
It’s often difficult to discern from within, what is obvious from an objective viewpoint.
It is through experience that I have learned to rely on reason to recognize where the limits of reason preclude the reliance on unsubstantiated intuition, which is known to be faulty.
Truthseeker
Non-debating member when I can help myself
A lot of the history is inaccurate in the Old Testament. The message of Moses and the other prophets comes through pretty well. I think some of it's history is symbolic, a story that gives a spiritual message, but not something that actually happened. Some of the things they are trying to explain in Genesis are not that edifying spiritually though. I don't think the conquest of Canaan later on happened, where they supposedly were supposed to wipe out tribes so that they wouldn't influence them in a bad way.
The Psalms and Proverbs are a good part of the Old Testament that I like to use in my interfaith devotionals. Of course the Gospels quoting Jesus are profoundly spiritual. Paul can say some enlightened things, though he wasn't 100% right about everything. Revelations i believe is an actual spiritual vision, but we don't actually know what all of it means. It should not be construed as violence being advocated in bringing about the Kingdom of God. It is highly symbolic prophecy.
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
Isn't the objective viewpoint merely an abstract ideal, sadly unavailable to we who are constrained to experience life subjectively?
Intuition exercised without reason, may certainly lead us astray. The opposite, I would suggest, is also true. It's through experience that I have learned to listen to the heart every bit as much as the head; and to weigh each in the balance, when it comes to negotiating life's vicissitudes.
Dao Hao Now
Active Member
In the absolute sense….perhaps so.
However, though we might not be able to achieve the absolute ideal, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t strive to come as close as is possible.
Which means being as diligently as possible to recognizing those biases that are common in leading us astray.
Relying on intuition unfortunately is one of those biases that has proven to be unreliable as a source for discerning results in an objective sense.
I live in Vegas, where casinos make a very comfortable living profiting off failed intuitions.
Segev Moran
Well-Known Member
The only part in the bible claimed to be spoken by god to all, is the Ten Commandments.
all the rest a prophecies that are an interpretation of humans to what god said.
In the OT, Moses is the only one considered to be a prophet who had a clear sight of God's word. The farther we go from him, the less clear God's word becomes.
This is why in the Jewish belief, one cannot contradict anything told by Moses, and no one (not even Moses) can contradict the Ten Commandments.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
The above is not true within the theology of Judaism. Moses didn't just divulge the Decalogue but also other Commandments as well. Prophets did speak their own mind but God's. The Law must be interpreted in context, thus the need for the widely used commentary system, some of which is recorded in the Talmud(s).
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Do you believe the Bible is God's word?
Will one start identifying the verses say from Genesis, what verses are not from G-d with the reasons also, please, right?
Regards
Audie
Veteran Member
Supposing, for sake of argument only
that it is as you say.
Were you granted the power of infallible
reading?
crossbody
Member
I have been granted God's grace, and God's grace is sufficient, blessings.
I believe the Bible is difficult to understand because there are two contradicting themes that are odds at each other. The Quran chooses one and denies the other as a fabrication and corruption.
However, if you can remove the contradiction, you will find that hints of the original religion revealed by God.
The contradiction is the status of those who are sent by God to lead humanity. You have an emphasis on the choice of God in some parts and some other parts shows the choice of his is not all too great. For example Solomon (a) dies a pagan.
The Quran is great at separating the corrupted parts from the original words. The hadiths also help fill details in addition that Quran omits about the past Prophets (a).
Last edited: