Showing posts with label Theology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Theology. Show all posts

Friday, October 21, 2022

Theology: How It Is Related To Other Disciplines

*Theology by Herb Silverman

It has been said, with some justification, that philosophy is “questions that may never be answered” and “religion is answers that may never be questioned.” But some questions in philosophy have been answered— by science. Branches of science sprang out of philosophical questions, many of which were once thought to be empirically impossible to test, like the idea of an atom propounded by Greek philosopher Democritus, as represented by the above picture. Ancient Greek philosophers concerned themselves with deducing what matter is made from, what the nature of the stars are, and concepts like chemistry and physics. These were regarded as philosophical issues, but many such questions have been explored and answered by scientists.

Philosophy, religion, and science are each involved with a search for truth. Science describes the way the world is. Philosophy and religion attempt to answer questions about what ought to be and why. But religion, unlike philosophy and science, is usually based on divine revelation and authority.

The word “theology” comes from the Greek words theos meaning God and logos meaning the word about (or the study of) God. Theology assumes that the divine exists in some form, and evidence for and about that existence may be found through personal spiritual experience or historical records of such experiences as documented by others. In short, theology is the study of God and of God's relationship to the world.

I consider myself to be an expert on theology. Why? Because I think the number of experts on any topic is inversely proportional to the evidence available on that topic. And by that criterion, we are all experts on God because there is absolutely no evidence for her/his existence. Many theologians make up stuff about God or quote stuff from books made up by others. My acknowledgment that I know nothing about God makes me more of an expert than those who claim to know God or to know about him/her.

Nobody can produce evidence that God is more than a thought or belief. Scientists can see stars that have been dead for billions of years and can document microscopic bacteria that lived on Earth eons ago. But of God we have no trace, except reports about God that neither the writers nor those around them ever witnessed, and the faith of millions who convinced themselves that God lives and reigns somewhere in the sky. If I told people I have an unverifiable, invisible friend that I speak with, they would think I have an overactive imagination, if not outright insanity, unless I named this friend “God.”

Most theists recognize how intellectually feeble faith is when they see it applied to anything other than their personal god belief. Competing and contradictory claims for thousands of gods by billions of people throughout history only says that humans can believe just about anything. Religious belief is not a logical conclusion arrived at after researching all the world's faiths and deciding on the most sensible one. It usually comes from childhood indoctrination and is wrapped up with values and loyalties developed at that time. People don't make a rational choice to believe in a god, so they are unlikely to make a rational choice to stop believing in that god, though some do if they become evidence-based.

In debates, I've had with Christian theologians my opponents use what is called “apologetics,” a branch of Christian theology that defends Christianity against objections. Scientists don't need apologetics because nobody must believe in science for it to exist. When I provide debate opponents with biblical contradictions or questions they can't answer because no answer matches reality, I sometimes hear the unfalsifiable response “God works in mysterious ways.”

Confirmation bias also plays a large role when interpreting passages in “holy” books. For example, some theologians claim that the Bible has it right in ways that prominent scientists had it wrong. Many scientists once believed in an eternal, steady-state universe before we learned about the “Big Bang” and an expanding universe. Genesis opens with “In the beginning,” which some Christian apologists interpret as scientific evidence that the Bible describes a Big Bang beginning. I point out that Genesis goes on to say that God then created two lights, the greater to rule the day, and the lesser the night. Almost as an afterthought, God then made stars (which biblical writers did not know were other suns, many larger than our sun). The Bible contains so much anti-scientific nonsense because it's a product of an Iron Age culture, and the Bible has no more knowledge in it than the people of Mesopotamia had at that time.

I think there is a place for teaching the philosophy of religion in academia, including by religious studies departments at public universities. Also, perhaps, in theology departments, depending on how the topics are taught. Philosophy of religion is a branch of philosophy concerned with questions regarding religion, including the nature and existence of gods, the examination of religious experience, the analysis of religious vocabulary and texts, and the relationship of religion to science. A good religious studies program should expose students to all kinds of religious beliefs, and some students might realize that the religion in which they were raised makes no more sense than do a lot of other religions.

A fine book for philosophy of religion or religious studies is Karen Armstrong's A History of God, though more accurately it should be called “A History of God Belief.” Within authentic academia, in the absence of proof of the existence of something that something must be deemed not to exist until verifiable proof is found. So “God” should be held not to exist pending some sort of verifiable evidence.

College theology departments that mainly promote apologetics in religion-affiliated schools do not undertake a legitimate search for truth. At such schools, I like to see what science courses are in the curriculum if any. Some religion-affiliated schools “teach” why evolution is wrong. I don't so much mind theological viewpoints that incorporate legitimate science, but too many don't. It is difficult, I would even say impossible, for apologists to show how their “holy” book is consistent with modern scientific findings. I remember a time when people would feel a little embarrassed when they admitted they knew almost nothing about science. I never expected to hear what I hear from so many today, that they don't believe in science, as if science (like religion) is no more than a belief. Ignorance is not bliss and refusing to accept what we know is ignorance squared.

* From Nov/Dec 2022 Freethought Society Ezine

Sunday, April 11, 2021

God Is Incoherent Regarding Time

"If God exists outside of time—not in time, but timeless and eternal—what would that mean about God's nature? God would never 'lose' the past or anticipate the future. God would not need to know the future, because to a timeless God, there would be no future. Everything would be ever-present in one timeless moment. But how could a timeless God relate to human beings?"

Time is not an abstract reality like mathematics, logic, and morality. It is part of our physical reality (matter, energy, and time). Any action within our reality takes time. In fact, the natural state of our reality is motion that is tempered by external resistance (link).

Click on the link below to see how philosophers and theologians struggle with the reality of "Time":


Thursday, July 23, 2020

Black Cat Analogy

Philosophy is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat.
Metaphysics is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat that isn't there.
Theology is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat that isn't there, and shouting "I found it!"
Science is like being in a dark room looking for a black cat while using a flashlight.
~origin unknown

Friday, June 5, 2020

Levels Of Certainty And Christianity

Different types of knowledge have differing levels of certainty, and there is a hierarchy of such. From the highest to lowest (link):
  • Mathematics and Philosophical Logic
  • Experimental Science
  • Observational Science
  • Historical Knowledge
  • Philosophical and Theological Argument (Inference to the Best Explanation)
Christian apologists are functioning at the lowest level of certainty, but, one would never know it when exposed to them. Ironically, they are generally more certain than science-based thinkers, who are uncertain but do know that they have the best tools to understand objective reality. 

Inference to the Best Explanation is a kind of abductive reasoning in which one chooses the best hypothesis or theory that best explains the available data. We use this form of reasoning in our everyday activities and in legal trials. The problem for Christian apologists is that scientific and historical investigation, the higher levels of certainty, lead to rejection of all claims for a God. Another factor to consider is that claims for a God are extraordinary, which require extraordinary evidence (link).

Thursday, April 16, 2020

What Is "Sophisticated Theology/Philosophy?"

One of my favorite atheist authors is John W. Loftus. He recently reposted one of his quotes on Facebook that I consider a classic. Here it is:
"What is Sophisticated Theology/Philosophy?
"Sophisticated theology/philosophy is argumentation used by delusional people to defend the indefensible. It is pure sophistry, empty rhetoric without substance, fallacious reasoning, ungrounded assertions lacking sufficient evidence. Sophisticated theology/philosophy is a kind of red-herring argumentation used as a smokescreen to hide the fact that faith lacks sufficient evidence. Follow its trail and you will be led down the rabbit hole of definitions used to obfuscate the lack of evidence. Sophisticated theology/philosophy confuses people who don't share that sophistication. At its most fundamental level sophisticated theology/philosophy is nothing more than special pleading."



Friday, June 22, 2018

Ancient Superstitions At The Heart Of Christianity

" From Bethlehem to the Empty Tomb, the Christian story doesn’t make sense. Secularists like to poke fun at Bible silliness, e.g., transferring demons into pigs, walking on water—and changing it into wine. All such episodes deserve ridicule, and savvy apologists can make the point, quite rightly, that such tales don’t really matter.

"Apologists know, however, where to draw the line: don’t touch the resurrection of Jesus. But trying to bring Jesus back to life—as a fact of history—doesn’t make sense at all, on any level. Thus apologists have gone to extraordinary lengths to make resurrection look respectable. Maybe we should give them “A” for effort, but a failing grade is inevitable."

A Review of Robert Conner’s book, Apparitions of Jesus: The Resurrection as Ghost Story

Wednesday, July 27, 2016

What Process Is More Humble?

" - - - In contrast, theology, confronted with The Problem of Undeserved Evil, either makes up foolish answers or claims that the mind of God is unfathomable. There is no way to check its claims or arguments."

Jesus ‘n’ Mo ‘n’ humility

Tuesday, March 1, 2016

Science: Why It "Shines" (LOL)

PHILOSOPHY is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat.
METAPHYSICS is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat that is not there.
THEOLOGY is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat, that is not there, and shouting; “ I found it!”
SCIENCE is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat using a f—– flashlight.

Saturday, May 2, 2015

Can You Handle The Truth?

What is “The Truth?” There have been three proposed routes to such in human history: philosophy; theology; science. Out of these, only one stands out: science. Science has proven itself to be the best tool humanity has developed in our search for “The Truth.”

I have committed myself to the promotion of science.  If you find anything that you disagree with on this blog, please ENGAGE me. What do I mean by that? You challenge ANYTHING on this page, you had best present EVIDENCE in support of your position,.and STAY WITH ME through my questions, my answers to your responses, etc. If you can't handle the heat, bye-bye.

Should you choose to challenge me, please ponder the following, as it will be the core of our discussion:

Do you accept science? If so, do you accept everything it says on all matters? If not, why not?

Is there anything that is better than evidence to determine the truth?

How do you define faith? Is faith belief without evidence? If not, what is it?

If you use faith to support your belief, why should I accept your belief over others in the same category (i.e. religion, medicine, or reality in general)?

If you are engaging me from a theist perspective, outside of religion, do you use faith in support of anything else? If not, why not? If you do, why do you?

Thursday, April 9, 2015

The "God Of The Gaps" Is Dead

"The main difference between Newton, Laplace and modern cosmology is that we don't presume (or shouldn't) to know all there is to know about the universe. Even as we strive to know more about nature — and this is what science is supposed to do — we also realize (or should) the vastness of what we don't know. One thing should be clear to all who share a scientist's urge to learn about the world: To put God in our current knowledge gaps certainly would not further our understanding of the universe. For that we need science and its stubbornly secular modern approach."

The "God of the Gaps" should not be used in support of a god..... full stop.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2015/04/08/398227737/what-the-god-of-the-gaps-teaches-us-about-science

Click here if you want to see an example of how Christian apologists don't really understand what the God of the Gaps means.  I responded to this ignorance with, "You do not understand the god of the gaps argument. Science simply states that any claim must be supported by evidence. Every claim in support of an interventionist deity has been falsified. Philosophy will never provide empirical evidence for anything. Instead of positing a god where there is no evidence, a science-based thinker says, "I don't know." (full stop)"  The website blocked this response by saying it is spam.  Ironically, apologists say they have "The Truth" but will not really have an honest and open discussion when challenged.

Sunday, November 2, 2014

There Are No Other Ways Of Knowing Outside Of Science

"To assert today that we should revert to a pre-scientific era, that theology or philosophy should trump scientific knowledge, is to claim that mythology/logic/reason is more reliable than evidence."

http://openparachute.wordpress.com/2009/07/10/different-ways-of-knowing/

Labels


Click on image

Choose how you look at reality wisely. Yes, it is a binary choice.

Choose how you look at reality wisely. Yes, it is a binary choice.
Click on image