God or absurdity

[James Field]

I've heard the whole " you can't use your resoning to validate your own reasoning" thing, but how does the existence of God supposed to allow me to know things as opposed if I didn't ? My uncle came at me with this last time my family and me went to visit them and I had thought we some how came up with this but I see now that it's like a whole thing. So if someone could answer my question that would be nice

 

[Bunyip]

You have stumbled on presuppositional apologetics, the McDonalds of personal philosophies. There is nothing to answer to other than a way to use a little linguistic slight of hand to fool people into thinking they have a point.

You can't use your reasoning to validate your reasoning?
A: What? I don't use my reasoning to validate my reasoning - what are you smoking? Did you really think I was gullible enough to fall for such transparent word play?
I don't use my reasoning to validate my reasoning - any more than I use my eyes to validate my vision, or my nose to validate what I smell.
Reasoning is how I consider and analyse the information my senses take in. Vision is how I see. My nose is how I smell.

You can't make an argument for god out of nothing more than a badly worded, deliberately misleading tautology.

 

[Kolibri]

The book of Proverbs links knowledge and the action one takes after understanding the knowledge (wisdom) to be linked to "the fear of Jehovah."

So we begin to learn what is wholesome and what practical actions because we first fear to displease our heavenly Father. As we follow the direction we come to "taste and see that Jehovah is good" by the results of what we do differently than what we would have done without this extra consideration. "Wisdom is proved righteous by all its children" said his son Jesus.

Prov 1:7; 9:10; Ps 34:8; Lu 7:35

 

[pearl]

God or absurdity raises a good point. If one is unable to reconcile faith and reason, then one may believe in the absurd. To reconcile requires both faith and knowledge; a knowing faith and a believing knowledge.

 

[LuisDantas]

Sorry for bothering you, but I am having trouble in understanding the OP's wording. Would anyone be so kind as to explain its meaning to be very slowly, with some alternate wording?

 

[James Field]

Sorry for bothering you, but I am having trouble in understanding the OP's wording. Would anyone be so kind as to explain its meaning to be very slowly, with some alternate wording?

. There seems to be some argument, I guess by some Christians, that without a belief in God one can't trust their own reasoning and hold a rational view of things, or something like that. It's on some website called GodorAbsurdity.com you could probably just google and find it. My question was how would the belief in God make ones reasoning valid as opposed to invalid reasoning by "nonbelievers" ?

 

[James Field]

God or absurdity raises a good point. If one is unable to reconcile faith and reason, then one may believe in the absurd. To reconcile requires both faith and knowledge; a knowing faith and a believing knowledge.

And why does it have to be faith in the Christian God ?

 

[Kolibri]

. There seems to be some argument, I guess by some Christians, that without a belief in God one can't trust their own reasoning and hold a rational view of things, or something like that. It's on some website called GodorAbsurdity.com you could probably just google and find it. My question was how would the belief in God make ones reasoning valid as opposed to invalid reasoning by "nonbelievers" ?

One could say that any man-made God is merely made up of man's thoughts anyway, so there is no difference. But in the case of a true God that would not be the case. Mostly likely your uncle is referencing in his thoughts 1 Corinthians 2:6-10.

"Now we speak wisdom among those who are mature, but not the wisdom of this system of things (or "this age.") nor that of the rulers of this system of things, who are to come to nothing. but we speak God's wisdom in a sacred secret, the hidden wisdom, which God foreordained before the system of things for our glory. It is this wisdom that none of the rulers of this system of things cam to know, for if they had known, they would not have executed (or "executed on the stake.") the glorious Lord. But just as it is written: 'Eye has not seen and ear has not heard, nor have there been conceived in the heart of man the things that God has prepared for those who love him.' (Isa 64:4) For it is to us God has revealed them through his spirit, for the spirit searches into all things, even the deep things of God."

Then verses 11-16 go on to contrast spiritual men from physical men. That physical men consider spiritual things as foolishness and so discount them. Whereas spiritual men consider all things and so make decisions that seem foolish to a physical man.

Colossians 2:8 describes the "elementary things of the world" as "philosophy and empty deception according to human tradition." So it can be argued that these are the "wisdom" of physical men.

Also Galatians 5:19-26 defines what is like to "walk by spirit" in contrasting "works of the flesh" with "fruitage of the spirit". The works of the flesh are the cause of many, many laws. Against the the individual traits of the fruitage of the spirit "there is no law".

 

[James Field]

One could say that any man-made God is merely made up of man's thoughts anyway, so there is no difference. But in the case of a true God that would not be the case. Mostly likely your uncle is referencing in his thoughts 1 Corinthians 2:6-10.

"Now we speak wisdom among those who are mature, but not the wisdom of this system of things (or "this age.") nor that of the rulers of this system of things, who are to come to nothing. but we speak God's wisdom in a sacred secret, the hidden wisdom, which God foreordained before the system of things for our glory. It is this wisdom that none of the rulers of this system of things cam to know, for if they had known, they would not have executed (or "executed on the stake.") the glorious Lord. But just as it is written: 'Eye has not seen and ear has not heard, nor have there been conceived in the heart of man the things that God has prepared for those who love him.' (Isa 64:4) For it is to us God has revealed them through his spirit, for the spirit searches into all things, even the deep things of God."

Then verses 11-16 go on to contrast spiritual men from physical men. That physical men consider spiritual things as foolishness and so discount them. Whereas spiritual men consider all things and so make decisions that seem foolish to a physical man.

Colossians 2:8 describes the "elementary things of the world" as "philosophy and empty deception according to human tradition." So it can be argued that these are the "wisdom" of physical men.

Also Galatians 5:19-26 defines what is like to "walk by spirit" in contrasting "works of the flesh" with "fruitage of the spirit". The works of the flesh are the cause of many, many laws. Against the the individual traits of the fruitage of the spirit "there is no law".

so my reasoning isn't valid unless backed by the scriptures and beliefs of the person who is telling me reasoning is invalid ? That doesn't really seem like an argument or a point

 

[pearl]

[

And why does it have to be faith in the Christian God ?

It doesn't. From the beginning of civilization there has been a sense of a wholly Other. We have a fundamental option as how
we relate. For some the Other is vengeful, or unmoved. For the Jewish and Christian faith this Other is love. Christianity answers that the reason that there is something rather than nothing is that it is loved, absolutely.
Just to clarify, there is no 'Christian' or 'Jewish' or 'Muslim' God, there is only one.

 

[Kolibri]

so my reasoning isn't valid unless backed by the scriptures and beliefs of the person who is telling me reasoning is invalid ? That doesn't really seem like an argument or a point

the beliefs of the person can also be suspect. How many different denominations of Christianity are there today? 10s of thousands. They can't all be correct. And who says your reasoning isn't valid if it is not backed up by scripture? It is only when your reasoning is countermanded by scripture that the argument can be made that you are not examining all things.

An example might be in order. We may have been exposed to a great deal of injustice. Do we rally forth and focus all our energy on fixing it? Do we get and remain enraged, speaking abusively to others? The "fear of Jehovah" would cause us to look for advise in the scriptures. Such accounts as these may have a bearing on how one may respond externally and internally.

By patience a commander is won over,
And a gentle tongue can break a bone.
- Proverbs 25:15

A stupid person gives vent to all his feelings, (Lit., "spirit.")
But the wise one calmly keeps them in check.
- Proverbs 29:11

Do not be overly righteous, nor show yourself excessively wise. Why should you bring ruin to yourself? Do not be excessively wicked, nor be foolish. Why should you die before your time? It is best to grasp one warning without letting go of the other; for the one who fears God will heed them both. - Ecclesiastes 7:16-18

 

[godnotgod]

God or absurdity raises a good point. If one is unable to reconcile faith and reason, then one may believe in the absurd. To reconcile requires both faith and knowledge; a knowing faith and a believing knowledge.

The way I see it, the (seeming) dichotomy between faith and reason is just tail chasing. The problem here is that both are actually in the realm of mind, and as such, are limited, dualistic, and conditioned views of Reality. What puts them both into the proper context is a view that is unconditioned, and outside of either. IOW, both Reason and Belief must be transcended into a state of Higher Consciousness. Why? Reason and Belief are thought-models about Reality; they are born of the limited mind. Unlimited mind is not of the discursive mind, but of non-dual consciousness itself, the condition that is in place before mind comes into play, before thought, and as such, sees into the true nature of things, rather than forms conceptual models about them.

"The place wherein Thou art found unveiled is girt round with the coincidence of contradictions, and this is the wall of Paradise wherein Thou dost abide. The door whereof is guarded by the most proud spirit of Reason, and, unless he be vanquished, the way in will not lie open."
Nicholas of Cusa

Paradox

 

[James Field]

[



It doesn't. From the beginning of civilization there has been a sense of a wholly Other. We have a fundamental option as how
we relate. For some the Other is vengeful, or unmoved. For the Jewish and Christian faith this Other is love. Christianity answers that the reason that there is something rather than nothing is that it is loved, absolutely.
Just to clarify, there is no 'Christian' or 'Jewish'
i meant the God of tve abrahamic religions, would you still say it's the same if it's what the Sikhs call Waheguru or Zoroastrianisms Ahura Mazda ?

 

[James Field]

the beliefs of the person can also be suspect. How many different denominations of Christianity are there today? 10s of thousands. They can't all be correct. And who says your reasoning isn't valid if it is not backed up by scripture? It is only when your reasoning is countermanded by scripture that the argument can be made that you are not examining all things.

An example might be in order. We may have been exposed to a great deal of injustice. Do we rally forth and focus all our energy on fixing it? Do we get and remain enraged, speaking abusively to others? The "fear of Jehovah" would cause us to look for advise in the scriptures. Such accounts as these may have a bearing on how one may respond externally and internally.

By patience a commander is won over,
And a gentle tongue can break a bone.
- Proverbs 25:15

A stupid person gives vent to all his feelings, (Lit., "spirit.")
But the wise one calmly keeps them in check.
- Proverbs 29:11

Do not be overly righteous, nor show yourself excessively wise. Why should you bring ruin to yourself? Do not be excessively wicked, nor be foolish. Why should you die before your time? It is best to grasp one warning without letting go of the other; for the one who fears God will heed them both. - Ecclesiastes 7:16-18

People's beliefs can be off, and I'm bit saying those quotes aren't good ideas but it doesn't mean that one can't come up with good answers to everyday life from other sources or from themselves as it doesn't mean that I couldnt have found the same bit of advice from the scriptures of other religions

 

[James Field]

the beliefs of the person can also be suspect. How many different denominations of Christianity are there today? 10s of thousands. They can't all be correct. And who says your reasoning isn't valid if it is not backed up by scripture? It is only when your reasoning is countermanded by scripture that the argument can be made that you are not examining all things.

An example might be in order. We may have been exposed to a great deal of injustice. Do we rally forth and focus all our energy on fixing it? Do we get and remain enraged, speaking abusively to others? The "fear of Jehovah" would cause us to look for advise in the scriptures. Such accounts as these may have a bearing on how one may respond externally and internally.

By patience a commander is won over,
And a gentle tongue can break a bone.
- Proverbs 25:15

A stupid person gives vent to all his feelings, (Lit., "spirit.")
But the wise one calmly keeps them in check.
- Proverbs 29:11

Do not be overly righteous, nor show yourself excessively wise. Why should you bring ruin to yourself? Do not be excessively wicked, nor be foolish. Why should you die before your time? It is best to grasp one warning without letting go of the other; for the one who fears God will heed them both. - Ecclesiastes 7:16-18

And the people
Who support the God or absurdity idea seem to believe I can't validate my reasoning, even in a nonspiritual or scriptural way, and I suppose that's what I don't get but it seems like I could be misinterpreting what they're saying.