Theology, What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing!

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
boatsnguitars
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2060
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2023 10:09 am
Has thanked: 477 times
Been thanked: 582 times

Theology, What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing!

Post #1

Post by boatsnguitars »

I am going to argue that there are few things more useless than Theology.

Definition I will be using:
Theology is the systematic study and interpretation of religious beliefs, doctrines, practices, and texts within the context of a specific religious tradition or belief system. Theology often seeks to understand and explain the nature of the divine, the moral and ethical principles associated with a particular religion, and the relationship between humanity and the divine. Theology can be seen as both an academic discipline and a form of spiritual reflection, depending on the context in which it is pursued.

Lack of Empirical Evidence: Theology is often criticized for its reliance on faith and lack of empirical evidence. Unlike fields like science, which are based on observable and testable phenomena, theology deals with abstract concepts and beliefs that cannot be proven or disproven. This lack of empirical evidence undercuts all validity of theological claims. There is not a single theological claim that can be made that either can't be proven true or false in any objective sense.

Incompatibility with Modern Scientific Methodology: The scientific method is a rigorous process that relies on empirical evidence, experimentation, and falsifiability. Theology, on the other hand, often operates outside the scope of these principles, making it incompatible with modern scientific methodology. This removes Theology from the most rigorous and useful tool we have as humans to determine truth from fiction - Theology thumbs it's nose at science and simply takes the ball and goes home. It refuses to even play the game other than by it's own rules - which change depending on the Theologian.

Fragmentation and Subjectivity: Theology is a highly fragmented field, with various religious traditions, denominations, and sects often having conflicting theological interpretations and beliefs. This fragmentation can lead to subjectivity, where theological conclusions are heavily influenced by personal biases and cultural backgrounds. As a result, theological claims lack universal consistency and credibility. Worse, they can be completely internally consistent to one religion, but completely inconsistent to another religion - the only parallel is in fiction: The Stars Wars universe is distinctly different from the Lord of the Rings universe. Only by entering into one universe can you find consistency, yet, there is nothing to objectively assess one universe from the other with religion. Islam, Mormonism, Christianity, Hinduism, etc. - they can't be proven wrong by another religion, since they all rely on supernatural and irrational beliefs; at least when viewed objectively.

Historical Conflicts and Divisions: Theology has played a significant role in historical conflicts, disputes, and divisions among different religious groups. Theological disagreements have often led to religious wars, schisms, and animosities, which can be seen as evidence of the negative consequences of theological study. It's not just that Theology is useless - it's dangerous. At least when someone brings up science and how it created the atom bomb, one can point to cancer cures and other benefits. With Theology, there seems to be no significant benefit - that is, if one points to the joy or peace religion offers, that can be done without theology, or, put another way: A ancient Polynesian found as much joy and peace in their religion as a modern Christian and theology would make no difference to that truth.

Limited Practical Utility: While theology may provide insights into the beliefs and practices of religious groups, it often has limited practical utility in addressing real-world problems and challenges. Fields like medicine, engineering, and economics offer tangible solutions and improvements to society, while theology is often seen as offering little practical guidance. Imagine all the people studying theology were to actually apply themselves to solving real problems? In truth, Theology is a massively egotistical practice of navel gazing.

Decline in Influence: In many modern societies, the influence of theology has declined significantly. People increasingly turn to secular and evidence-based approaches to address questions about the world and human existence, relegating theology to a more peripheral role in shaping public policy, education, and moral values. More and more - other than people studying theology to get rich off of old ladies - there is no demand for theologians to weigh in on any problem that faces the world. Sure, they are trotted out for a 30 second spot to comment on Halloween, or their view about another Virgin Mary statue leaking, but there are no serious people asking theologians for serious answers to serious questions.

Ethical and Moral Questions: Theological discussions around ethics and morality are often seen as arbitrary and subjective, as they depend on specific religious beliefs and interpretations. This can hinder the development of a shared moral framework that is inclusive and relevant to diverse societies. in fact, as I repeatedly say: No one understand morality less than a religious person.

Redundancy: Many philosophical and ethical questions that theology attempts to answer can also be addressed by other fields, such as philosophy, psychology, sociology, and ethics, without relying on religious beliefs. This makes theology appear redundant in the quest for knowledge and understanding. In the race case a theologian may have an actual answer that matters (I can't think of one), these are better answered by other fields; fields that have objective methods to determine the truth or falsity of the claims.

Changing Social and Cultural Norms: As societies evolve and adapt to changing norms and values, theology may find itself struggling to keep up with these shifts. Theological doctrines that were once considered absolute may become outdated and irrelevant in the face of evolving social and cultural norms. All religions die - all theologies become obsolete. Sure, current theologians believe their religion is the exception - which is exactly what all the other theologians believed before. Also, to this point, we see how religions change to meet current beliefs: Gay pastors, for example. What happened to no gays? It appears the earlier theologians were wrong - or the current ones are - and it's all just speculation and subjective opinion.

Lack of Consensus: Theological debates often lack consensus and can result in never-ending discussions without clear resolutions. This lack of conclusive answers can lead to frustration and a sense of futility in theological inquiry. There has never been consensus, never will be consensus because there are no facts to discuss. There is no "there there."

These are reasons Theology is useless. I would argue it damaging on top of it's uselessness - which makes it ultimately dangerous.

But, worse, beyond it being useless, it's so simplistic and arbitrary that it allows anyone to do it. Even the most simple-minded fool can wax on about their belief about their favorite God of the hour. They can make all kinds of proclamations about what their God thinks, want, wonders, does or does do. They can be inconsistent and claim it's us, the non-believer that doesn't understand! They can say things like "God says yes, no and maybe". They can claim God is too complex to understand - yet, they will tell us all about how they understand God. (This phenomenon isn't about how complex God is, but how poor the person is at expressing their childish grasp of a ephemeral subject that doesn't exist).

And, still worse... yes, it gets worse: Theology is a field ripe for attracting the insane; the conspiracy minded; the tin-foil hat wearing buffoons' that from their basement in Iowa have somehow discovered the answer to all questions through numbers and signs; who somehow know exactly what the government is doing, and is someone been anointed by God to understand these things and educate us all on these matters. And they are treated as divinely inspired - get that? Insane ramblings are equal to "divine inspiration" - That should tell us something of how valuable Theology is when you can't distinguish madness from inspired truth.

And still worse... Theology can be invented from whole cloth and considered respectable by the people who practice it: Think of how serious Scientologists take themselves! Mormons! Christians! They all think they all took themselves so seriously even as they were inventing the religion! Don't think for a moment that early Christians were any different from any other early religious group. They joined their little circles and told stories that made them feel good and decided it was the truth that everyone needed to hear. What ego! What profound ignorance! The blind leading the blind - and Theologians giving them cover every step of the way.

Watch the pomp and pageantry of a Church service. Watch how seriously they take the breaking of bread, or hanging from hooks, or dipping of water, or wearing special underwear, or bathing in the Ganges, or walking on coals... These were developed by Theologians to honor their imaginary gods - and there is no telling which, if any, actually does the thing it is supposed to do: God answers yes, no or maybe - remember? So, Theologians could say, "You must drink wine and eat bread to curry favor of Malosh the One-Eyed Bull God (or whatever practice or god) - but you can't know if that works because "yes, no, maybe."

In other words, a Theologian could invent ideas that they know are invented, but if he can get someone to believe them, he still gets paid. There is no QA/QC when it comes to Theology. If a school rejects some loon because they don't believe the Bible properly, that Theologian gets to go to another school and claim they are the one speaking the truth, and the old school is filled with vipers and heretics - and - as the events surrounding Marcion proved - none of it matters except that one tradition wins out over another. Not truth, mind you, just one story sounds better to more people.

Like art. Like a Hollywood Blockbuster. But, there is room in theology for the Art House films, and a host of other takes on the Supernatural Cartoon Universe in which gods can turn people into trees, water into wine, etc.

And we are supposed to take this seriously? We are to be respectful of these outrageously inane beliefs? Really? Have you seen the Pope's hat and robes? They are hilarious! It's as if they are mocking us - begging us to say something.

So, there is my argument against Theology. Would anyone like to argue in favor of Theology?
“And do you think that unto such as you
A maggot-minded, starved, fanatic crew
God gave a secret, and denied it me?
Well, well—what matters it? Believe that, too!”
― Omar Khayyâm

User avatar
boatsnguitars
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2060
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2023 10:09 am
Has thanked: 477 times
Been thanked: 582 times

Re: Theology, What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing!

Post #31

Post by boatsnguitars »

Athetotheist wrote: Sun Nov 05, 2023 8:29 pm [Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #25

You're setting yourself at odds with some pretty smart people.
I don't think so.
You don't think the National Academy of Sciences is run by smart people? Then how did they become scientists?

the basis of the consistently ignores materialistic default - Things work without any need for a god.
Here's what you miss about science: Science doesn't assume the presence----or the absence----of a creator.....

......which means......

Science does not assume a default.
Right. Whereas Theology assumes a default. They presuppose the existence of a God, based on no evidence. I'm not sure how they strengthens the Theists perspective. It's actually quite damning.

It's like saying, "Science can't tell you what the best band is in the world. Therefore, we will refrain from commenting (unless we do discover it is something science can comment on)."

Or, "Science can't tell you whether ghosts exist on Mars - because the peoplke who invented ghosts said they are Subnatural - not natural/out side the realm of science - so, if they claim that then we'd be silly to take hem seriously. But, peopel are allowed to have their silly beliefs. Have at it. We'll keep doing important things while they gaze at the navel."
“And do you think that unto such as you
A maggot-minded, starved, fanatic crew
God gave a secret, and denied it me?
Well, well—what matters it? Believe that, too!”
― Omar Khayyâm

TRANSPONDER
Banned
Banned
Posts: 9237
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 1080 times
Been thanked: 3981 times

Re: Theology, What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing!

Post #32

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Athetotheist wrote: Sun Nov 05, 2023 7:53 pm
boatsnguitars wrote: Sun Nov 05, 2023 11:46 am
Athetotheist wrote: Sun Nov 05, 2023 11:20 am [Replying to boatsnguitars in post #1

You're setting yourself at odds with some pretty smart people.

https://thesciencebehindit.org/does-sci ... ce-of-god/
Can you explain your point? One liners are usually flagged.
My apologies. I assumed that including the article link would keep it from being designated a one-liner.

You did read the article, didn't you?
Enough to see that it was wrongheaded, in the usual way. As your appeal to (dubious) authority was wrongheaded. Lane Craig for instance is smart. Obviously smart. But he is wrong, logically wrong, not because he isn't smart, but is trying to use his smarts to make work (e..g kalam) what doesn't work.

It's interesting hat I seem to see you battling Biblical scripture (on inerrancy) but outside that, you battle for an equally invalid concept a priori sortagod. I find it odd that you can't take that last step.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER on Mon Nov 06, 2023 6:04 am, edited 2 times in total.

TRANSPONDER
Banned
Banned
Posts: 9237
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 1080 times
Been thanked: 3981 times

Re: Theology, What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing!

Post #33

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Athetotheist wrote: Sun Nov 05, 2023 8:29 pm [Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #25

You're setting yourself at odds with some pretty smart people.
I don't think so.
You don't think the National Academy of Sciences is run by smart people? Then how did they become scientists?

the basis of the consistently ignores materialistic default - Things work without any need for a god.
Here's what you miss about science: Science doesn't assume the presence----or the absence----of a creator.....

......which means......

Science does not assume a default.
Well, that's logically sound, isn't it? Ah...you mean the materialist one. :D Science didn't need to assume anything. The world was there before we were. We just didn't know how it worked and assumed a god dunnit. Science showed that the processes didn't need a god and so the default is there and is valid without need for debate. It is the default that exists as a validated basic. It is the theist assertion that there is a god, either involved in that world of material processes or not that is the invalid assumption and is the irrational assumption. Not science.

I went back and had a look at the article again. Just looking at the title, It was fine. But the problem is how you mistake the whole logic of the situation, even if the article didn't.

God does not have to exist, just because science can't prove it doesn't. That's the basic fallacy Theism makes every time, and cannot seem to get out of that mindset (because if they ever stood aside from Godfaith, they whole illusion would collapse) and so they persistently try to push repackaged variants of 'God must exist unless science 100% disproves it" (classic reversal of burden of proof even if ignoring the material default was valid, which it is not, as I explained) as an argument. So the implications of that article are of course got wrong, by you if not by the article itself. This is immediately obvious so one doesn't have to read beyond the headline.

I'll read it all if you insist, but it'll make no difference to your being wrong
p.s I did read it and is generally pushing Christian evolutionists as being scientifically credible and never mind the literal interpretation of Genesis. They also wag about the supposed scientific credentials of Christianity, e.g Lemaitre, though it must have dismayed him that he was in the long line of Believers who thought they were researching the work of god, only to find they had discovered something (Big Bang) that seemed to work against the Bible,if not some sorta god.

So it seems that it was you who didn't read the article, even though it does leave a gap for a non -religious god, it for sure doesn't make a case for it.

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 3416
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 612 times

Re: Theology, What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing!

Post #34

Post by Athetotheist »

[Replying to TRANSPORTER in post #32

You did read the article, didn't you?
Enough to see that it was wrongheaded, in the usual way. As your appeal to (dubious) authority was wrongheaded. Lane Craig for instance is smart. Obviously smart. But he is wrong, logically wrong, not because he isn't smart, but is trying to use his smarts to make work (e..g kalam) what doesn't work.

It's interesting hat I seem to see you battling Biblical scripture (on inerrancy) but outside that, you battle for an equally invalid concept a priori sortagod. I find it odd that you can't take that last step.
Awfully presumptuous, isn't it, to critique scientists on science? Does it anger you that there's a whole science academy which disagrees with you on what science entails?

You like to extoll processes as not needing a god to function, but serious scientists are humble enough and mature enough to acknowledge that science doesn't close the gap by accounting for the processes themselves. Serious scientists aren't intimidated by the prospect of the unknowable.

TRANSPONDER
Banned
Banned
Posts: 9237
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 1080 times
Been thanked: 3981 times

Re: Theology, What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing!

Post #35

Post by TRANSPONDER »

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #34]

You of course misunderstand or misrepresent the case. Since you are making specific points I'll go back and look, but even if the claim is true, why it is true isn't known. It is rather the theist who is intimidated by the unknown, because it means 'unknown' it does not mean 'a god is doing it'. You didn't know this? I suggest you learn it fast. I suggest you also learn that hopefully suggesting I'm getting rattled or angry because you are coming up with atheist -stumpers, are not going to get you anywhere. :D

Ah That isn't the one about medical placebo being credited to God or religion, anyway, but about trying to keep godfaith going without denial of the science that makes a god really un-necessary. Did you really think those articles which frankly looked popular rather than peer reviewed or even religious pamphleteering, rwere going to make a case you you? They really have no case to make, though they do cover the discussion fairly well, gotta say. A starting -place for discussion, perhaps, certainly not a conclusion :)

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 3416
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 612 times

Re: Theology, What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing!

Post #36

Post by Athetotheist »

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #35
I suggest you also learn that hopefully suggesting I'm getting rattled or angry because you are coming up with atheist -stumpers, are not going to get you anywhere.
I bring it up because you seem to get so huffy and belligerent when your ideas are challenged.

Ah That isn't the one about medical placebo being credited to God or religion, anyway, but about trying to keep godfaith going without denial of the science that makes a god really un-necessary. Did you really think those articles which frankly looked popular rather than peer reviewed or even religious pamphleteering, rwere going to make a case you you? They really have no case to make, though they do cover the discussion fairly well, gotta say. A starting -place for discussion, perhaps, certainly not a conclusion
So you're dismissing the National Academy of Sciences as a tabloid?

I'm not trying to make a case here against science making a god unnecessary. I've made such a case elsewhere.

viewtopic.php?t=40592

My purpose here is to challenge the notion that theology is "good for absolutely nothing", and I have the NAS on my side.

TRANSPONDER
Banned
Banned
Posts: 9237
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 1080 times
Been thanked: 3981 times

Re: Theology, What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing!

Post #37

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Athetotheist wrote: Thu Nov 09, 2023 8:27 am [Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #35
I suggest you also learn that hopefully suggesting I'm getting rattled or angry because you are coming up with atheist -stumpers, are not going to get you anywhere.
I bring it up because you seem to get so huffy and belligerent when your ideas are challenged.

Ah That isn't the one about medical placebo being credited to God or religion, anyway, but about trying to keep godfaith going without denial of the science that makes a god really un-necessary. Did you really think those articles which frankly looked popular rather than peer reviewed or even religious pamphleteering, rwere going to make a case you you? They really have no case to make, though they do cover the discussion fairly well, gotta say. A starting -place for discussion, perhaps, certainly not a conclusion
So you're dismissing the National Academy of Sciences as a tabloid?

I'm not trying to make a case here against science making a god unnecessary. I've made such a case elsewhere.

viewtopic.php?t=40592

My purpose here is to challenge the notion that theology is "good for absolutely nothing", and I have the NAS on my side.
You may try to control the parameters of the discussion. That'll do you as much good as your attempts to make a case for theism or a god.

That said, I'll take on board that strictly literally 'Theology is good for absolutely nothing' may be overdoing it. But making the case that theology is any use might struggle, The thing is, if a placebo works, then religion isn't necessary. Not in medicine or mental health. Faith in a magic pill will work as well as religion, maybe better.

So if that goes, what case have you got for religious Faith being useful, never mind the Theology that is based on it?

You were the one straying off the topic, not me.

bjs1
Guru
Posts: 1030
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:18 pm
Has thanked: 48 times
Been thanked: 253 times

Re: Theology, What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing!

Post #38

Post by bjs1 »

boatsnguitars wrote: Wed Nov 01, 2023 7:30 am I am going to argue that there are few things more useless than Theology.

Definition I will be using:
Theology is the systematic study and interpretation of religious beliefs, doctrines, practices, and texts within the context of a specific religious tradition or belief system.
You seem to devote a fair amount of your free time to doing exactly this. I wonder why you would do so since you consider such actions to be useless.
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.
-Charles Darwin

TRANSPONDER
Banned
Banned
Posts: 9237
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 1080 times
Been thanked: 3981 times

Re: Theology, What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing!

Post #39

Post by TRANSPONDER »

bjs1 wrote: Thu Nov 09, 2023 9:45 pm
boatsnguitars wrote: Wed Nov 01, 2023 7:30 am I am going to argue that there are few things more useless than Theology.

Definition I will be using:
Theology is the systematic study and interpretation of religious beliefs, doctrines, practices, and texts within the context of a specific religious tradition or belief system.
You seem to devote a fair amount of your free time to doing exactly this. I wonder why you would do so since you consider such actions to be useless.
I put that through the Theist- English translator app and it came out, guess what? "Atheists, please shut up and go away". Amazing how many ways Theists, Christians and Bible -apologists have of saying the same thing.

No, the stock answer to 'Why do atheists spend so much time talking about what they don't believe' is:
A lot of people do believe it, and they vote.
That vote gives religious interference its' wallop.
And even if it was just mildly annoying like Daanikenism alternative science and flat earthism, it would still be a ...well.... :giggle: Duty, I suppose, to disabuse people of a lot of fanciful tosh. That's the atheist rationale and why we keep doing it. I trust we won't have to explain yet again why we spend time doing this.
In addition, of course, it's interesting often challenging and not infrequently a bit of a hoot. :D

bjs1
Guru
Posts: 1030
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:18 pm
Has thanked: 48 times
Been thanked: 253 times

Re: Theology, What is it Good For? Absolutely Nothing!

Post #40

Post by bjs1 »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Fri Nov 10, 2023 12:29 pm
bjs1 wrote: Thu Nov 09, 2023 9:45 pm
boatsnguitars wrote: Wed Nov 01, 2023 7:30 am I am going to argue that there are few things more useless than Theology.

Definition I will be using:
Theology is the systematic study and interpretation of religious beliefs, doctrines, practices, and texts within the context of a specific religious tradition or belief system.
You seem to devote a fair amount of your free time to doing exactly this. I wonder why you would do so since you consider such actions to be useless.
I put that through the Theist- English translator app and it came out, guess what? "Atheists, please shut up and go away". Amazing how many ways Theists, Christians and Bible -apologists have of saying the same thing.
You mean when theists say nothing remotely similar to what you wrote, and then you assign new meaning to our words based on what you want us to have said? Yeah, I suppose in that circumstance it would appear that we are all saying the same thing.
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.
-Charles Darwin

Post Reply