False premises

[MQTA]

http://www.christianforums.com/t2229431-th...=7#post19431677

 

Post #67

 

You say that one needs God to unlock the mysteries. I pointed out that while yours is certainly a possible interpretation of what we see, I find it much more likely that one needs a belief in "God" to blind one to the fact that the "mysteries" are inventions with no objective truth or meaning.

 

That is:

 

You say that one who adopts your belief system will admit the truth of your system's tenets, and purportedly understand them. I do not disagree with this.

 

However, you state that the reason for this is that faith in your belief system is a prerequisite for understanding. With this, I do not agree, because it seems to me that "understanding" is a prerequisite for faith in your belief system, rather than the other way around.

 

I consider your belief in God to be a false premise. I also observe that any false premise leads a person who accepts it by faith to believe false things; and I observe that such a person will be certain that these false things are true. I agree that we also see this effect on people who accept the "God" premise by faith; but I don't agree that the certainty reached by this method (which you call a special understanding of truth) is different from the false certainty reached by accepting any false premise.

 

It is true that if I have faith in a God who answers prayer, I will come to "understand" that prayer is effective; but even if that God is not real, and prayer is completely ineffective, I can hardly avoid that "understanding" once I've chosen to place faith in that particular God. A God who answers prayer logically requires the efficacy of prayer; thus, if your premise (God) is false, then your conclusion is likewise false, no matter how strongly you think you understand it.

 

It is trivial to observe that if one accepts a proposition, one must also accept its corollaries. However, the rules of logic plainly show that one cannot make the corollaries true by arbitrarily stating that the premises are true; that is, you cannot "discover" the mysteries of God by assuming the premises that require them. Rather, you can lead yourself to conclusions based on those premises, and your conclusions will be either true or false depending on the truth of your premises.

 

Or to put it another way, certainty does not make truth; you might reach a conclusion of which you are certain, if you use premises that you consider certain, but if your premises are false, no amount of false certainty (reached through faith in false premises) is sufficient to make your conclusions true.

 

What a post! WTG

[Mythra]

That is a good post. Everything I'd say if I was in possession of the articulatory repertoire..

 

When I get to that point, I usually just say "bullshit".

 

I shoulda stayed in school.