Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Christian Topic => Topic started by: Walt Zingmatilder on November 28, 2017, 10:39:39 AM
-
While there is a lot of fun to be had over the trilemma. What about Lewis's dilemma......That Christianity is either true or it is the biggest con job in history.
-
This is as big and steaming a pile of horseshit as the trilemma.
He should have stuck to mediaeval literature. Apparently he was quite good at that, once.
-
While there is a lot of fun to be had over the trilemma. What about Lewis's dilemma......That Christianity is either true or it is the biggest con job in history.
Some of what Jesus is quoted as saying was sensible and worth consideration. However, the 'supernatural' stuff surrounding the guy has no credibility whatsoever, and is highly unlikely to be true. If Jesus was truly dead, then resurrected, staying down here on Earth would have confirmed the status claimed for him.
-
While there is a lot of fun to be had over the trilemma. What about Lewis's dilemma......That Christianity is either true or it is the biggest con job in history.
Unfortunately for you Vlad the evidence is not laying on the side of your beloved Christianity, it's looking like a con job at the mo.
Regards ippy
-
While there is a lot of fun to be had over the trilemma. What about Lewis's dilemma......That Christianity is either true or it is the biggest con job in history.
'andles, do you come yo this board just to get a good battering because I cant see any other reason ?
you certainly aren't going to convert anyone with the arguments you propose . I ,for one, would change my view immediately if you produced any empirical evidence but you never do .
In your defence, no one else ever has either
-
'andles, do you come yo this board just to get a good battering because I cant see any other reason ?
That then begs the question of what you are coming to this board for.
.
-
That then begs the question of what you are coming to this board for.
.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
-
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
Oxford Dictionaries: beg the question (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/beg_the_question) (sense 1)
-
While there is a lot of fun to be had over the trilemma. What about Lewis's dilemma......That Christianity is either true or it is the biggest con job in history.
All religions are a con in a sense (neglecting the vanishingly small chance that one of them is true). In particular, most versions of Christianity are way too riddled with contradictions to be taken seriously.
However, a con would imply a deliberate deception and totally leaves out the possibility of people simply getting stuff wrong: being deluded, mistaken, hallucination, misunderstanding, stories getting exaggerated or embellished, hyperactive agent detection, and so on, and so on, and in any combination, including, perhaps, some deliberate deception along the way.
So, some combination of cock-up and con, would be my guess.
Lewis wasn't very good at this, was he?
-
That then begs the question of what you are coming to this board for.
.
you could just ask me directly .
you might not get an answer but you can ask .
-
Oxford Dictionaries: beg the question (http://www.religionethics.co.uk/definition/beg_the_question) (sense 1)
People put their Christmas trees up in November, doesn't make it good.
-
People put their Christmas trees up in November, doesn't make it good.
Some around here were even up in October! ::)
-
People put their Christmas trees up in November, doesn't make it good.
Indeed - but as far as language changing goes, resistance is futile!
Also, given that the "formal" usage was a mistranslation from Latin (according to your wiki link), it could be argued that the modern meaning makes more sense.
-
Interesting tangent about the change in meaning in 'begging the question'. It reminds me of 'theory', where a popular usage has developed, quite different from the formal sense. As Stranger says, resistance is futile. I have spent years arguing about the shift in meaning in 'gender', but to no avail.
-
Interesting tangent about the change in meaning in 'begging the question'. It reminds me of 'theory', where a popular usage has developed, quite different from the formal sense. As Stranger says, resistance is futile. I have spent years arguing about the shift in meaning in 'gender', but to no avail.
don't know where I am these days with all that bollocks(noun) ::)
-
While there is a lot of fun to be had over the trilemma. What about Lewis's dilemma......That Christianity is either true or it is the biggest con job in history.
Lewis really did have a problem with his attempts to reduce these religious questions to a few either/or propositions. Christianity refers to such a vast array of differing beliefs, that it is ludicrous to speak in such terms. I suppose he meant that the supernatural claims are either true, or those who believe in them have perpetrated a con. But even the supernatural claims can be seen to differ in the original scriptures. No doubt those Catholic Christians who marginalised and tortured Jews were quite sincere in believing what they did was right (and therefore not con-artists). No doubt those Protestant Christians who rooted out and tortured Catholics, whilst believing in the same original scriptures, also thought that what they were doing was right, and therefore not con-artists.
Do you know what Lewis meant when he spoke of "Christianity" in this inclusive way? (Does anybody here know what Vlad means by "Christianity" when he speaks of it as a sort of unified 'Platonic' idea?)
I wonder what Lewis' stance on transubstantiation was.
-
Lewis on Transubstantiation
'I don’t know and can’t imagine what the disciples understood our Lord to mean when, His body still unbroken and His blood unshed, He handed them the bread and wine, saying they were His body and blood…I find ‘substance’ (in Aristotle’s sense), when stripped of its own accidents and endowed with the accidents of some other substance, an object I cannot think…On the other hand, I get no better with those who tell me that the elements are mere bread and mere wine, used symbolically to remind me of the death of Christ. They are, on the natural level, such a very odd symbol of that…and I cannot see why this particular reminder – a hundred other things may, psychologically, remind me of Christ’s death, equally, or perhaps more – should be so uniquely important as all Christendom (and my own heart) unhesitatingly declare…Yet I find no difficulty in believing that the veil between the worlds, nowhere else (for me) so opaque to the intellect, is nowhere else so thin and permeable to divine operation. Here a hand from the hidden country touches not only my soul but my body. Here the prig, the don, the modern , in me have no privilege over the savage or the child. Here is big medicine and strong magic…the command, after all, was Take, eat: not Take, understand.'
-
Lewis on Transubstantiation
" Here is big medicine and strong magic."
Heap big medicine, Kemosabe!
-
White man speak with forked tongue.
-
The thread that cultural sensitivity forgot ::) :)
-
Oh gosh, is this racist? I'll just sneak one more in, from John le Carre actually, 'too much wampum not good for braves'.
-
Heap big medicine, Kemosabe!
Does that make you Chief Running Skidmark?
-
I rather think that those who dismiss the dilemma do so because, having weaved the story that believers are thick, mad or have some mental incompetence, and that atheists are intellectually superior, you can hardly go on to admit that such a crew as the Christians could be capable of the biggest caper, heist, con, hustle in history. The gymnastic predicament of those that don't accept the dilemma is IMV highly entertaining.
Of course there is a serious side in not calling out spade for spade and that is the promotion of vague generalities which legitimise fence squatting and lack of focus.
-
I rather think that those who dismiss the dilemma do so because, having weaved the story that believers are thick, mad or have some mental incompetence, and that atheists are intellectually superior, you can hardly go on to admit that such a crew as the Christians could be capable of the biggest caper, heist, con, hustle in history. The gymnastic predicament of those that don't accept the dilemma is IMV highly entertaining.
Of course there is a serious side in not calling out spade for spade and that is the promotion of vague generalities which legitimise fence squatting and lack of focus.
So, Mohammed?
Mad, bad or the perpetrator of the (2nd?) biggest con in history?
Which one do you go for?
-
I rather think that those who dismiss the dilemma do so because, having weaved the story that believers are thick, mad or have some mental incompetence, and that atheists are intellectually superior, you can hardly go on to admit that such a crew as the Christians could be capable of the biggest caper, heist, con, hustle in history.
Is this a joke? It's difficult to see what you might actually be suggesting here. A 2000 year conspiracy (silly)? Just a few people at the start (slightly less silly but to what end)?
The gymnastic predicament of those that don't accept the dilemma is IMV highly entertaining.
Of course there is a serious side in not calling out spade for spade and that is the promotion of vague generalities which legitimise fence squatting and lack of focus.
Much easier to just say that we should all indulge in black and white-ism rather than to actually address how the grey can be ruled out, eh?
Basically, this is all empty wordage to avoid addressing the actual points that have been raised. Par for the course... ::)
-
This is as big and steaming a pile of horseshit as the trilemma.
He should have stuck to mediaeval literature. Apparently he was quite good at that, once.
You are being unfair, try reading That Hideous Strength it is genuinely creepy, and with modern CGI it could be filmed.
-
You're certainly right there, Humph. I've read it four or five times. His best!
-
You are being unfair, try reading That Hideous Strength it is genuinely creepy, and with modern CGI it could be filmed.
Not sure that that was why Shaker was on about, but you are right. It would make an interesting adaptation
-
Finding it rather touching that anyone thinks that Lewis' dilemma is worth considering these days.
-
Given the gist of the first few posts I took it that the reference was to Lewis the writer. His fiction and his Christian books like Mere Christianity and the Screwtape Letters.
Again, another thread where the 'personal opinion' outweighs the literary or logical and intelligent aspects of arguments from a learned man to consider Christ being true or false.
Which of you have had books published?
Which of you will be remembered long after their death for personal achievements.
Christ and Lewis have this in common. The things they said and what has been written remain.
Instead of personal opinions based solely on your beliefs let us have arguments concerning what Lewis wrote and evidence to dismiss them. Dilemma in the making.
Belief is personal choice...isn't it?
Just as your personal opinion and choice decides what you think of others.
-
Christ and Lewis have this in common. The things they said and what has been written remain.
The same applies to Hitler and Stalin. So?
Jackie Collins gets books published by the gazillion. It is proof of nothing other than a section of the reading public like a good romp.
-
Instead of personal opinions based solely on your beliefs let us have arguments concerning what Lewis wrote and evidence to dismiss them.
Arguments about what he wrote and the evidence for it and rationality of it (or lack thereof) is exactly what is being discussed.
Belief is personal choice...isn't it?
No.
-
Given the gist of the first few posts I took it that the reference was to Lewis the writer. His fiction and his Christian books like Mere Christianity and the Screwtape Letters.
Again, another thread where the 'personal opinion' outweighs the literary or logical and intelligent aspects of arguments from a learned man to consider Christ being true or false.
Which of you have had books published?
Which of you will be remembered long after their death for personal achievements.
Christ and Lewis have this in common. The things they said and what has been written remain.
Instead of personal opinions based solely on your beliefs let us have arguments concerning what Lewis wrote and evidence to dismiss them. Dilemma in the making.
Belief is personal choice...isn't it?
Just as your personal opinion and choice decides what you think of others.
Actually I have had quite a bit of my written work published over the years, famously my 9/11 poem, which the Chief fire officer of the Pentagon Fire Service saw on-line and contacted me to get my permission so he could print it out and display it in their fire office. Maybe I will be remembered in a few thousand years time and worshipped. YEH RIGHT ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Given the gist of the first few posts I took it that the reference was to Lewis the writer. His fiction and his Christian books like Mere Christianity and the Screwtape Letters.
Again, another thread where the 'personal opinion' outweighs the literary or logical and intelligent aspects of arguments from a learned man to consider Christ being true or false.
Which of you have had books published?
Which of you will be remembered long after their death for personal achievements.
Christ and Lewis have this in common. The things they said and what has been written remain.
Instead of personal opinions based solely on your beliefs let us have arguments concerning what Lewis wrote and evidence to dismiss them. Dilemma in the making.
Belief is personal choice...isn't it?
Just as your personal opinion and choice decides what you think of others.
FTR I have had some poetry published, albeit it was on the understanding that any profits would go towards the costs of the next edition, and Mrs Bennett has had three books published, which can be purchased on Amazon. And YES Mrs Bennett has been paid & received profits, although I am not giving our names for obvious reasons.
-
FTR I have had some poetry published, albeit it was on the understanding that any profits would go towards the costs of the next edition, and Mrs Bennett has had three books published, which can be purchased on Amazon. And YES Mrs Bennett has been paid & received profits, although I am not giving our names for obvious reasons.
Nice one! :)
-
You're certainly right there, Humph. I've read it four or five times. His best!
The revelation that The Head of the N.I.C.E (who are anything but) really is a head, is a glorious piece of thrilling macabre writing!
-
You are being unfair, try reading That Hideous Strength it is genuinely creepy, and with modern CGI it could be filmed.
Yes, Lewis could be a very imaginative writer of fiction, and the Cosmic Trilogy (inc THS) is some of the best in the fantasy genre (though I could do without some of the pompous sermonising and bombastic prose in Perelandra). Till We Have Faces is, I think, a masterpiece.
However, that is not what the main topic of this thread is about, which is Lewis' simplistic theological propositions. If his trilemma could be demolished by an intelligent 13 year old (it could), then his dilemma, is as Rhiannon suggests, a source of amusement at best.
-
Yes, Lewis could be a very imaginative writer of fiction, and the Cosmic Trilogy (inc THS) is some of the best in the fantasy genre (though I could do without some of the pompous sermonising and bombastic prose in Perelandra). Till We Have Faces is, I think, a masterpiece.
However, that is not what the main topic of this thread is about, which is Lewis' simplistic theological propositions. If his trilemma could be demolished by an intelligent 13 year old (it could), then his dilemma, is as Rhiannon suggests, a source of amusement at best.
The recent work on the trilemma by contemporary atheists is a bit sad because it is at best an attempt via categorory buggeration to turn three into four or five or whatever .i.e. Pathetic and then rounding of with more bolt holes through which to evade.
Dismissal of the dilemma is a necessity if you've declared Christians stupid.After all how could a Christian possibly run the biggest scam in history.
-
The recent work on the trilemma by contemporary atheists is a bit sad because it is at best an attempt via categorory buggeration to turn three into four or five or whatever .i.e. Pathetic and then rounding of with more bolt holes through which to evade.
Are you categororically sure about that?
-
Dismissal of the dilemma is a necessity if you've declared Christians stupid.After all how could a Christian possibly run the biggest scam in history.
Could a Muslim possibly run the 2nd biggest scam in history?
You seem to be hiding in your own nuclear bunker on that one!
I wonder why?
-
You are being unfair, try reading That Hideous Strength it is genuinely creepy, and with modern CGI it could be filmed.
It has been considered: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls008000807/
-
The recent work on the trilemma by contemporary atheists is a bit sad because it is at best an attempt via categorory buggeration to turn three into four or five or whatever .i.e. Pathetic and then rounding of with more bolt holes through which to evade.
Dismissal of the dilemma is a necessity if you've declared Christians stupid.After all how could a Christian possibly run the biggest scam in history.
Many other options have been pointed out, both for the dilemma and trilemma. Instead of spluttering out incoherent insults, why not try to explain how you think they can be ruled out?
-
It has been considered: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls008000807/
Thanks for that. I am not so sure about Helena Bonham Carter, I would have gone for Pam Ferris.
-
The recent work on the trilemma by contemporary atheists is a bit sad because it is at best an attempt via categorory buggeration to turn three into four or five or whatever .i.e. Pathetic and then rounding of with more bolt holes through which to evade.
Dismissal of the dilemma is a necessity if you've declared Christians stupid.After all how could a Christian possibly run the biggest scam in history.
Either you let the atheists add more categories or you force them to choose one of the two unpalatable (to Christians) options. I think that is the real flaw in his argument: he relies on the generally Christian sensibilities of the time that cause people to recoil from the liar and lunatic options.
If Jesus was a liar or a lunatic, what of it? If he was anything like modern cult leaders, he was probably a bit of both.
-
Either you let the atheists add more categories or you force them to choose one of the two unpalatable (to Christians) options. I think that is the real flaw in his argument: he relies on the generally Christian sensibilities of the time that cause people to recoil from the liar and lunatic options.
If Jesus was a liar or a lunatic, what of it? If he was anything like modern cult leaders, he was probably a bit of both.
Though Lewis was writing at a time when there was a greater religious knowledge at the time Jeremy you have to demonstrate that the general vagueness, religious ignorance, reduced understanding or will to understand religion, and general apatheism is the better position from which to assess the dilemma or trilemma.
It seems as only Chris Hutchins realised the force of the trilemma and dilemma and certainly was not afraid to come down in favour of 'bad'
-
Though Lewis was writing at a time when there was a greater religious knowledge at the time Jeremy you have to demonstrate that the general vagueness, religious ignorance, reduced understanding or will to understand religion, and general apatheism is the better position from which to assess the dilemma or trilemma.
It seems as only Chris Hutchins realised the force of the trilemma and dilemma and certainly was not afraid to come down in favour of 'bad'
The force of the trilemma comes from people have social taboos against thinking bad things off Jesus. It's not a good argument in favour of him being God.
-
The force of the trilemma comes from people have social taboos against thinking bad things off Jesus. It's not a good argument in favour of him being God.
I completely disagree.
The force is in focussing the person onto the alternatives.
As I say only Chris Hutchins apparently realised the commitments which the dilemma and trilemma focus people onto.
-
I completely disagree.
The force is in focussing the person onto the alternatives.
As I say only Chris Hutchins apparently realised the commitments which the dilemma and trilemma focus people onto.
OK so Jesus was either a liar or a lunatic and Christianity is the biggest con job in history. Time to start arresting all the people using it to extort money out of the marks. We should start with the Pope and the Arch Bish. of C.
-
The trilemma was a totally naive or disingenuous statement(or indeed a bit of both). Its proposition is particularly limiting and, because of this, I find it of little significance. There is no reason to think that Jesus couldn't have been both deranged and a liar(or any combination of both). Indeed, if one believes in the idea of a god, then I suggest that he could have been a combination of all three. Only if you start off by believing in the Christian idea of a God, can you possibly discount the first two by favouring the third, in which case it is particularly useless proposition as it relies heavily on faith rather than any rational approach. I have no such commitments.
-
The trilemma was a totally naive or disingenuous statement(or indeed a bit of both). Its proposition is particularly limiting and, because of this, I find it of little significance. There is no reason to think that Jesus couldn't have been both deranged and a liar(or any combination of both). Indeed, if one believes in the idea of a god, then I suggest that he could have been a combination of all three. Only if you start off by believing in the Christian idea of a God, can you possibly discount the first two by favouring the third, in which case it is particularly useless proposition as it relies heavily on faith rather than any rational approach. I have no such commitments.
Is that the rational approach that has led us to the illusion of self?
-
Is that the rational approach that has led us to the illusion of self?
Haven't a clue what you are on about in relation to what I have said. So I can't answer your question....if you expected an answer, that is.
-
The same applies to Hitler and Stalin. So?
Jackie Collins gets books published by the gazillion. It is proof of nothing other than a section of the reading public like a good romp.
Have they been talked about for over 2,000 years without having been in newspapers etc?
You see the difference between tabloid and the news media around the world which wasn't around 2,000 years ago.
Going to have to wait 2,000 years before you can compare.
-
I know its hard for you to understand Sassy but you brought the idea of contemperaneous comparison up when you queried whether anyone on the board was a published writer as if that had some bearng on the veracity or otherwise of the claims you made.
-
I know its hard for you to understand Sassy but you brought the idea of contemperaneous comparison up when you queried whether anyone on the board was a published writer as if that had some bearng on the veracity or otherwise of the claims you made.
Given the gist of the first few posts I took it that the reference was to Lewis the writer. His fiction and his Christian books like Mere Christianity and the Screwtape Letters.
Again, another thread where the 'personal opinion' outweighs the literary or logical and intelligent aspects of arguments from a learned man to consider Christ being true or false.
Which of you have had books published?
Which of you will be remembered long after their death for personal achievements.
Christ and Lewis have this in common. The things they said and what has been written remain.
Instead of personal opinions based solely on your beliefs let us have arguments concerning what Lewis wrote and evidence to dismiss them. Dilemma in the making.
Belief is personal choice...isn't it?
Just as your personal opinion and choice decides what you think of others.
So how do you compare the published writers of the bible to the times C S Lewis books were written?
You see Christ coming and his writings about him were before and after him.
CS Lewis was well after both. But how do you comparison?
Red Herring... why? Do you think you are somehow above average in your intelligence and even more intelligent than believers?
Instead of personal opinions based solely on your beliefs let us have arguments concerning what Lewis wrote and evidence to dismiss them. Dilemma in the making.
Belief is personal choice...isn't it?
Just as your personal opinion and choice decides what you think of others.
I know it isn't a mistake by you on your part as I was very clear as you see above.
I can only state you have proved me right....Just as your personal opinion and choice decides what you think of others.
By all means bring an acceptable argument or point of view but don't try blind siding because you believe your opinion of someone shows you believe them to be incapable of seeing what you are saying or what you are up to. DISAPPOINTED IN YOU. :(