Hero Professor In Hell Right Now

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think its possibly might be the case that you are wrong and many religous people happily admit they may be wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not for any culturally relevant religion such as Christianity or Islam. It doesn't make sense for a believer to treat the tenets of these religions as being "maybe" or "probably" true. The tenets are so fantastically arbitrary that once you open the door to skepticism even a crack, belief won't have a chance.

Thus doubting the truth of doctrine is built-in as sinful into these religions, and is not an option for their adherents. Someone who's just generally "spiritual"...sure. But not a Christian or Muslim.

[/ QUOTE ]
Lots of christians are happy to admit that they believe but don't know.

Its simply not a problem for them, I'm not sure why you think it is.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just fun with words. They would admit they believe but don't know, but they would most certainly never put the likelihood of their God existing at <50%. They believe but don't know in rhetorical terms only; in fact they are as certain of it as anything else.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think that's it at all. Non-egotistical maniacs recognise that in general they are no better at forming beliefs than others so they recognise their belief systems are not preferential.

Hence they realise that it may be the others who are correct (see DS's best reason post). They have faith but recognise that that they may be a property of them not of the world.

They may not put it in those terms but its a straightforward property of relatively humble people.

they don't take the step of it diminishing their beliefs - that's a property of irrational faith and not having read the book of bayes.

chez

[Subfallen]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think its possibly might be the case that you are wrong and many religous people happily admit they may be wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not for any culturally relevant religion such as Christianity or Islam. It doesn't make sense for a believer to treat the tenets of these religions as being "maybe" or "probably" true. The tenets are so fantastically arbitrary that once you open the door to skepticism even a crack, belief won't have a chance.

Thus doubting the truth of doctrine is built-in as sinful into these religions, and is not an option for their adherents. Someone who's just generally "spiritual"...sure. But not a Christian or Muslim.

[/ QUOTE ]
Lots of christians are happy to admit that they believe but don't know.

Its simply not a problem for them, I'm not sure why you think it is.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

Someone who happily says Jesus may or may not have been God Incarnate is not a Christian according to my theological understanding. Certainly such people may call themselves Christians, but I prefer to avoid such imprecise language. They're not Christian.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think its possibly might be the case that you are wrong and many religous people happily admit they may be wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not for any culturally relevant religion such as Christianity or Islam. It doesn't make sense for a believer to treat the tenets of these religions as being "maybe" or "probably" true. The tenets are so fantastically arbitrary that once you open the door to skepticism even a crack, belief won't have a chance.

Thus doubting the truth of doctrine is built-in as sinful into these religions, and is not an option for their adherents. Someone who's just generally "spiritual"...sure. But not a Christian or Muslim.

[/ QUOTE ]
Lots of christians are happy to admit that they believe but don't know.

Its simply not a problem for them, I'm not sure why you think it is.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

Someone who happily says Jesus may or may not have been God Incarnate is not a Christian according to my theological understanding. Certainly such people may call themselves Christians, but I prefer to avoid such imprecise language. They're not Christian.

[/ QUOTE ]
then you'd exclude many including many leading lights of the Church of England. Which may be fair enough [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

but then you haven't claimed anything any more as you are excluding by definition anyone who hasn't got the property you say they all have.

chez

[Subfallen]

Yeah, I'm exercising a properly dogmatic special pleading in my theological assertions. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Also, I'm an American, and I suspect American evangelicals haven't mellowed nearly as much as the Church of England. Certainly both of them have diverged far from what was once orthodoxy. (Changing orthodoxy in the face of a changeless God!?!)

But, seriously, IMO NotReady and txag007 are the only two posters in this forum who demonstrate a properly Christian dogmatism about the specific truth of their doctrines. (Although, ironically, I'm sure they still differ on some key points as NotReady seems a Calvinist and txag a fundamentalist.)

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I'm exercising a properly dogmatic special pleading in my theological assertions. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Also, I'm an American, and I suspect American evangelicals haven't mellowed nearly as much as the Church of England. Certainly both of them have diverged far from what was once orthodoxy. (Changing orthodoxy in the face of a changeless God!?!)

But, seriously, IMO NotReady and txag007 are the only two posters in this forum who demonstrate a properly Christian dogmatism about the specific truth of their doctrines. (Although, ironically, I'm sure they still differ on some key points as NotReady seems a Calvinist and txag a fundamentalist.)

[/ QUOTE ]
The problem with USA christianity is that its a political movement. In England we performed the cunning trick of an established church with no real power - they're easily confused poor dears. Same went for the monarchy.

I think NotReady concedes the possibiltiy he is mistaken. He just doesn't believe he is. Its as DS put it so well in his hi-falootin days, a matter of operating under the assumption rather than believing.

chez

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

I think NotReady concedes the possibiltiy he is mistaken. He just doesn't believe he is. Its as DS put it so well in his hi-falootin days, a matter of operating under the assumption rather than believing.


[/ QUOTE ]

It's not just an assumption but also a belief. I also believe I'm fallible.