Lots of bashing for the belief of God....

[GameOver22]

sapphi_snake said:

GameOver22 said:

If thats how you feel, then I do not think there is any way to change your mind. I will point out that many definitions and explanations operate in this manner. When you find something that conflicts with an idea or definition, you often attempt to further clarify the definition in order to eliminate the ambiguity or inconsistencies. This is true for many definitions or ideas and is not reserved to religious questions. You will find that atheism has undergone drastic changes as it has become apparent that atheistic conceptions of the universe did not mesh with science. The same goes for redefining science as it became apparent that classical definitions did not agree with developments in quantum physics.

Point being, it is not that the definitions change because they wish to cover up inaccuracies. They change becuase it becomes apparent that past definitions were inaccurate or inadequate. The definition of omnipotence has changed because the idea has evolved, and the term has become more refined as philosophers recognized the absurdities that result with the idea of an all-powerful being that can cause contradictions (a further understanding of logic forced them to clarify the defintion). The main point is that changing the meaning of a term is not a bad thing. Just because a term had some meaning in the 6th century does not mean that defintion is the right definition. The definition could just be inaccurate or be in need of further clarification given recent developments (one scientific example being the evolution of the term "atom").

I think you're making a massive mistake by comparing the way science self corrects itself, with what we were t5alking about. Science evolves because new discoveries are made, it's ridiculous to assume that at any given point scientists know all the secrets of the universe.

By comparison religion claims to hav absolute knowledge, so a correction would just prove the opposite of that. Also, religions are fabricated, they're not based on observation (like science) and have no connection to reality, so the "corrections" you tal kabout are made to save face, and are more often than not influenced by fields outside the religion (philosophy, science etc.), rather than from whithin (due to the fact that religions claim to have absolute knowledge, and challenging the canon is viewed as heresy, yet changes happen when the irrationality of religion is exposed, as to not lose followers).

I think you might be missing my point. First, religion does not claim to have absolute knowledge. God has absolute knowledge, but religion does not. It doesn't take a very complex example to recognize this point (just think about how science has been much more successful at providing information about the natural world than religion- its quite clear that religion did not have absolute knowledge in this area).

In the same way you could argue that it is ridiculous to assume that scientists know all the secrets of the universe, I can argue that it is ridiculous to assume that a philosopher or theologian will know all the truths and implications of some logical system. As they learn more about the system and continue to recognize the implications of such a system, it is natural that they will gain a better understanding of their domain of study. This then leads to a revision of definitions and ideas.

My point wasn't that science and religion share a direct comparison and have similar modes of explanation. My point was that definitions and ideas change all the time when it becomes apparent that the definitions are inaccurate. This is true for science as well as religion. It does not make a difference whether science is empirical and religion is foundational. I honestly don't need science to prove the point. I just thought it would be a good example given the discussion at hand. You can just look at such words as liberty, freedom, natural, human nature, substance (philosophically speaking), and innocent (noun). If you look at these words, you will recognize that they have changed over time, and they are still used differently depending on the context. The important thing is to recognize how the word is intended to be used and take this into account when you encounter it.