Why is it so important to refute Christianity?

patiodog wrote:

Quote:
Pure dogma on either side just leads to non-ending, non-educational, motionless debate.

How do you debate the issue from opposing sides without it being dogmatic? The question is inherently one of dogma.

Well, I just feel that Christians who can't objectively look at science, and Secularists who can't examine scripture simply sell themselves short in terms of ammunition when it comes to debate. The question of real debate is not about 'dogma' at all. It's about convincing the opposing side of the position you are defending, which is impossible without an understanding of where they are coming from.

0 Replies

Incidentally, my personal feelings about religion, which are somewhat documented here (I am no believer) does not effect how I feel about conducting discussion amongst the religious and the non.

0 Replies

Quote:

I do think religion is based on ignorance...

I don't entirely agree with this. An embryologist I know is one of the most educated and thoughtful people I have ever met and is also a devout Christian (though probably not in the eyes of many fundamentalists). He is fluent in four languages and works at one of the country's leading institutions for the study of animal development. Nonetheless, he cleaves to his highly personal conception of his religion. I don't begrudge him his belief; his occupation and his faith constantly lead him to question both of them in what I think is a very healthy way. He needs to have answers to big questions, even if he has to revise them along the way.

I should point out, though, that he views the Bible primarily as a repository of poetry and cultural experience, not as the word of God, and has told me that he is disturbed by the actions of many churches and "charismatcs" as well...

0 Replies

patiodog wrote:

Quote:
I do think religion is based on ignorance...

I don't entirely agree with this. An embryologist I know is one of the most educated and thoughtful people I have ever met and is also a devout Christian (though probably not in the eyes of many fundamentalists). He is fluent in four languages and works at one of the country's leading institutions for the study of animal development.

So? Do you assert that all the beliefs of an intelligent man can't be ignorant?

I did not say: "all who believe in Christianity are ignorant"

I did say: "I think religion is based on ignorance".

And I'd apply it to that man as well, he may be intelligent but he subscribes to a theory that I think is based on ignorance.

0 Replies

Quote:

So? Do you assert that all the beliefs of an intelligent man can't be ignorant?

Not at all. But I do think there is a distinction between willful ignorance (that is, a refusal to examine beliefs) and accepting and even cultivating cognitive dissonance. The person I am describing -- I don't think he expects to be assigned to heaven or hell based on some accounting of his moral turpitude and acceptance of Christ as savior. Rather, I think that he finds that scientific explanations ultimately leave a certain emotional and intellectual void that he fills by looking back to his cultural heritage. He turns to his religion the way I turn to music -- to tame the beast. And I have to say that his reflections help inform a life that I think is very well-lived: he is eager to help those he can, lives extremely modestly, donates both money and time to those who need it. I do not think his active use (not acceptance) of certain parts of the Christian metaphor (not doctrine) qualifies as ignorance. Significantly, though, in my couple of long conversations with this guy, I've never seen any indication that he rejects good scientific evidenence in favor of Christian dogma.

Doesn't change my general feeling about organized religion in general, which does use ignorance as a tool for social control.

0 Replies

Ok, I'll try again. I did **not** say anything about the believer being ignorant.

I **did** say something about beliefs being based on ignorance.

To use your own example:

"void that he fills by looking back to his cultural heritage"

Whether or not he is ignorant, he is "filling a void" with a elements of a religion that I consider to have been based on ignorance.

0 Replies

Just reading.

0 Replies

Quote:

Whether or not he is ignorant, he is "filling a void" with a elements of a religion that I consider to have been based on ignorance.

That much I will buy. However, I do not believe that using the constructs to organize and interpret personal experience is invalid. This would require that I discard most of the world's literature. I have a much dog-eared copy of a particularly diverse and interesting poetry anthology (The Rattle Bag) that I often revisit to cast some light on my own inner life, and the Bible can be used in much the same way. Much of the art that I admire and find meaningful is grounded in religion; this doesn't make the art -- the expression of the artist's personal experiences in moving through the world -- invalid in itself.

What I see as ignorant (in the pejorative sense) is using something as the only source of such sustenance. Ultimately, we are all ignorant about a great many things, and how we address this ignorance is pretty much arbitrary.