Spock speaks!

12308263_10156105907400467_4220658945334314341_n

The great Christian Biblical scholar Tom Wright actually wrote this in his book Who Was Jesus? I recall being stunned when I first read it as a Christian. As Spock, son of Sarek, says: Highly illogical.



Categories: Christianity, God

25 replies

  1. So God didn’t know he was God. Yep, sounds perfectly logical. Paul, you just don’t get it bro, you need to study Trinitarian logic and then it will all make sense..lol

    Maybe N.T. Wright was referring to Kashmir Saivism, where Shiva gets lost in his own self projected creation and is blinded by his self imposed Maya and forgets he is the supreme being. Ok,my head hurts…lol

    Liked by 1 person

  2. No, No, No! We can’t understand God so therefore we can’t understand the trinity yet our religion makes perfect sense at the same time because it is still relevant today in this crazy modern world where nothing makes sense. Remember when you contradict yourself and are in doubt call for the holy ghost to fly in like a caped superhero to save the day. Remember he will make falsehood into truth!

    Liked by 4 people

  3. I imagine Spock would consider most elements of most religions to be illogical.

    Like

  4. Belief in 1 God, Creator of all things is logical. Believing that the immortal God actually died is illogical. Obviously.

    Like

  5. Belief in a deity would be completely illogical from a scientific perspective.

    Like

    • How is it so?

      I believe there is ultimate intelligent being (the One and only Deity) who had created this amazing universe where I live. Why is it illogical from scientific perspective?

      Like

    • It cannot be verified through scientific means. It is purely an article of faith, which is by definition illogical. Might it be true? I cannot say, from a theological perspective. From a scientific perspective, it doesn’t qualify.

      Like

    • Theology aside, there are many theories of modern science which don’t rely on the verification from empirical findings. Einstein postulated relativity theory which brings us the idea of space time realm. Is it illogical to believe that time travel possible? Based on Einstein general relativity theory, it is not.

      Like

    • Why is faith by definition illogical?
      And why do you believe that if science cannot address an issue then it is not worth considering?

      Logic and physics are two different forms of knowledge where the former involves the use of ones reason and the latter drawing on observation and experimentation. Your comment i believe demonstrates two seperate ways of knowing something to be true.

      Liked by 2 people

  6. Faith is not an article of fact – it cannot be quantified or measured in empirical terms. This is not to say it’s not worth considering (I never claimed it should be dismissed), but as a matter of logic, which is rooted in observation and objective fact, is any religion (particularly the Big 3) a logical one?

    Consider it from an observational perspective. We are led to believe through religious texts that an all-powerful deity created the universe. The exact narrative behind this varies, but this is the primary idea of many religions – especially the Big 3. The proof of this is usually found in documents which are self-referential, and rely on events which have never been observed since. It is an article of faith.

    If that is what you believe, more power to you. It is not an exercise in logic though.

    Like

    • Proof of Gods existence can and is often argued without making any references to scriptures no matter the religion. Take C.S Lewis as an obvious example of this. His moral argument doesn’t contain any mention of Christ but demonstrates that there is likely an ‘ought’ behind the function of things.

      Logic is not rooted in observation but rather reason or ‘mind’. Science is rooted in materialism which is a philosophical position that one must first trust to be true in other words ‘faith’. Reason also requires one to trust that their mental faculties work properly to be able to deduce truth. While the two interact with one another, after all one must be able to interpret he data but that does not mean they are the same just as the left and right are the same although they can and do exist in the same space.

      Faith simply put is believe or trust in that which cannot be seen or known through our reason or senses but from as you say an outside source due to it being beyond he capacity of both, however it does not follow that it is unreasonable as does not require you to deny what you see and know. Now that would be grounds to reject a certain faith. This is why the Qur’an and Jesus reularly utilise examples of the world around them in order to make their point about God, he is not a competing explanation for how things came to be, rather they as they function reveal to us such an order and purpose that through them may come to see the one behind it all.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. Eric, there is a stark difference between theories which can be tested (the theory of relativity has recently been tested and evidence that Einstein was right about it has been found) and something that cannot be verified through any means.

    Like

  8. Patrice

    You said;
    Faith simply put is believe or trust in that which cannot be seen or known through our reason or senses but from as you say an outside source due to it being beyond he capacity of both, however it does not follow that it is unreasonable as does not require you to deny what you see and know. Now that would be grounds to reject a certain faith. This is why the Qur’an and Jesus reularly utilise examples of the world around them in order to make their point about God, he is not a competing explanation for how things came to be, rather they as they function reveal to us such an order and purpose that through them may come to see the one behind it all.

    I say;
    God Bless you. You are absolutely right.

    What we don’t know and like it as such i.e. heaven and angel, our is belief. We have not seen it but believe it.

    What we know like 1+1=2 will always be true. Changing it to 1+1=1 will always be wrong even if God says so it will still be illogical and wrong because we know it.

    What ever God says about heaven and angel is right because we have not been to heaven and back or have seen an angel before.

    1+1+1+1=4 and God will not change it because it is true. God will not change true to lie i.e saying 1+1+1+1=5 that will be a lie even if God says so. God does not lie so He will not say so and has never said so.

    Thanks.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Eric, the Theory of Relativity concerns itself with spacetime and how forces can warp it. This has recently been demonstrated in experiments that measure how particles travel when near major gravity wells. The theory itself is grounded in observations and logical thinking – it is not a faith driven position.

    Patrice, moral arguments for the existence of a god or gods are not the same as logical arguments. Logically, no deity has ever revealed themselves to us outside of religious documents, which are self-referential. It is entirely faith-driven, which is the opposite of a logical position. Logically, you do not conclude something exists without at least some form of evidence or a theory which explains the facts that does not introduce extra mechanisms (Occam’s Razor).

    Like

    • I agree with you that moral arguments are different from logical arguments for they unlike logic require ones own experience, however that does not mean that they functional independently in Lewis’ argument for while his point about morality is based upon observation of the outside world (after all he begins his book by describing two people arguing) it does not restrict itself to only that mode of knowledge, but also applies logic for it reasons according to the object (morality) as a sign of authenticity.

      Like

    • If Einstein’s theory had been proven by observations and “logic”then in theory nothing precludes time travel into the past but why can anybody able to beam into the past till now? Do you then need to wait until somebody will truly comeback from the past to have ‘faith’ in time travel ?

      There are scientists which use scientific principles to theorize God existence in logical way and even it’s proven positive in computer simulation. We just do’t have the ability to construct any observeable validation, because we are theorizing a phenomenon beyond our level intelligence and dominion.

      Like

    • Einstein’s theory isn’t the same as being able to construct machines or devices to carry out that feat. His theory regarding the warping of space was a theory that made logic sense back in the 1910s and 1920s but we lacked the technology to test it. I’m not saying time travel is a definite, but please don’t conflate theory with ability.

      Like

    • In that case, time travel “theory”is a mere human attempt to understand some aspect of the universe using human notation (mathematical formula), it is possible and logical , only human shortcomings makes untestable. Nevertheless you allow to have “faith” in the math formula (created by human) explaining without empirical evidences.

      Theist rely on the information given in the God given holybook that “theoretically” One true God , the creator of this universe, exists and He require us to worship Him. Only human do not have the technology or ability to test it.

      Like

    • The key difference here is that a deity cannot be quantified through any measurable means – it is simply postulated as existing, and always existing, defying mechanisms we understand about energy, spacetime and entropy. The ‘faith’ you speak of in scientific equations is grounded in other, verifiable theories and data – it doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Measuring and quantifying a deity through any empirical means is impossible.

      Like

    • Your position use axiom that scientific models human ever attempted (and verified by human weakness) must always be the ultimate truth. This is not the case. Science truth is relative and transient..

      In the 17 century Newton found gravity and theorised it was a constant, instantaneous force, across the entire 3D universe at once.This for long time became standard “truth” and “logic” and people have faith in it. due to this axiom. but not long ago Einstein then came along and punched a hole in Newton’s truth. Nothing universally constant and instant about gravity at all, there are infinite gravitational forces across his 4-D space-time universe, although no instruments can neither see nor measure space-time, yet this model is thought to be the truth till now and God knows when it will be re-assesed again.

      Just because deity cannot be quantified through any measurable means believing in it does not necessarily means illogical .

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: