Sunday, March 18, 2012

The dark of the moon

In my view, there are three common types of Religious believers. There are those who say "the moon is green and there is nothing you can do to change my mind"; those that say "the moon is green, but it appears white due to a clever magical illusion"; and finally those that say "the moon is green- metaphorically, although in reality it is actually white". The first type of Religious believers will just flat out deny any evidence you give them, like Norman Geisler. The third group, on the other hand, will quite literally be atheists in disguise, like John Dom Crosson. And the second option, which seems most popular amongst Religious people, just looks like compartmentalization to most Atheists. I'm not saying Theism is irrational- but one can see why one might see things that way.

2 comments:

  1. Creation stories are every religion's most unbelievable aspect. Most Christians I know don't take Adam and Eve at literal, but I'm not sure how they decide which parts of the Bible are stories and which are histories. Personal incredulity, I guess.

    Is the Resurrection pretty strong evidence? It would be if it happened today, but as it is--how do I know whether it is a story or a history?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, I'm hesitent to say the resurrection is weak evidence- it's far stronger than any evidence from rivalling religions, which itself deserves merit. I mean, when it comes to Islam, they have to take what Muhammad said on face value, as he was the only real visionary. Buddha's life is practically unkown. At least we know multiple people claimed to have seen Jesus alive again, even if the circumstances are horribly muddled. Perhaps its because I hold somewhat conservative views on Jesus' life and how much we can know about it that I find the resurrection more persuasive. Kinda like how a philosopher like Quenton Smith finds the Kalam argument more persuasive than, say, I do, since Q's an A-time theoriest and I'm not.

    Just a quick thought- I think some religions like Hinduism work better since they are consistent in their mythology. You know, since literally none if it happened in reality, so the myth defense works. Christianity, on the other hand, has to apply a double standard on myth vs reality, and its very tellin :)

    ReplyDelete