Rationality & Christianity: Mutually Exclusive?

[Idaho]

Taking one's religion seriously is rather the antithesis of British values.

Such nonsense! And bizzare coming from you. This has been a very devout christian country, and a radical and revolutionary religious country.

The move to secular humanism has been dramatic in the last 100 years - but that's something that you have always been against.

I suppose, as a religious man, you shouldn't be expected to be rational.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Such nonsense! And bizzare coming from you. This has been a very devout christian country, and a radical and revolutionary religious country.

Religion hasn't really been taken seriously in the UK since the ascension of Queen Victoria. It was taken seriously by people in the colonies, to be sure, but that's why those people went out to the colonies.

The move to secular humanism has been dramatic in the last 100 years - but that's something that you have always been against.

Secular Humanism is an invention of the last few decades, but Humanists have always tended to be secular. Christian and Islamic Humanists frequently had more in common with each other than with the tradionalists and fundamentalists in their own camp.

I suppose, as a religious man, you shouldn't be expected to be rational.

That's rather like me say that, as an atheist, you shouldn't be expected to be kind.

Isn't it?

[Idaho]

That's rather like me say that, as an atheist, you shouldn't be expected to be kind.

Isn't it?

No, because it isn't an essential feature of atheism to not be kind. But you can't be a christian unless you embrace the irrational.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

No, because it isn't an essential feature of atheism to not be kind. But you can't be a christian unless you embrace the irrational.

You claim is baseless and can be easily disproved, it depends on all Christians being a certain type, which they are not.

Again, it's like me saying all love and kindness comes from God - and because Atheists reject God they are neither loving nor kind. Now, to be clear, this statement would apply only to atheists.

[Idaho]

I'm intrigued as to how you can be a rational christian. I accept that you can be a Christian and be rational in your everyday life. But how about with regard to a magic man who had special powers and was created by God impregnating a woman who gave birth a month later?

[Pannonian]

I'm intrigued as to how you can be a rational christian. I accept that you can be a Christian and be rational in your everyday life. But how about with regard to a magic man who had special powers and was created by God impregnating a woman who gave birth a month later?

It's possible to be rational with values derived from Christianity though. The best of the British left is descended from movements relating to or derived from the UK's various Christian denominations. Probably the most dominant of all philosophical feelings though is a dislike of evangelism of any kind, whether religious or otherwise. Atheist evangelism is just as bad as Christian evangelism. As long as one does not impose one's values on others, it doesn't matter much what kind of rational or nutcase being one is.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'm intrigued as to how you can be a rational christian. I accept that you can be a Christian and be rational in your everyday life. But how about with regard to a magic man who had special powers and was created by God impregnating a woman who gave birth a month later?

At the end of the day everybody's metaphysics and cosmology are "irrational" because we all start from a point where where there is no evidence.

Atheists believe the universe spontaneously came into existence, Christians believe the universe was created by God.

Atheists believe the universe operates according to logical and consistent laws (except for Quantum Theory), Christians believe that the universe operates according to logical and consistent laws (except for Quantum Theory and Divine Intervention).

Once one accepts the existence of an omniscient being then things like virgin conception and walking on water are trivial and the existence/non-existence of God is a neutrally weighted question because there's no evidence one way or the other.

As regards Jesus specifically, most Christians accept that he violated the laws of Physics (although he was born after nine months, not one) and therefore they don't try to explain his miracles using Cod science, they simply say that Jesus "cheated" by being outside the rules that govern the universe. If you think that's a lot to accept, given that he was INSIDE the universe whilst also being OUTSIDE it and was able to pick and choose then you really should look at some of the modern theorems in Physics because they sound just as odd.

This viewpoint is fundamentally different to people who say the universe is 6,000 years old despite all the evidence to the contrary.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I'm intrigued as to how you can be a rational christian. I accept that you can be a Christian and be rational in your everyday life. But how about with regard to a magic man who had special powers and was created by God impregnating a woman who gave birth a month later?

Christians do not believe in a magic man or a sky fairy or other such nonsense, nor is belief in a Supreme Being comparable to them.

If you want to use that silly language then by the same token I suppose you believe in a magic explosion, which is a similarly untestable hypothesis since of course we can't recreate the conditions of the Big Bang.