HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Warren Stupidity » Journal
Page: 1

Warren Stupidity

Profile Information

Member since: Tue Nov 9, 2004, 09:14 PM
Number of posts: 48,181

About Me

My Flagged For (24 hour) Review is now at day 111. Dangerous minds!

Journal Archives

Its ok if you are doing the lord's work.

Posted by Warren Stupidity | Thu Jul 31, 2014, 07:06 PM (1 replies)

Dishonesty and thoughtlessness in believers.

I'm on the record here as having made the claim that believers are either dishonest or thoughtless. It is a weak claim, in that there probably exists at least one believer who is neither, and it really only applies to Christians, although it might apply to other faiths as well, I just don't know enough to make that case.

What I actually mean by that claim is this:

1. Christianity in modern times is basically divided into "literalist" and "modernist or liberal" camps. The literalist believe that the bible, or large parts thereof, is the literal and inerrant Word of God, while the modernists believe that the bible is instead a series of metaphorical stories not mean to be taken literally, except for some stories, which are.

2. The literalist position is basically an honest position, by which I mean that many literalists really do believe that the bible is the literal word of god and are not being disingenuous or dishonest when discussing their beliefs. This form of belief is however "thoughtless" in that there is no way to reconcile the massive set of contradictions, impossibilities, and immoral horrors contained within the holy text that is claimed to be the literal word of god. The literalist position, if honestly held, is unconsidered, it is not thought out, it is "thoughtless". There are however plenty of literalists who are simply opportunists who don't believe one damn thing in their holy book, but act like they do for various reasons.

3. The modernist position is basically an intellectually dishonest position, by which I mean that the modernist, when discussing their beliefs, reformulates those beliefs based on the context of the argument. The parts of their holy text that are obviously impossible are recast as metaphors to fit with whatever modern conception of reality they conflict with. The contradictory texts are again reformulated on the fly to deal with the logical absurdities. Pinning down actual beliefs in a modernist is, in my experience, impossible. I don't think the modernist position is an honest one.
Posted by Warren Stupidity | Sun May 4, 2014, 01:49 PM (101 replies)
Go to Page: 1