Can you argue this point to logic?

Question

I am keeping an open mind on the issue of Religion and God. If you can find a relatively logical reason for this then you can possibly sway me to your side of thinking. One of the things that makes me think from an agnostic point of view is the HISTORICAL time line. It is not accurate and therefore religion, bible etc is illogical to me. Please be respectful, it is the very nature of my confusion about my own religion which is in fact christian.

Answer 1

Logic works best applied to mathematical equations and empirical observations. When people are involved, there are too many variables. One could argue that humans, being needy, respond to kindness with kindness, therefore trust and generosity are the best courses of action. Or you could argue that humans, being needy, are untrustworthy and should be monitored and controlled. Same conditions, opposite conclusions. But let's see what can be done.

Any writing that gains the status of scripture, no matter how symbolic, has to make some kind of sense. Otherwise it would be discarded. If the reader/hearer can't extract a metaphor, a life situation or moral lesson from the text, it's useless gibberish to him. Even a futuristic phophecy has a thread that relates to the listener's contemporary situation or it goes in the trash.

Similarly, if a text presented a world view incomprehensible to the listener, even if it were absolutely true, it would sound like crazy ravings. A spherical, spinning Earth swinging unsupported around the sun would be ludicrous to a person with no concept of a "force" of gravity. A dinosaur is pointless fantasy to one who has never seen one. The secrets of biology are wasted on someone who has no mechanical concepts beyond the lever, the inclined plane and maybe the Archimedian screw.

The historical timeline of the Bible is incidental. Its only purpose is to show order in the created world, to fill in the gaps left by the unanswerable questions. Now that we are able to answer some of these questions, the Biblical version starts to look shabby to our educated minds. But history was never the point. History is trivia. Purpose is what matters to the writers of the Bible. Not "how" but "why".

People who cling to the literal words in the Bible as inviolable are stuck with that obsolete world view. They are afraid that reinterpretation might wash their spiritual grounding right out from under them. (If one story is analogized, where do you stop? How much of holy writ gets interpreted into "relative" meaninglessness?)

Copernicus, Galileo and Newton all threatened their contemporarys' world view. Finding out the Earth is not the base and center of the universe, nor is the solar system, nor even our own galaxy, was a succession of blows to the spiritual esteem of those who thought God had a special regard for them. The unexamined implications of each new discovery frightened them into attacking and punishing the newsbearers. Yet faith survived, they adjusted. Now nearly everyone accepts the heliocentric theory, the laws of motion, the equation of light, etc. Faith had to change, not essentially, just incidentally.

Authentic religion is not about facts. Facts are random trivia. It is about meaning. The more one concentrates on who did what to whom where and when, the less one is engaged in the purpose of religion. We don't just believe facts, we believe IN ideas and ideals. The stories illustrate these ideals (positively and negatively). To reduce them to "historical" records robs them of their meaning.

Is every story in the Bible a metaphor? It doesn't matter what is literally factual or not. They are stories, not reporting. They always make a point. Their objective is truth, not lists of events.

Fundamentalists believe in moral "absolutes" and condemn the unhinged horrors of "moral relativism", but as our understanding of cosmology, biology, sociology, etc. change, so must our moral framework. What made perfect sense in Moses' day may be barbaric to us and vice-versa. The whys don't change, only the hows.

That's not exactly logical reasoning, but an attempt to restore the honest underpinnings of religion. "Salvation" is not about studying for a Jesus quiz so you can get placed in a good afterlife. It's about building up the kingdom of God, with peace and justice, on Earth now, because you know "why".

Answer 2

What is the point of logic? History? I see no contradiction between history & the Bible.

Logically, make sure to get your historical facts straight (don't be swayed by anyones hobbyhorses) & don't read weird things INTO the Bible that are not actually there.

Email me a for instance if you want to make a point & I will take the time to discuss it with you.

Edit 1-Edcamious
The Bible has not been changed. Look at the Dead Sea Scrolls. We have the same Bible today as we did back then. Now it has been translated into different languages such as Spanish, English, German, Chinese, etc... but the original language is still the same 1900 years after it was written.

Edit 2-JP
Yes, the existance of God may be illogical. But does that mean it isn't true? You still haven't answered me on the resurrection of Jesus. It is a historical fact. What say you about:
1. The resurrection, historical fact, of Jesus?
2. Is history illogical seeing that it cannot be proven?

Answer 3

While I suppose I should dissuade you from Christianity, because, well, that's what everyone else does, really there's no need to take the bible literally at all, one probably shouldn't even remotely attempt to view it as a historic record, only a figurative work that has morals built in rather than meaningful historic stories. It's fully possible to be christian and not care about a word the bible says, or at least disregard a few stories. (For example Martin Luther wanted Revelations removed from the bible, and he's a famous religious figure, the book may well have been written by an ascetic in a cave taking halicingens acording to historians, but that's another matter.)

Of course, that said, since you have an open mind now, I'd recommend actually looking at a greater variety of religions out there. I mean the prevelent religion around you just happens to be what you're born into, it doesn't make it any more true. Just consider whether you truly believe in what you've been taught, if it seems right, if it seems partially right in some way, or if it just seems flawed and dependant on something you can live without.

With that over and done with, on to logic, there has never once been much of a decent logical argument for the existance of God, several have been made, but none make much logical sense especially if one accepts the possibility that the universe could have infinite age in either direction (past or future). Faith itself is a practice called as such because it is based upon a complete lack of knowledge or logic to deduce that knowledge, so, logic would ultimately argue that it's impossible to know one way or another, but a nonexistance of a specific god is more logically more likely than an existance of a divine power, as there are quite a few conflicting options out there with equally valid origins. No matter what god one believes in, the majority of the world says they're wrong. You could also fall back on the opposite of Pascal's wager. Pascal said that there's no penalty for believing in a god, while there is for not, but on the same level, if a god is worth believing in, would that god send 5.5 billion people, regardless of how they live, to live in eternal suffering? If not, then you needn't believe in that god regardless, so you're safe if there is a god, while it seems more likely that there isn't.

Answer 4

Psalm 90:4
For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night.

2 Peter 3:8
But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

Time is relative.

Remember that everything that science has not seen happen is theoretical "THEORY" not fact some of the theory's may be true but you have to think of all the possibility's. Has the earth always aged the same way. Are the radiology date testing truly taking in all the possibility's of the past? The Earth flips its magnetic poles every so often would this make changes in the way test readings are read? The sun sends flairs to the earth is there an afect of the atmosphere that would effect the time tests. Was there something that happeded in the past that we dont even know that happened that changed the earth?

If you look into the history back to 20,000 years ago you will see that alot of animals disapered like the mamoth. The oldest trees are only 20,000 years old in the redwoods. Know you need to ask yourself how do they date test for age and see if there are alternatives. do the research and dont let a professor who is set in his narrow minded ways sway you find the facts yourself.

As men get older they get so set in there ways that they think so heighly of themselves that they become there own god in there tinking.

Find the true facts. Find out if the theory could have holes or weak spots that if one element was changed the theory would change. If so then its not a factual theory it just a theory.

Answer 5

I dont know really that having trouble with the time lines is anything for or against Christianity. There is trouble with the time lines whether it be in science or in religion, to anything before written history. There is debate among Christians (And other religions) about at what time which things happened, but thats the same in Science as well. Science timelines change very often, if you pick up a text book written today, it will have different timelines from one 20 years ago. The logical way to go on this is that man has not yet figured out the right time line, on either end. This makes one view no more invalid than another.

Answer 6

I'm not sure what historical time line you are referring to....

Religion has taught things that are not in the bible, but they say they are. This has cause so much confusion and lack of respect for the bible. For example, the bible does not say the planet earth is only 6000 years old. Where that came from I don't know. That each creative day is a literal day...that is not true. We are in the 7th day or God's rest day and it has lasted over 6000 years.

If I were you, I would read the book of Genesis and see for yourself. We do have dates as to mankind's existence. We have the date of the flood, we know how long Adam lived, so the year that Adam was created can be calculated.

Look at other dates in the bible and look at other historical records and see if they don't coincide.

Answer 7

You got me when you said historical time line.I myself don't see an issue with the historical time line,or with God's prophetic time table.If you will read very closely in your bible you will notice that the bible doesn't jump around all over the place.It actually flows from page to page.Granted,there is a gap of about 400 years between the old testament,and the new testament,but it is insignificant to the Bible's validity.

Try this link,and maybe you can find some answers there.

http://www.evidencebible.com/witnessingtool/browse.shtml

Answer 8

It is nearly impossible to accept science AND literal biblical interpretation... that's why you see so many conflicts arising between the two sides. However, the bible taken as a spiritual text written by men is far less problematic. The Old Testament is a history... like any history, it is biased and incomplete and at times inaccurate, but it is important to the understanding of the coming of Christ. The Gospel is the meat and potatoes... if one follows Christ, then what could be more important than his teachings? We are given four versions of the same information, allowing us to think critically and find similarities and differences, because these texts were still written by fallible men. Finally, the rest of the New Testament is made up of editorials... learned men giving their interpretation and opinions on Christ's teachings. They're helpful, but they come from flawed men and are therefor flawed.

We have to assume that if God is all powerful, he could have written a holy text for us... he didn't need to go through men to do it. Certainly Christ could have left a written record if a flawless text were critical. But Christ taught in parables, not with rote memorization. He did not give rules to memorize so much as he taught us how to think critically about spiritual and moral issues, and most importantly, to think for ourselves. If we take the bible as a tool to help us with this critical thinking, it is helpful. If you misuse it as a factual history and rulebook, it is dangerous and problematic.

Answer 9

For knowledge to exist, three facts must be accepted as true:

- Math & Logic are valid
- Direct observations or aided observations supported by Math & Logic are valid
- Supernatural existence, if real, does not involve itself in the natural realm (otherwise, any 'fact' could be changed by the interference -- say by the God of Gravity changing his mind on how strong it will be tomorrow).

Free will can thus be shown to be false:

- The mind is a consequence of the physical nature of the brain (Nonsupernatural causation axiom).
- Quantum physics contains a truly random component (Mathematical axiom)
- All observations can be expressed mathematically (Mathematical axiom).
- All principles causal to observations can be expressed mathematically (Mathematical Axiom).
- All mathematical expressions can be evaluated (Mathematical Axiom).
- An evaluation need not be deterministic, it can be stochaistic, that is, describing 'probabilities'. (Statistical mathematics).
- Since quantum physics can affect the human brain, and thus mind, the human state is mathematically stochaistic (consequential)
- If the quantum randomness is rescoped to be viewed as an input, the human brain ceases to be stoichasitic and is deterministic. (statement of rescope)
- A deterministically computable system is incapable of escaping its previous states, and produces outputs based on a computable result of the previous state and current inputs.(Turing-Church Thesis)
- Determinism counters free will. (By definition)
- Free will is not possible. (consequential)
- If a deity exists, free will is a natural consequence. (axiomic, potentially debatable. However, a deity that creates intelligence without free will cannot hold its creation responsible)
- Free will does not exist, therefore, deity does not exist. (modus tollens).

The idea of a god existing is disproven logically.


-----

Recon:

The resurrection of Jesus is not a historic fact. It is a supposition made by Christians. There is no reliable evidence that it has happened.

Further, archeology is a science, it uses the scientific method. That means many things we think we know, we may actually not know. We used to think, for example, that the Greeks were technologically backwards -- until we found an ancient relic, an analog computer, that trumped some basic modern techniques for determining the movement of planets, and involved finer detail of gear-work than was thought possible. Turns out, also, that the Greeks invented the first vending machine (an urn that dispensed blessed water when you put a coin in the top), and Egyptians seem to have beaten the rest of the world to the voltaic cell (chamber pots have been found with one side dipped in one metal, the other side dipped ni another metal... put an electrolyte in such a jar ... say, urine... and you will have a battery). So history can be wrong, and hey, that's a good thing... it means history has a scientific basis.

Answer 10

There's a lot more inconsistency in the Bible and the Christian faith that you have yet to discover. I second the recommendation for reading "The God Delusion." Or, if you don't have the patience for books, consider watching "The God Who Wasn't There."

If you want to see something really messed up (like little children made to pay homage to the image of George W. Bush, kids being brainwashed into the American Taliban and encouraged to be ready to sacrifice their lives for Christ, or the Rev. Ted Haggard denouncing homosexuality before he was revealed to be a cockthirsty speed freak), watch "Jesus Camp."

Do your own research. It's not my place to sway you.