the "manmade" God.

[theculturewarrior]

From the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [url="http://www.iep.utm.edu/k/kantmeta.htm"]http://www.iep.utm.edu/k/kantmeta.htm[/url]

[quote]The project of the Critique of Pure Reason is also challenging because in the analysis of the mind's transcendental contributions to experience we must employ the mind, the only tool we have, to investigate the mind. We must use the faculties of knowledge to determine the limits of knowledge, so Kant's Critique of Pure Reason is both a critique that takes pure reason as its subject matter, and a critique that is conducted by pure reason.

[/quote]

[theculturewarrior]

[url="http://www.iep.utm.edu/d/descarte.htm"]http://www.iep.utm.edu/d/descarte.htm[/url]

[theculturewarrior]

I forgot to say...more to come.

That's quite a book list!

[Melchisedec]

[quote name='theculturewarrior' date='Apr 11 2005, 03:47 PM'] From the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [url="http://www.iep.utm.edu/k/kantmeta.htm"]http://www.iep.utm.edu/k/kantmeta.htm[/url]

[/quote]
Great stuff! A friend of mine had also suggested kant, but I'm still working my way up to him.

[theculturewarrior]

[quote name='theculturewarrior' date='Apr 11 2005, 03:30 PM'] In the meanwhile...

How do you know that the sky is real? [/quote]
...

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='theculturewarrior' date='Apr 11 2005, 03:30 PM'] In the meanwhile...

How do you know that the sky is real? [/quote]
So my question to you, then, is this: How do you deal with those of us who do believe that it's possible that there is no such thing as 'reality' and that the sky could be a figment of our collective imaginations? I don't take it on faith that the sky (or whatever) is real, but I don't believe that my life would be altered one mote if it were proven illusory. It simply [i]does not matter[/i] whether it is real or not.

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='theculturewarrior' date='Apr 9 2005, 02:54 PM'] Melchisedec asked the question, "Can God exist without man?"

My answer, taken on faith, is that God has existed without man, but since God is True God, and True Man, theoretically, there has to be at least one Man.

The question at hand is who made who, God, or man?

Matters of faith have the quality of unfalsifiability. They can neither be proved or disproved scientifically. Prophecies have the quality of self-fulfillment, as do prayers. People of faith often cling to their faith when faced with evidence to the contrary.

The thing is, religion isn't the only thing taken on faith. That I am truly alive and that what I sense is real are matters I take on faith, and matters that have been challenged by secular philosophers, matters with the qualities of unfalsifiability, and to my experience, "self-fulfullment."

It would seem that man cannot escape the qualities that are inherent in any worldview, to greater or lesser extents. My question is, why?

Why is man a religious being? Why is faith also an "inherent" quality in man, along with goodness? Where does it come from? That men die celibate for something or Someone they literally can't see or hear strikes me as an evolutionary defect, unless there is a God.

More to come. [/quote]
Obviously I believe that man created god(s/dess/desses) instead of the other way around. Older myths are more directly relational to those questions which were unanswered/able. Christianity's beliefs are neither new nor unique. Nor are its stories -- and don't get me wrong here, I have no problem with story adaptation, Shakespeare is one of my favorite authors. The problem is with christianity's belief that it's first at all of this and best because it has lasted a long time. Anyway, you really want to know what I think, read my sig.

[Socrates]

As I have said before, Christianity's claims (when looked at closely) are (or were) new and unique.

It is the only religion claiming its Founder, a particular historical figure, was in fact God Himself.

True, other religions have myths with somewhat similar themes, but they take place in a vague mythic time, and do not concren a particular person in a particular time and place who eyewitnesses have seen, etc, ("In the reign of the Emperor Caesar Augustus.)

ONe must also remember that Judaism's monotheism was unique among the peoples of that time - almost all other surrounding religions worshipped a multitude of gods. Judaism claimed there was only one God, and that no others should be worshipped.

You need to give some specific examples of what Christianity supposedly "stole" from other religions.

[Jaime]

I'm sure that Mel (shortening the name a bit to not cause typos. no offense) could offer a bunch of examples that appear to be "borrowed" from another religion.

In fact, so could I and every theologian here.

Creation story
Ten Commandments
Virgin Birth
Darth Vader being the father of Luke Skywalker

But I digress.

Are there similarities? You bet! There are universal truths to all cultures. Take death for example. There are three components to dealing with death that every single culture on earth abide by

There is a public viewing of the corpse
There is disposal of the body
There is a ceremony that incorporates a greater belief.

Doesn't matter what the culture is, these three things are a part of the ritual.

The question boils down to "How does a finite human comprehend what he perceives to be infinite?"

There lies the crux. One can argue that to resolve the unresolvable, man creates God. One can also argue that God is trying to connect to humanity to help us understand what cannot be comprehended fully.

There are similarities that cannot be explained through plagiarism. It is literally impossible for the Israelites to borrow from the Mayans. Yet there are similarities. Because there are similarities, that can strengthen the argument that God is indeed working through all cultures and not just one.

[burnsspivey]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Apr 12 2005, 12:11 PM'] As I have said before, Christianity's claims (when looked at closely) are (or were) new and unique.

It is the only religion claiming its Founder, a particular historical figure, was in fact God Himself. [/quote]
Should I assume that you mean Jesus here? Because this statement simply doesn't make sense. What do you mean by "founder"? And how does christianity's "founder" differ from judaism's?

[quote]True, other religions have myths with somewhat similar themes, but they take place in a vague mythic time, and do not concren a particular person in a particular time and place who eyewitnesses have seen, etc, ("In the reign of the Emperor Caesar Augustus.)[/quote]

Just because a work incorporates real people doesn't make it non-fiction. Nor does that validate its uniqueness.

[quote]ONe must also remember that Judaism's monotheism was unique among the peoples of that time - almost all other surrounding religions worshipped a multitude of gods.  Judaism claimed there was only one God, and that no others should be worshipped.[/quote]

Zoroastrianism was also presumptively unique at its time. And?

[quote]You need to give some specific examples of what Christianity supposedly "stole" from other religions.[/quote]

Who said christianity stole from other religions? And, I believe that Melchisedec gave a list of books above that deal with themes in christianity that appear elsewhere.

Edited April 12, 2005 by burnsspivey

[Socrates]

[quote name='burnsspivey' date='Apr 12 2005, 01:43 PM'] Should I assume that you mean Jesus here? Because this statement simply doesn't make sense. What do you mean by "founder"? And how does christianity's "founder" differ from judaism's?

[/quote]
Of course I mean Jesus. As a Christian, I beleive God is the true founder also of the Jewish religion which was fulfilled in Christ. However, neither Abraham, nor Moses, nor any of the other Jewish prophets claimed to be God or the Messiah. Jesus did. That is the unique claim of Christianity. Any Jew would immediately recognize the difference. That is why the Jewish leaders condemned Jesus to death for blasphemy.

[quote]Just because a work incorporates real people doesn't make it non-fiction.  Nor does that validate its uniqueness.[/quote]

You may believe the Christian Gospels are fiction. Christians believe them to be fact (Gospel Truth!). You haven't contradicted my point. What other religions have documents which make the same claims as the Gospels?

[quote]Zoroastrianism was also presumptively unique at its time.  And?[/quote]

Zoroastrianism appeared long after the Judaism. Judaism is the first major monotheistic religion.

[quote]Who said christianity stole from other religions?  And, I believe that Melchisedec gave a list of books above that deal with themes in christianity that appear elsewhere.[/quote]

All religions deal with some similar themes (creation, the meaning of life, death, the afterlife, etc.) It is the particular claim of Christianity that is unique.

[theculturewarrior]

<hijack>Hmmm...

I'm in a little over my head with this, but I know that Chesterton and the Inklings were not afraid of Christianity and its mythological predecessors. Maybe somebody else knows more about this. Tolkien considered Christianity a myth, but he also considered it the Truth. It was the True Myth.

Thus the quote I posted earlier in this thread. "A legend is written by the majority of the people in the village who are sane. A book is written by the one man in the village who is mad."

</hijack>

[theculturewarrior]

[quote name='burnsspivey' date='Apr 12 2005, 10:39 AM'] So my question to you, then, is this: How do you deal with those of us who do believe that it's possible that there is no such thing as 'reality' and that the sky could be a figment of our collective imaginations? I don't take it on faith that the sky (or whatever) is real, but I don't believe that my life would be altered one mote if it were proven illusory. It simply [i]does not matter[/i] whether it is real or not. [/quote]
I guess my point was that on a certain level, it takes at least some faith to know reality. You can say, "the sky is real." And I can say, "how do you know?" And you can say, "because I sense it." And I can say, "why do you trust your senses?" We could continue ad nauseam. But after a certain point, you would simply have to trust your principles. That's faith.

That you find reality irrelavent is outside of my original assertion.

To mel...I haven't forgotten about this thread, I've just been busy. Bibliography to come. In the meanwhile, could you please give the complete bibliographic information on the books you've listed?

God bless,

TCW

[theculturewarrior]

Q: How is it more plausible to say that man created God, than to say that God created man as a religious being? I don't think that has been answered.

I would also say, that the Catholic Church does not claim to have a historical monopoly on Truth, as if there is nothing true in other Faiths. The difference, it seems to me, is that the Church has holds the Truth more fully and more carefully than any other faith, and man needs the whole Truth.

[theculturewarrior]

[quote name='burnsspivey' date='Apr 12 2005, 01:43 PM']
Who said christianity stole from other religions?  And, I believe that Melchisedec gave a list of books above that deal with themes in christianity that appear elsewhere. [/quote]
Yeah, I was looking for information on the authors, and I couldn't find anything except on one. (Thus the request for more information).

The only thing I could find was on Freke, and he didn't seem to be much of an authority. He has a BA in philosophy and writes books on "spiritualism." I could not find any indication that his views belonged to an academic consensus, or represented it best.

That's not to say I think Christianity's mythical predecessors are an invention of Mel's authors. But to say that Christianity is a fabrication, well, I don't see how one proceeds from the other.