Monday, May 08, 2006

Quick Thoughts on Why . . .

I Am Not An Atheist

Atheism is, in the end, pretty useless. It has no answers. I find most atheists rather amusing, particularly in their intense opposition to theism. Why bother? Why spend so much effort in something that means so little? What, pray tell, does atheism have to offer in place of theism?

Atheism provides no grounds for morality. Some might say, that morality allows for society to get along better. But the question remains, why bother? Why should society get along? To what end is society? Should we keep the machine running simply because it's here without any reference to why it's here? Sounds pretty sterile to me.

Fortunately, most atheists are better than their philosophy. Most believe in some sort of morality, God only knows why. Most live productive lives.

I Am Not An Agnostic

Agnosticism is a dead end. Agnostics claim either that they do not know, or that they cannot know. Both positions are self-contradictory. How, do you know that you do not know? The recognition of ignorance is the knowledge that something exists and that it is different from what you already know. That in itself is knowledge of what is claimed to be unknown. It only requires a further search to extend this fundamental knowledge.

Even more contradictory is the claim that you cannot know. That's a quitter's position. The claim that you cannot know is a statement of knowledge directly relating to the knowledge that cannot be known. For unless you know certain characteristics, how can you know that you cannot know? Thus those that claim that you cannot know already know but simply quit rather than moving forward.

I Am A Theist

Theism explains the reality we experience. The existence of creativity and free will demonstrate that there is more than mere physicality. These two characteristics of our existence are evidence that the natural is a subset of a supernatural.

Theism explains the uncaused cause that is conveniently left out of atheism. We know that we cannot have an endless chain of causes and effects without an uncaused cause else the entire chain would never have begun.

Theism provides a context for the many things that atheism cannot and agnosticism refuses to. Theism answers quesitons. You may not agree with the answers, but at least it provides a place to start.

I Am A Christian

Christianity is, to my understanding, the most consistent form of theism. This is true, regardless of the many misguided that do it wrong. Christianity conforms with what we experience in life better than any other I've looked into. Christianity provides not only answers to what was, but gives understanding to what is, and offers guidance concerning what will be.

Now I am committed to Christianity until I find something better. Some might say that is a contradiction because the commitment is tentative and Christianity does not allow anything short of total abandonment.

Well, Christianity does not ask for abandonment, Christianity asks for obedience. These are two different things. Furthermore, if in my study of Christianity I find that I have been mistaken, then it would be foolish to stick with it. And if it turns out to be false, then what's the harm in moving on?

The key, is to follow the truth to the best of my ability. I cannot imagine God ever having a problem with that.

11 Comments:

At 10:40 PM, Blogger Rocketstar said...

Russel,

Very well said, nice. Clear and concise.

I APOLOGIZE FOR THE FOLLOWING BOOK!

I think this is the second time I have mentioned it, but I truly wish all “Christians” mirrored your thought process.

Atheism: I agree 100%, I put them in the same group as theists, both claim something to be true and neither can provide proof that their theory holds merit based on knowledge, experience, logic and concrete testable, provable substance.

Agnosticism: If I understand you correctly,

“How do you know that you do not know? The recognition of ignorance is the knowledge that something exists and that it is different from what you already know. That in itself is knowledge of what is claimed to be unknown. It only requires a further search to extend this fundamental knowledge.”

We are exactly the same, that’s why I am willing as an Agnostic (this has sparked my next post), to take the first step in that, “Yes, I do think there is something else. Something beyond us, but what that is, I and WE have no clue.”

Theism:

“These two characteristics of our existence are evidence that the natural is a subset of a supernatural.
-------- I love this sentence.

“We know that we cannot have an endless chain of causes and effects without an uncaused cause else the entire chain would never have begun.”
-------- Using your own previous statement, which I agree with, we do NOT know what is possible and what is not possible.

“Theism answers questions. You may not agree with the answers, but at least it provides a place to start.”
----- But should we accept answers that we can not prove to be true? What kind of start is a start that starts with idea’s claimed facts that one can not prove?

Christianity:

“Christianity conforms with what we experience in life better than any other I've looked into.”
---- Check out Western Buddhism if you have not.

So in my view, and I know that we have gone around and around on this, I can only take the first step in this “answer”. I can only take that first step to say that I do believe that there is something else, something beyond me and WHAT I am. I have yet to see what that second step looks like, but I do understand that some really, really, really want to see that next step. Well, so do I, probably more than the aforementioned, but I have yet to see that second step.

I think I would like to replace an old “Blog Link” with yours, what do you say?

So said Rocketstar

 
At 1:18 AM, Blogger Peter Dodson said...

Can someone please clarify what Theism is?

Thanks!

 
At 5:34 AM, Blogger Russel Trojan said...

Mr. Rocketstar, It seems that you have issues with knowledge that is derived from sources other than empirical evidence. There is knowledge we have that is the result of logic. An example is the need of an uncaused cause is required by logic; it is a necessity and as a result an undeniable fact. Without this type of knowledge, pretty much all knowledge becomes questionable. Maybe I should be a bit more explicit about the logic evidence.

And for dodos, Theism is the opposite of atheism, both coming from the Greek word theos meaning god. Atheism says no god, theism says god. Theism is actually a superset of Christianity and includes any belief that believes in a supernatural realm.

 
At 8:19 AM, Blogger Rocketstar said...

russel,
"There is knowledge we have that is the result of logic."
------ I agree that we can derive that there is something else beyond us, but I don't see how you can derive anything more specific than that; using any logic or empirical proof.

 
At 10:56 AM, Blogger Russel Trojan said...

Rocketstar, old buddy, old chum, old pal. Why can't you just take my word for it? ;-)

 
At 1:27 PM, Blogger Rocketstar said...

russel,
LOL !

I wish I could, really, I wish I could. It would be sooo much easier.

 
At 3:03 PM, Blogger Peter Dodson said...

"Atheism is, in the end, pretty useless. It has no answers."

I think my problem with this is that it assumes that one is looking for answers or that we need answers.

"Why spend so much effort in something that means so little? "

Spending effort towards what?

"Atheism provides no grounds for morality."

Why not? Why do we need a higher power to tell us how to act towards each other? Can't we figure it out for ourselves?

 
At 5:41 PM, Blogger Russel Trojan said...

Dodos, we need a reason to continue. Some have diluted that reason so that their only reason to exist is because they exist. To believe that existence is important because it exists is to believe nothing. The question still stands, "Why bother?"

It case you hadn't noticed, atheists spend a fair amount of effort contradicting theists and working diligently to keep their views silent in the public square. If theism is a silly little superstition, why the animosity?

As for morality, atheists can be very moral people and many, if not most are. However, the question is still, "Why bother?"

Why should we get along? So we can live longer? Why then should we live longer? If this is all there is, "Why bother?"

 
At 8:23 PM, Blogger Peter Dodson said...

"Dodos, we need a reason to continue."

Why? Why can't we exist just to exist? Why does we need to attach some sort of significance or specialness to it? I continue because I want to insure that the future generations don't make the same mistakes we are making right now.

"To believe that existence is important because it exists is to believe nothing."

Our existence is no more important than the frogs or the fishs. You assume that atheists believe our existence is important.

"If theism is a silly little superstition, why the animosity?"

No animosity, just making sure religion stays out of the public sphere, especially in politics.

"Why should we get along? So we can live longer? Why then should we live longer? If this is all there is, "Why bother?""

Why bother? Because things are better for us all when we get along.

 
At 5:49 AM, Blogger Russel Trojan said...

"I continue because I want to insure that the future generations ..."

This statement demonstrates that you have a reason that extends beyond simple existence. You feel an obligation to posterity. Why? What have they done for you? Or better, what can they do for you?

You say you want to keep religion out of the public sphere. On what rational grounds do you deem religion to be unworthy of public discourse? Personal preference? Certainly not on any demonstrable proof that it's false.

 
At 9:56 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

Christianity consistent?

Being logically consistent (orderly), the orderly universe must mirror its Prime Cause / Singularity-Creator—Who must be Orderly; i.e. Perfect. Therefore, no intelligent person can ignore that our purpose and challenge in life is learning how we, as imperfect humans, may successfully relate to a Perfect Singularity-Creator without our co-mingling, which transcends the timespace of this dimensional physical universe, becoming an imperfection to the Perfect Singularity-Creator.

An orderly—"not capricious," as Einstein put it—Creator (also implying Just), therefore, necessarily had an Intelligent Purpose in creating this universe and us within it and, being Just and Orderly, necessarily placed an explanation, a "Life's Instruction Manual," within the reach of His subjects—humankind.

An orderly—"not capricious," as Einstein put it—Creator (also implying Just), therefore, necessarily had an Intelligent Purpose in creating this universe and us within it and, being Just and Orderly, necessarily placed an explanation, a "Life's Instruction Manual," within the reach of His subjects—humankind.

It defies the orderliness (logic / mathematics) of both the universe and Perfection of its Creator to assert that humanity was (contrary to His Tor•âh′ , see below) without any means of rapproachment until millennia after the first couple in recorded history as well as millennia after Abraham, Moses and the prophets. Therefore, the Creator's "Life's Instruction Manual" has been available to man at least since the beginning of recorded history. The only enduring document of this kind is the Tor•âh′ —which, interestingly, translates to "Instruction" (not "law" as popularly alleged). (Source and further reading of how to relate to the Creator: www.netzarim.co.il)

The fact that the Creator is perfect implies that He isn’t self-contradictory. Therefore any religion that contradicts Torah is the antithesis to the Creator.

Christianity contradicts Torah.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home