Sunday, September 21, 2014

Answers for Dan

I a long meandering and, at this point, fairly incoherent comment thread elsewhere I asked Dan some questions. Dan, shockingly, asked me some in return. At the time I was too busy to respond with anything more than "I'll answer your questions when I can.". Given the direction the thread took, I chose to answer said questions here so as to avoid causing any more confusion over there. This way, I can do what I said I'd do, as well as preempt the "You never answer my questions" whine. So here are the questions copied from the other thread. Dan; “Do you think it is provable that God exists?” Me; Yes, I believe that it is possible to prove to a reasonable person to a reasonable degree of certainty that God exists. I suspect that what I consider to be a reasonable degree of proof will not be acceptable to you, but I do believe it to be provable. Dan; “Do you think God sometimes commands (commanded) people to destroy whole nations, including children and babies?” Me; I believe that the OT records instances where God commanded people to do all sorts of things that seem, by our standards, to be strange or unreasonable. I believe (as do you) that God is God and that He can do what He chooses. Dan: “Do you think God created the world in six days, ~6,000 years ago?” Me; Let me preface this by saying that God is God and He is capable of engineering His creation any way He chooses to. With that said, after spending some time looking at this issue a while ago I came to the conclusion that I believe that it is possible that God literally created everything is six literal days, and that the text of Genesis supports this view. I also believe that it is possible that the six days were not 24 hour days, but undefined periods of time. Personally I believe the important phrase is “God created”, the rest is just details. I find it strange that Christians have no trouble affirming that god created everything from nothing, but quibble about how long it might have taken. To be blunt, I can live with either option, and don’t get too worked up about it. As to the age, I am perfectly comfortable with a God who can speak the universe into existence being able to create said universe with the appearance of age. I see no reason to believe that God’s power to create is somehow limited. Personally, it’s not a topic I get too worked up about. But thank you for presuming that you knew more about my views than I do. Dan; “Do you think originally there were only two people, a literal Adam and Eve?” Me; I see no reason to doubt the existence of a literal Adam and Eve. I also see no reason to presume that God stopped after Adam and Eve. I know it’s repetitive, but I believe the “God created” is the important part; I’ll quite comfortable to leave the details to God. Dan; “Do you admit there is no data to support any of that, and in fact, data which would contradict it?” Me; So Dan; “Do YOU think we can say, “I know as a matter of fact that God’s opinion on abortion, war and homosexuality are…”?” Me, I think that we can say that the Bible is the primary means for God to communicate what He wants to humanity. I further think that we can read what the Bible plainly says about topics such as sexuality, marriage, war, and life. From that I believe that one can reasonably conclude that God has given us some guidelines about how best to live in a way that pleases Him. I think we also see the results when people behave in ways that seem to be at odds with what pleases God. Given that it seems reasonable that one can discern God’s “opinions” on any number of topics. Of course it’s not demeaning at all to refer to God’s standards as “opinions”. Dan; “Do you think it is possible to know perfectly what God’s Ways are on some topics?” Me; I think that it is possible to know what God’s ways are on a number of topics. I think it is also possible to use the principles that inform the topics that are clearer, in order to come to reasonable conclusions on those which are less explicit. Dan; “Which topics?” Me; I’d suggest that there are a number of topics on which scripture is reasonably clear, and that there are principles that allow us to construct guidelines on others. As to a list, I see no reason to provide one, as it will just encourage you to nitpick about what is or is not on the list. OK, I did what I said, and answered your questions. I am pretty sure I can predict your response to my answers. So, while I may or may not allow you to post comments, don't expect much beyond the answers I've given. I know I probably can't prove any of this to your satisfaction, and I don't care. I also know that your recent stance that the Bible is NOT the primary source of knowledge about God will preclude any sort or rational conversation about any of this. So, if you expect anything more from me, I expect that you will make an actual argument to counter what I have said supported by the same level of proof you expect of others. If you won't, don't be surprised to see your opinions disappear.

2 comments:

Dan Trabue said...

First off, now that I know they're here, let me thank you for these many answers in this post and others.

Now, a few questions of my own...

Yes, I believe that it is possible to prove to a reasonable person to a reasonable degree of certainty that God exists.

Okay, prove it to a reasonable atheist. How about George, who's been around some of our blogs?

Or is it your opinion that each and every atheist and agnostic is not reasonable?

I think the problem may be in your/our understanding of the word "prove." When I use it, I mean it in the MW sense...

" to establish the existence, truth, or validity of (as by evidence or logic)"

To establish, as with no doubt, beyond any question. Prove.

Now, I think you and I may offer proofs, or reasons why you and I find it reasonable to believe that God exists, but prove it beyond all doubt? No, I don't think we can do that. Nor do I think it reasonable to assume that all atheists unreasonable people.

Craig...

Dan; “Do you think originally there were only two people, a literal Adam and Eve?” Me; I see no reason to doubt the existence of a literal Adam and Eve. I also see no reason to presume that God stopped after Adam and Eve. I know it’s repetitive, but I believe the “God created” is the important part

Okay, but it sounds like you're leaning towards "you must take Adam and Eve/literal six days" as the preferred answer. So please clarify: If believe "God created" is the main concern, then are you fine with those many fellow believers who sincerely believe that this text is best understood as myth? Or do you believe they are mistaken? Further, do you believe that they are not even sincere or that they are somehow looking for an "easy way out," or are "writing off scripture" when they simply disagree with other human's understanding of the proper genre assignment of this text?

That's all for now.

Thanks,

Dan

Craig said...

"Okay, but it sounds like you're leaning towards "you must take Adam and Eve/literal six days" as the preferred answer."

I don't care what it sounds like. I've been clear, I believe that "God created" is the crux of the matter. If one accepts the existence of a God with the ability to create anything (let along everything) out of nothing, then who cares how long it took. I am perfectly comfortable with the idea that God could have created everything in 6 micro seconds, or 6 days, or whatever. It seems strange to believe that there is a God who created everything seen and unseen, but to try to put limits on the mechanics of the creation.

If someone chooses to believe that Genesis is myth, without evidence, who am I to stop them. If there is compelling evidence, why hasn't it been presented? I think that some folks are genuinely sincerely wrong in what they believe (Not wrong by my standard, but objectively wrong. I suggest that there is objective right and wrong independent of what we can perceive), I also think that there are some who are looking for an easy way out, or who want to write off scripture. So, what.