To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 28025
28024  |  28026
Subject: 
Re: What are your axiomatic religious beliefs and why?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Wed, 25 Oct 2006 21:58:11 GMT
Viewed: 
2124 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Brendan Powell Smith wrote:

   What would you say are your axiomatic religious beliefs?

Hmm, this is a really good question, Brendan. It’s hard to answer this truthfully, because I was raised in a Christian setting. So there are many things I believe that probably at their root go back to what I learned in Sunday School as a child, but that I also think logically follow from reason or from other more basic axioms. I hope that I would have come to these conclusions via logic as an adult without prior inculcation, but I recognize that what I see as a logical path miraculously brings me back to what I learned as a child, so intellectual honesty forces me to admit that if I had been raised in another religious tradition, I might well hold very different beliefs while still thinking myself eminently logical.

That said, I spent last night thinking about your question, I think (or at least I would like to think) that my axiomatic religious beliefs come down to one statement:

If God exists, then God is knowable.

I suppose that any discussion presupposes a few things - that the universe exists, that reality is constant, and that observation and reason are trustworthy. If we can’t start with those, then no topic can be discussed, because I am left as a bare Descartian self-aware soul, but all else is up for grabs.

Anyway, back to my “If God exists, then God is knowable.”

I think, and I’m not going to go into a discussion of these as this thread is asking about what our beliefs are, not to go into an endless debate about each one, that there are valid logical arguments for the existence of some supernatural creative force that we call God. However, I do believe that it would be logically consistent to then think that that God has nothing to do with us - that he wound up the universe and then went on his merry way, or that he is not in any way personal, but is more of a blind force, or somehow so large and great that our puny minds cannot even approach him. The leap of faith, as I see it, is that we can know god and have some sort of rapport with him. (Please excuse the gendered pronoun - I did grow up in the western tradition, after all.)

Once we make that leap, it logically follows that there are ways in which God can be known. I ascribe to the traditional “two book” school - that God is revealed both in general revelation (“the Heavens declare the glory of God” etc) and in special revelation (i.e. scripture). (Hmm, is this another axiomatic belief, or a logical extension of the first?) If there is special revelation, then we must look at these different candidates - Christian and Jewish forms of the Bible, Koran, Buddhist writings, ravings of a crazy man, whatever. I would like to think that if I came as a blank slate and read all of these I would come to think that the Christian Bible would fit the best with my reason and observation. Of course no one actually starts as a blank slate and studies all of the religious writings of the world and chooses between. However, I would like to think that I have been somewhat intellectually honest in my studies of the Bible and do find it to be generally reliable. Once a witness has been found to be generally reliable, it follows that we should give at least some credence to it even when it makes statements that we have no direct confirmation of. For instance, if I find that my friend is generally reliable, I have no reason to disbelieve him if he tells me he ate eggs for breakfast yesterday, even if I was not there to actually observe him. Even if he makes more outlandish statements, if I have no direct reason to disbelieve, I will give him the benefit of the doubt. Therefore, once I have accepted the Bible as a generally reliable witness, most of the rest of my religious beliefs follow from that, colored by my experience and my reason.

Bruce



Message is in Reply To:
  What are your axiomatic religious beliefs and why?
 
This is an off-shoot from a (URL) discussion> John Neal and I were having on OT.debate, but I'd like to open up the following question to any religious believers who feel like answering. What would you say are your axiomatic religious beliefs? Let's (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

3 Messages in This Thread:


Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR