Challenge for Christians

[joeactor]

For purposes of this thread, we will accept uncontested and take for granted that the universe was created by an omnipotent, omniscient, and all-loving entity who incarnated in the body of a Jew named Jesus two millennia ago.  Given all that -

Uh, given that, it's not likely that you'll get an answer that conforms to logic.

He's got the keys to the universe, so all questions have the same answer: God.

Why? How? What methodology?

None of that matters when an omni-everything being is in the mix.

Even the book that God inspired doesn't have to conform to logic, because no human mind can understand how god works.

Sorry to interrupt, but it seems like a pointless discussion.

(or am I missing the point?)

[elliebean]

Uh, given that, it's not likely that you'll get an answer that conforms to logic... so all questions have the same answer: God... it seems like a pointless discussion.

(or am I missing the point?)

I took the above to be more or less the point in itself.

[Persimmon Hamster]

I find myself nodding in agreement at pretty much everything Achronos writes.

You, sir, must have a very sturdy neck.  <wokka wokka>

[Thumpalumpacus]

Scientific proof is an untestable, unprovable, arbitrary axiom, just like theism is.

I take it, then, that instead of careful climbing, you'd merely jump to the bottom of the Grand Canyon? Or drink cyanide to slake your thirst?

Your words say one thing, but your actions tell the truth about your beliefs.  If religious faith is as valid as science, try posting here without using a computer.  I double-dog-dare you.

[Asmodean]

I double-dog-dare you.

Me, I'm posting this without touching the keyboard. Praise Xenu!   Typing without keyboard, that is )

[Inevitable Droid]

Even the book that God inspired doesn't have to conform to logic, because no human mind can understand how god works.

That's a perspective I've never given any credence, though some Christians seem willing to.  I take for granted that logic would be an attribute of omnipotence and an attribute of omniscience, such that, both would operate logically.  Maybe that's the real difference between atheists and theists.  The former refuse to abandon logic.  I think the latter abandon logic almost gleefully, as if it were a straitjacket and their faith a sharp knife, cutting them free.

[joeactor]

Even the book that God inspired doesn't have to conform to logic, because no human mind can understand how god works.

That's a perspective I've never given any credence, though some Christians seem willing to.  I take for granted that logic would be an attribute of omnipotence and an attribute of omniscience, such that, both would operate logically.  Maybe that's the real difference between atheists and theists.  The former refuse to abandon logic.  I think the latter abandon logic almost gleefully, as if it were a straitjacket and their faith a sharp knife, cutting them free.

I understand.  I view the world (and humans in particular) as being on a continuum.  Nobody is 100% logic or 100% faith.

There are many cases where clinging to logic can get you killed (and of course the same with faith).

I try to live in a balanced way.  Logic is a good foundation, but sometimes leaping to action requires more faith.
The greater the risk, the greater the reward (or failure).

What if the universe is not a logical place?  Or if god exists, perhaps his logic is beyond us.
Even as short as 100 years ago, you'd have trouble convincing a scientist that quantum physics is real.
Yet today we have evidence that lends credence to it.

Maybe in another 100 years we'll discover the basis for the whole ball of wax is not logical.

(and looking at the state of humanity, I'd say that's a pretty strong case for an illogical god   )

[Inevitable Droid]

There are many cases where clinging to logic can get you killed

What would be an example of one?

I try to live in a balanced way.  Logic is a good foundation, but sometimes leaping to action requires more faith.
The greater the risk, the greater the reward (or failure).

I think that what you're calling faith, I would call hope.

What if the universe is not a logical place?

Logical consistency is a universal attribute of natural phenomena.  This is borne out by the totality of human experience since our ancient mother Lucy first shambled across the African grasslands.  Even quantum mechanics is logical.  The universe can surprise us, but once we adjust our premises to accommodate our new understanding, logical consistency never fails.  Not only is this factual, but upholding and depending on its factuality is the basis of survival and sanity.  To seriously abandon the expectation of a logically consistent universe is to flirt with death and madness.  (Logical consistency isn't the same as perfect predictability, of course, since the completeness and accuracy of our premises isn't perfect.)

Or if god exists, perhaps his logic is beyond us.

In the sense of being too complicated - perhaps, if I momentarily grant your premise.

[joeactor]

There are many cases where clinging to logic can get you killed

What would be an example of one?

Well, if you're gonna get picky and demand evidence, then...

I was thinking in terms of a quick life-threatening scenario where quick action based on instinct or learned response might save you, and logically working through what the best option to take may not... basically.

I try to live in a balanced way.  Logic is a good foundation, but sometimes leaping to action requires more faith.
The greater the risk, the greater the reward (or failure).

I think that what you're calling faith, I would call hope.

(Logical consistency isn't the same as perfect predictability, of course, since the completeness and accuracy of our premises isn't perfect.)

Yes.  Agreed.

But science takes for granted a base level of predictability and a base level of logic.

Some "Givens" may or may not be true, but they're all we really have to rely on.

(don't want to get into the whole "Dark Star" bomb discussion about reality)

[Inevitable Droid]

I was thinking in terms of a quick life-threatening scenario where quick action based on instinct or learned response might save you, and logically working through what the best option to take may not... basically.

Interesting.  I would still call the reaction logical.  Some guy comes at me with a mean look in his eye and a knife in his hand.  The obvious syllogism that yields danger gets processed instantly.  What happens next is hormonal, what I tend to call appetite for lack of a better word; in this case, appetite for survival.

<accidental misquote>

Joe, you accidentally quoted this - "I try to live in a balanced way.  Logic is a good foundation, but sometimes leaping to action requires more faith.
The greater the risk, the greater the reward (or failure)." - as being something I said, and this - "I think that what you're calling faith, I would call hope." - as being something you said.  It was the reverse, just for the record.  You said the first thing and I said the second thing.  Just a fumble finger, but worth correcting, from my perspective, as I would never have said that first thing.

But science takes for granted a base level of predictability and a base level of logic.

Some "Givens" may or may not be true, but they're all we really have to rely on.

Agreed.  Scientists rely on the premise of a logical universe as bedrock truth, and I concur with that.  They also rely on their best predictions of what will happen, sometimes as an assumption when designing an experiment, and sometimes as the very hypothesis to be tested.  When they take a prediction as an assumption, and the experiment surprises them with the possibility that their assumption might be false, they turn around and make what used to be an assumption (or its opposite) into a hypothesis, and run a new experiment.  I concur with all of that.

[joeactor]

Oops - yep... fumble fingers.  Sorry 'bout that.

But on the rest, yes... absolutely.

Science must be based on some assumption of predictability and logic or else it would all fall apart.

Can't base predictability on faith alone, that's for sure!

[Inevitable Droid]

Uh, given that, it's not likely that you'll get an answer that conforms to logic... so all questions have the same answer: God... it seems like a pointless discussion.

(or am I missing the point?)

I took the above to be more or less the point in itself.

You were right!  

[Persimmon Hamster]

Also in regards to the animal suffering, I will follow up with a response this evening or on Wednesday and I don't think it is an issue that should be sidestepped, it's obviously something important to consider.

...still waiting.

[Thumpalumpacus]

There are many cases where clinging to logic can get you killed

What would be an example of one?

Expounding logical atheism in Iran.

[joeactor]

There are many cases where clinging to logic can get you killed

What would be an example of one?

Expounding logical atheism in Iran.

Hah!  If I were drinking milk, you'd owe me a keyboard  lol