You can substitute "Armstrongism" for "Christianity" and get the same meaning.
It seems both are afraid of thinking outside the box.
When Christianity feels it depends on the most shallow, unreflective view of the world,
when it feels that no argument is too silly to use
so long as it helps prop up its "biblical" (?) world-view,
it is the enemy of the truth.
Followers of the Messiah have their own REALITY, JUST LIKE those of the world.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with your request is that it ignores one the prime tenets of the faith, that the world is evil and that the ecclesia of the Messiah is to come out of that evil.
By telling them 'face reality, face reality,' you're assuming you know what reality is and they don't. Are you so smart that you really know?
They are NOT not facing reality, they just don't accept your version, because its faithless, selfish, and inconsistent.
There's one thing wrong with the picture: The tiny little box of "My Worldview" needs to be way, way, way outside the circle of reality.
ReplyDeleteAlso, research studies have shown that people who are incompetent are unaware of their incompetent until they are raised to some minimum competence to realize how incompetent they are.
The point is the people inside that little box of incompetence have no idea how incompetent they really are. Furthermore, they cry foul when anyone points out reality to them.
The only reason reality is faithless is because it relies on real hard evidence, not the writings of sheep herders who lived over two thousand years ago. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
ReplyDeleteIt is inconsistent because as new information is discovered the old view has to be rewritten to conform to the newly discovered facts, without burying its head in the sand and ignoring them.
Unfortunately, Vaughn, new magic spells are not going to help the Armstrongist Warlocks.
ReplyDeleteThat old magic is gone.
"Real hard evidence" is whatever each man thinks it is.
ReplyDeleteThere really is no "real hard evidence," everything is 'faith,' or if you prefer, what we currently believe.
Before Copernicus and Galileo, what was our "real hard evidence" about cosmology? Before Newton quantified 'gravity' what was our "real hard evidence" about that phenomenon?
Let's form ten panels of experts on "real hard evidence" and see if they can agree on even a single point without caveats.
Their 'hard and true' judgments will always depend largely upon their biases.
The sheer fact that 'the writings of sheep herders who lived over two thousand years ago' is followed today by 2+ billion persons on the planet is rather "extraordinary evidence," don't you think?
Perhaps you suspend judgment and just wait and see.
Well, OK, fair enough.
ReplyDeleteJump off the top of the Empire State Building 10 times.
The way science works is the scientific probability of your death occurring at least once out of these ten times.
If you die even once (let alone the full ten times), we have "hard scientific evidence" that gravity works and the "panel of experts" can be satisfied that your death is the result of "hard scientific evidence"*.
At the same time, for the Coroner's inquest, we shall have "experts" examine your DNA to "prove" whether you are the one who died based on "hard scientific evidence".
It's not perfect, but your death will provide us the best "hard scientific evidence" we could have on the subject.
*It is possible that random updrafts and other unforeseen circumstances may leave you with merely broken bones with multiple fractures and a coma the first 8 times, but the experiment can be done with people assisting in the experiment to throw you off, if you are too incapacitated to do it yourself.
Alternative experiment: We can have you consume cyanide 10 times, with the inert ingredients compromising 2% of the total, thereby accurately representing the toxicity levels of the ACoGs.
MY REALITY: Your follow up comment actually makes my point, but you cannot see it with your head in the sand.
ReplyDeleteEspecially when the sand is mixed with concrete and water.
ReplyDelete