is it part of your belief to reject data that opposes your belief?

[jamesmorrow]

simple question. is it part of your belief to reject data that opposes your belief? i have recently had a bible discussion with a fundamentalist christian. as it turns out his ultimate "argument" in response to the various biblical contradictions i pointed out to him was that no matter how immoral or contradictory god's actions seem, we MUST ALWAYS assume they are not.

we must always assume that negative data regarding god is actually positive data that only looks negative to us, because we do not see the big picture, do not have a full understanding, and are too limited to understand, and/or judge god/the bible.

the bible states that god is moral, therefore we must dismiss any data that says otherwise. and then he compared our limited understanding to that of a bear in a bear trap, or a baby being treated by a doctor....

he says that we are under the false impression that some of the things god did (as described in the bible) are evil, just like the bear is under the false impression that you are trying to hurt it, when all you are trying to do is free it, or the baby is under the impression that the doctor is trying to hurt it, when he is only trying to treat it.

whats your take?

 

[robo]

I think you are right.

Another part of faith is the belief only in certain miracles and not others.

There is no reason why one should believe Jesus was conceived of a virgin while NOT believing that it is possible for Mohammed to ascend to heaven on a flying horse.

Both are unscientific but believed by nearly 4 Billion people on earth.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

It is a part of my belief to embrace data that opposes my belief.

 

[Madhuri]

I don't even want to comment about Christianity...it becomes a bit exasperating.

I will say that no, this is not the case in Hinduism. Unless the person is a bit fanatical or a complete literalist. If you take something that is full or allegorical meaning and take it only literally then you come up with problems.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

simple question. is it part of your belief to reject data that opposes your belief? i have recently had a bible discussion with a fundamentalist christian. as it turns out his ultimate "argument" in response to the various biblical contradictions i pointed out to him was that no matter how immoral or contradictory god's actions seem, we MUST ALWAYS assume they are not.

we must always assume that negative data regarding god is actually positive data that only looks negative to us, because we do not see the big picture, do not have a full understanding, and are too limited to understand, and/or judge god/the bible.

the bible states that god is moral, therefore we must dismiss any data that says otherwise. and then he compared our limited understanding to that of a bear in a bear trap, or a baby being treated by a doctor....

he says that we are under the false impression that some of the things god did (as described in the bible) are evil, just like the bear is under the false impression that you are trying to hurt it, when all you are trying to do is free it, or the baby is under the impression that the doctor is trying to hurt it, when he is only trying to treat it.

whats your take?

It's not part of my belief system. Matter of fact, the Buddha taught us to test his teachings against reason and experience. Buddhism attempts to be as rational as possible. It doesn't always hit the mark, as any belief system will inevitably have things that cannot exactly be proven or disproven, but it tries. As far as the example you gave, that's circular reasoning, and one of the reasons why I left Christianity. They have no real answers for anything, but like Madhuri, I don't really want to go into that here.

 

[waitasec]

i like it when i learn something...

so i would say, no...that said, i would also add that skepticism is not rejecting...
it's taking what is said with a grain of salt.

 

[thau]

Simple question. Is it part of your belief to reject data that opposes your belief?

Data that opposes my beliefs is far different than data that disproves my beliefs. As to the latter, I am always open but do not know of any that is substantial.

The apparent contradictions in the Bible are close to what your fundamental friend suggests, i.e. “God is so sure and proven, to think these apparent contradictions bring that all down is simply unrealistic.”

I agree.

As a Catholic, the general teachings coming from Rome over the centuries are more along the lines of the following: “One cannot always say with certainty, especially from the Old Testament, what is factual or historical or literal, and what is meant only as a lesson. We do not claim all the Bible to be literal, but we (the Catholic Church) claim it all to be the inspired Word of God and that is why we accept it and embrace it.”

 

[Orias]

simple question. is it part of your belief to reject data that opposes your belief?

My entire belief is to stay open to what others believe, and then use it against them (but only if they try and use theirs against me )

i have recently had a bible discussion with a fundamentalist christian. as it turns out his ultimate "argument" in response to the various biblical contradictions i pointed out to him was that no matter how immoral or contradictory god's actions seem, we MUST ALWAYS assume they are not.

One of the few things I picked up from Steven Segal was that assumption is the mother of all fluck ups.

I often get yelled at when I tell people that God wants you to look within yourself.

For some realizing they don't know is a conclusion of sorts.

we must always assume that negative data regarding god is actually positive data that only looks negative to us, because we do not see the big picture, do not have a full understanding, and are too limited to understand, and/or judge god/the bible.

If you look at Gods in general, I think an easier understanding may arise.

Like that they are our Gods.

the bible states that god is moral, therefore we must dismiss any data that says otherwise. and then he compared our limited understanding to that of a bear in a bear trap, or a baby being treated by a doctor....

The bible states a lot of things, without explaining any of it.

Though if I offered my personal conjecture we would find a completely different view.

he says that we are under the false impression that some of the things god did (as described in the bible) are evil, just like the bear is under the false impression that you are trying to hurt it, when all you are trying to do is free it, or the baby is under the impression that the doctor is trying to hurt it, when he is only trying to treat it.

whats your take?

Who is he?

Though I guess, I would never consider my father evil either. Unless I possessed some sort of resentment for him bringing me unwillingly into existence (which I don't).

 

[painted wolf]

No.. I embrace new data and strive to always understand the world to the best of my abilities.
I can't properly respect and strive to honor what I don't understand.

wa:do

 

[Orias]

Just because you delete a post, doesn't mean what you said isn't true.

 

[thau]

"He that is slow to believe anything and everything is of great understanding, for the belief in one false principal is the beginning of all unwisdom"-Anton LaVey


Didn’t your guy also say something like “the whole of the law shall be do as thou wilt?”


God begs to differ.

 

[Orias]

Simple question. Is it part of your belief to reject data that opposes your belief?

Data that opposes my beliefs is far different than data that disproves my beliefs. As to the latter, I am always open but do not know of any that is substantial.

The apparent contradictions in the Bible are close to what your fundamental friend suggests, i.e. “God is so sure and proven, to think these apparent contradictions bring that all down is simply unrealistic.”

I agree.

As a Catholic, the general teachings coming from Rome over the centuries are more along the lines of the following: “One cannot always say with certainty, especially from the Old Testament, what is factual or historical or literal, and what is meant only as a lesson. We do not claim all the Bible to be literal, but we (the Catholic Church) claim it all to be the inspired Word of God and that is why we accept it and embrace it.”

I will continue with my example.

I find all of this to be agreeable, as a Satanist I see a line between factual and not factual. In all cases, the line is drawn by the level of "the most common", usually those who overcame certain and potentially existence threatening opposition. But in the end, the line is drawn by you and by me. If we disagree, does that have to make conflict?

Or can lines flow through each other freely?

There is a difference between data that opposes my beliefs and data that disproves it. Though really, if data can disprove a belief, then data itself is subject to belief.

In other words, you will never prove me wrong and I will never prove you wrong. Though in your head, you know your right but you don't know that he is right, and he is thinking the same thing.

To see one, you must see through two.

Now why all the harsh assumptions and then reconsiderations?

 

[Orias]

"He that is slow to believe anything and everything is of great understanding, for the belief in one false principal is the beginning of all unwisdom"-Anton LaVey


Didn’t your guy also say something like “the whole of the law shall be do as thou wilt?”


God begs to differ.

If I am to be certain, the first couple of pages in the bible makes it clear that we have dominion over the sky, the land, the birds, and the sea.

If your God does indeed beg to differ, who is sending me the message telling me otherwise?

 

[Orias]

If your going to just look up and pick out quotes as you fancy then you better be prepared to receive the same.

 

[Willamena]

If your going to just look up and pick out quotes as you fancy then you better be prepared to receive the same.

What... You can't be better than him? I prefer your voice to Crowley's.

 

[Orias]

What... You can't be better than him? I prefer your voice to Crowley's.

I'm no better than a puppy that poops on a carpet.



I see it on most people's faces.

I'm not really better (to them) because I haven't proven anything to them (though I know what I am capable of).

 

[thau]

If I am to be certain, the first couple of pages in the bible makes it clear that we have dominion over the sky, the land, the birds, and the sea.

If your God does indeed beg to differ, who is sending me the message telling me otherwise?

The rest of the book expounds on what is meant by man's "dominion" vs. God's dominion over man.

I don't think it was intended for you to have license to do as you please.

 

[thau]

If your going to just look up and pick out quotes as you fancy then you better be prepared to receive the same.

I wasn't intending to give a thorough and lengthy dissertation on all that Mr. Levay may be about.

However there is a lot of public knowlege about him, his church, his backwards "bible" and the like. Shall we make no judgments and let our children choose whatever they like?

 

[Me Myself]

I don't even want to comment about Christianity...it becomes a bit exasperating.

I will say that no, this is not the case in Hinduism. Unless the person is a bit fanatical or a complete literalist. If you take something that is full or allegorical meaning and take it only literally then you come up with problems.

Must remember than being a literalist is not a requirement for christianship.

Catholicism sees many stuff as methaphorical to the least, and naturaly, I would be even less literal than them in many stuff

I think sometimes "postpone" data may be good, but you cannot reject objectively a data you postpone.

I say it may be good to postpone if you feel you are not able to currently understand it, or if you feel your current shock may cloud your better judgement. Naturaly, this means that the data postponed will be evaluated and compared with all other concepts of reality that I have. the answer may well be "I don´t know", but if I feel it´s relevant, I will try to grasp.

Important to understand too, comprehension does trascend words. I believe in a lot of things I have not fully digested yet.

Moksha/Nirvana/kingdom-of-God will come

 

[Me Myself]

"He that is slow to believe anything and everything is of great understanding, for the belief in one false principal is the beginning of all unwisdom"-Anton LaVey


Didn’t your guy also say something like “the whole of the law shall be do as thou wilt?”


God begs to differ.

We all do as we wish. As a catholic, you technically believe in free will I assume right?