|
Jastiger posted:a particular system of faith and worship. quote:Please google Sociology, Anthropology, Political Science. Morality is relative. You can see how things change over time and use statistics to inform your analysis of behaviors and compare that to what you value. How does it follow from this that it's possible to make a falsifiable moral claim? Bryter fucked around with this message at 16:15 on Dec 17, 2015 |
#
¿
Dec 17, 2015 16:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
Obdicut posted:No, very large amounts of our society thinks that you shouldn't marry people based on their race or their gender, as a quick and easy disproof. And more broadly "western culture" includes places where even a "mixed marriage" between Catholics and Protestants is controversial.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:I find your critique interesting that its "objectively true" that they worship the same god. The texts for each religion specifically says they aren't. You do know that "the texts for each religion" are in part the same texts? The Torah is part of Christian Biblical canon and is an Islamic Holy Book. Islam in particular is pretty explicit about its relationship with the "people of the book", and outright says that they worship the same god, but are doing it the wrong way.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
Tei posted:This could be a academic interpretation on religion, and based on the last 10 pages of this thread, is a wrong one. Whether they are or not is irrelevant, the dude I was replying to made a claim about the content of those books themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:In part doesn't mean "is". Where in the the texts of each of the Abrahamic faiths do you believe it specifically says that the God worshipped by the others is a different God? Jastiger posted:You also have to remember that the Christian and Islamic faiths built onto the existing Jewish one. It'd be like me writing an addendum to a series and calling it Canon that retroactively jive with the original story. That doesn't mean it's necessarily the same god as understood by the followers. I get that it may be a somewhat reasonable assumption, but I don't think you can call it "fact". By that standard talking about a Christian God is itself pointless, as you can't say it's a fact that all Christians worship a common God. I don't think it's a particularly useful perspective.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Where does it say its the same? I think its too open to interpretation to be considered "fact". The entirety of the Gospels, which portray Jesus as a reformer of Judaism, and, again, the repeated acknowledgement in the Qur'an of the shared beliefs of Muslims and the people of the book. Jastiger posted:Well I think we can define what a Christian is based on some basic criteria in the bible. God, Holy Spirit, Jesus are generally considered to be the base line Christian qualification with all the rest of the stuff being denominational. So there is some value there, I think, when differentiating between Christianity and other faiths. That's the criteria you think should be applied but, as you said, "that doesn't mean it's necessarily the same god as understood by the followers". To an objective observer, it's just as much a fact that the Abrahamic faiths share a God as it is that Christian denominations share a God.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:I don't think that means its a "fact" that they are the same god Well neither do I, because Obdicut posted:Gods don't exist, Jastiger But it's as useful and reasonable to talk about an Abrahamic God as it is to talk about a Christian God.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:No I DO understand that which is why I think his explanation was not very good. The Bible and Das Kapital are very different works, but the explanation of "read the book" because it has "scientific proofs in it" is used with the Bible all the time. See stuff like Answers in Genesis and Ray Comforts stuff. Thats what I was getting at. "Sure, you may say radiotherapy can treat cancer, but some people say crystals cure cancer." Yes, and?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:PLUS, the original post was in response to Pain Mainframe in that there have always been aspects of faith that were taken literally. I think thats still the case, if you want to be super easy about it we can just leave it that "god is real". Thats pretty much taken literally, we can agree on that? Not every Christian would follow you on that one. Bryter fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Dec 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Would you consider them Christians though? If they identified as Christians, sure, I wouldn't argue.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 17:21 |
|
|
Jastiger posted:A contentious point I think. As is the question of whether Catholics are Christians. What is and isn't foundational to Christianity is not unanimously agreed upon, and your definitions are as arbitrary as anyone else's.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2015 19:20
|
|