Fanatical Believing Humans [Podcast]
Steve is back sans Josh... but there's a good reason. Steve talks about belief, basketball and his boy. In the end, we are all just Stupid Church People.
Download it here or subscribe via
This will be a new weekly podcast. Make sure to subscribe so you don't miss anything. Don't forget to go to Josh's Blog for more info for his weekly call-in show "SCP|Talk".
Download it here or subscribe via
This will be a new weekly podcast. Make sure to subscribe so you don't miss anything. Don't forget to go to Josh's Blog for more info for his weekly call-in show "SCP|Talk".
posted by Steve at
4/01/2009
7 Comments:
Last night's show was a blast. I felt bad because I cut Zeke and Ninja off a few times, but other than that (and my crappy mic) it was a great time. I look forward to next week's show.
Good stuff. Amusingly, you have that teaching (preaching?) habit of repeating key points. Which is adorable.
Truth versus belief is an interesting intellectual exercise, especially when you dive into empiricism. By the time you're done, you can start doubting the outside world and end up paranoid. However, while many things can be proven (albeit, at a great inconvenience), religion is not one of them, hence why we gather here and elsewhere.
Also, apologies for last night; I must confess that I was the mysterious "Guest 3." I hadn't the time to sign up before the show began, and I'd things to tend to during. Incidentally, chat really lags and makes it difficult to stay relevant...
Worst experience I had with the "I just know it's true" phenomenon was when this guy from our church told our daughter that if they only prayed with more faith then my wife's chronic illnesses would be cured. I took him aside, showed him a number of scripture passages that shot holes in his name-it-and-claim-it belief system and asked him to apologize to my daughter for upsetting her. His response? "I know it's true because the Spirit confirmed it to me."
Friggin' d-bag.
I think a sign of how relevant/true something is/could be is by how much damage it can/does cause.
Zeke, I am deeply saddened by what that Frak-head said to your daughter. I personally would have shoved his spirit-confirmation right up his spiritually ignorant ass...but I'm just old school like that.
I'm sorry I wasn't able to join the maiden voyage, but I'm eager to listen to it, and possible join in on future excursions.
good times.
steve...sorry, I confused your show with Josh's new one. I didn't realize you guys were running solo projects.
Quick feedback on your first solo ride.
The truth about truth: If I understand you correctly, you are claiming the authority to debunk the 'truth' about the self-proclamations of the bible (and thus Christianity) based on the fact that you have no tangible evidence of it in your life? So the millions of believers (both past and present) who would claim otherwise, based on their own claims of personal evidence in their lives (proof of course being subjective), are what...liars, fools, wrong? All of them?
I get that it all hinges on belief, but just as you claim that the 'truth' can not be proven, so can you not disprove it based soley on your own life experiences...right?
I always view those who stand up in front of the masses claiming superior knowledge of 'truth' as rather selfrighteous...please help me understand how I shouldn't toss you behind that same pulpit?
I don't think I am claiming authority other than a belief isn't really "knowing" anything.... and I am not basing it on the fact that it isn't tangible in my life, I am basing it on the fact that in no way shape or form is believing the same as knowing anything.
As far as the millions of believers out there, I would say that they have certainly had experiences that affirm their beliefs... but it doesn't change the fact that, as you say, it is subjective. I wouldn't call them liars or fools or wrong... I would call them believers.
And I am not sure I said I could disprove "truth". Why would I say that? Truth is truth. 2 + 2 = 4. Truth. Proven. Fact. I think all I was saying (as nauseum possibly) is that belief in something doesn't make it real or true or right simply because one believes it.
I didn't claim superior knowledge of truth... just pointed out some things regarding what it isn't.
steve,
I guess what I was saying, without spelling it out, is that what many of those people have ARE events/happenings that qualify as evidence/facts to validate their beliefs as their truth (again...eye of the beholder, which also however does not automatically discredit all).
I would agree that the existance of God will never (short of Him busting out an O.T. style miracle or apperance) be a universal truth, but I do think that one (or a group of ones) can have valid truths that might not be universal. IOW just because a scientific team, recognized by the global community, doesn't come out and determin the truthiness of a belief doesn't discount the possibility (there are definitely plenty of crazy's out there) that these claims are in fact universally true.
I get a very black or white kind of finality vibe from your reasoning. I think its a fair statement to say that the world as we know it just doesn't fit in to those kind of clean and well defined categories. Even on a non-spiritual level there are still so many mysteries regarding life and existance that will most likely never be fully understood. I think the reality of that 'X' factor must be included when determining what a 'truth' really is, and for whom.
IMO, sometimes the mystery IS the truth...but not always, nor should that be an easy spiritual cop-out!
Great topic. I look forward to hearing/reading more on this.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home