Theology: fact, or opinion

[Blastcat]

Hi folks!

Your friendly neighborhood gadfly here!

I've been asking theists in here ( ok, mostly Christians of all kinds ) if what they talk about are FACTS or OPINIONS?

I almost never seem to get replies to these questions.

When it comes to this theology subforum, for example, people will debate ENDLESSLY about what a Biblical passage is SUPPOSED to mean, what a word in the Bible means, and so on. Raging debates, never any seem to be resolved.

And I read these.. as an outsider to the debate.
There doesn't seem to BE a right answer.

So, the question for debate is:

Is theology merely discussions about opinions, or are they about facts?

Follow up questions might be:

IF theology is about facts, who has the CORRECT facts, and who is wrong? It seems that everyone is claiming they are right, and that anyone not in agreement is wrong.. OR WORSE.. from Satan or something.

To an outsider, theological arguments smack of a rationalization for tribalism.

So, that's 3 questions, really ..

1. Is theology merely about opinions?
2. If theology is about facts, how are we to tell fact from opinion in this case and
3. Is theology putting a justification for "us against them" thinking?

[Talishi]

[Replying to post 4 by Talishi]

Theology is very much like number theory. Numbers themselves are abstractions, but we can try to think about their properties in non-contradictory ways.

I can't figure out from your post if you think theology is about fact or opinion.
Is MATH fact or opinion, for that matter?

Let me use an analogy for theology. I'll call it Bombadilogy. Tom Bombadil appears in the works of J.R.R. Tolkien. Suppose we are replying to a post on the Debating Bombadilogy forum titled, "What order of being was Tom Bombadil?"

Using evidence from the text (mostly The Fellowship of the Ring, but also in snippets of other works) some Bombadilogists would assert that he was a higher order of being than man, because the One Ring did not turn him invisible when he put it on, nor did he fail to see Frodo when Frodo put it on.

Then the question would turn to whether he was an elf, a Maiar, a Valar, or even the One (Eru Iluvatar) gone native in Middle-Earth. Some would reject the elf theory because he said he was the first of creation, prior to the dwarves even, which would also seem to reject the theory he was the One. Others would suggest he was the Valar named Ulmo, god of waters (sort of like Neptune), who seldom was seen in Valinor. And so on. Some of the Bombadilogists would believe this stuff was real, and perhaps even pray to Bombadil, but they would be able to discuss all these things on a level with people who didn't believe a word of it.

[marco]

Theology is very much like number theory. Numbers themselves are abstractions, but we can try to think about their properties in non-contradictory ways.

Is it????? Theology is the study of "theos", which no one knows anything about. Number theory is exact, since we can give precise definitions. Though we cannot prove God is infinite we can certainly prove the prime numbers form an infinite set.
One study is guesswork and the other is exactitude.

[Talishi]

Theology is very much like number theory. Numbers themselves are abstractions, but we can try to think about their properties in non-contradictory ways.

Is it????? Theology is the study of "theos", which no one knows anything about. Number theory is exact, since we can give precise definitions. Though we cannot prove God is infinite we can certainly prove the prime numbers form an infinite set.
One study is guesswork and the other is exactitude.

I'll give you an example of how to study God. Suppose we define him as immutable and omniscient. I can show that those two attributes are mutually exclusive by referring to how we experience linear time. I began to compose this post at 11:35 Seattle time. That is my knowledge of the present, that it is 11:35. In the intervening span, my knowledge of the present has changed to 11:38. An immutable God cannot change, so the simple knowledge of what time it is remains beyond God's ken. And that negates his omniscience.

[marco]

1. Is theology merely about opinions?
2. If theology is about facts, how are we to tell fact from opinion in this case and
3. Is theology putting a justification for "us against them" thinking?

Theology can only be about opinions, but some opinions are regarded as sacrosanct.

The word "fact" must be redefined when we deal with theology, for what we would normally regard as ludicrous, becomes factual if our axioms are that God not only exists but has inspired a book to prove it. There is no argument against this, known to man.

Theology justifies itself.

[Peds nurse]

Hi Peds, nice to debate with you again.
I'm not sure if you actually answered the OP's 3 questions, though.

That's I mean when I said that if God is just an abstraction for those words, then I don't have a problem. Except, I suspect that most Christians take "God" to mean something MORE than just an abstraction for love, and vengeance and hate and wisdom and mystery, and ignorance and so on. I really seem to think that a LOT of Christians take "God" to mean a real thing.. a real being.. that they "know" intimately and so on...

That's where I say .. er.. prove it?

It is equally enlightening to engage with you, Mr. Blastcat!

So, you are asking people to prove their relationship with God?

How we interpret those attributes, is quite different because it hinges upon our understanding, which forms our belief. How we interpret which understanding is accurate, requires both the study of scripture, as well as intervention from the HS.

And what human, precisely is going to arbitrate just who has found the accuracy of another human's understanding of the Bible?

Two things can be true at the same time, especially when it comes to explaining an object or thing. If I looked at my trees in the summer, I would say they have beautiful green leaves. If someone else looked at my trees in the winter, they would say that they have no leaves at all, but are completely bare. Both interpretations are correct, based on the season of which one experiences them.

The Pope?
Yourself?

Blastcat?

I would say, all of the above.

I would also like to say, that our belief's are not stagnant, the more He reveals to us what the truth is, the more we conform our belief's to fit within that context. It is constantly evolving.

"He reveals to us. "

We would have to assume that's true.
If it's all true.. then.. what is there to debate?

Your revelations are better than other Christian's revelations ?
Why isn't God revealing himself a little more.... I don't know... perfectly?

I don't know how such a perfect communicator can communicate so POORLY that everyone has a different idea about what he is communicating.. by REVELATION.. isn't that a DIRECT communication from a GOD?

You might find that odd, Blastcat, but I find that perfectly acceptable. God works differently in everyone's life. In the Old Testament, He did exactly that...met people in a way that they could understand perfectly. We don't think alike, nor do we learn alike, or even understand everything alike. We could watch a movie, and my views could be completely different than yours, does that make me wrong, or even yourself?

Why does he even BOTHER with revealing himself, if the communication doesn't WORK?

Something has worked BC, or we wouldn't even be discussing this issue on this forum. Christianity has been around for over 2000 years, and their have been millions upon millions of followers. How is that not working?

Two separate ideas or theologies can be true simultaneously.

Do you mean two OPPOSITE theological propositions can be true at the same time?

Does X = X in theology?

That equation doesn't make sense anywhere else. It's ILLOGICAL anywhere else.
Are you saying that theology, whether is it about facts or opinions is ILLOGICAL?

I am saying that 2+8=10. It is also true that 5+5, 9+1, 6+4, 7+3, all equal 10.

God is forgiving, and God's wrath is poured out on his people can both be true, just as we are forgiving parents, and we ground our children.

When you define theology as the study of God....

I have to ask if you think that theology is in the business of studying an actual God or opinions about a God that theologians have to first ASSUME is an actual God?

Does that question make sense to you?
Does theology worry about the truth of the beliefs at all?

It would be kind of silly to devote one's time and energy to something that one does not believe exists. I would assume that Christian theologians, do believe in God.

Or is theology JUST about inventing hypotheticals?
Is there any KNOWLEDGE about God, or knowledge about the IDEAS about God?

If two opposing theological propositions can be true at the same time... how can theology be said to be rational?

It's like someone would say "Theology is about facts, and not about facts".
Well, if that's the case then, no theology can make SENSE to outsiders.

How can we possibly know if our beliefs are true when we discard sound reasoning? In what sense can theology be about the truth, if it's really "anything goes" ?

It's going to be fun to read your reply.

[/quote]

As I stated earlier, two things can be true at the same time. Is science always true? Can two things of science be true at the same time? Does science change as we know more about the world around us?

We can have two or more completely true views of God. Somethings, what we thought were true, can change after more study of scripture. Not everyone agrees to what the scripture means, but it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist. If I believe the world is square, and someone else believes it is round, it doesn't mean the world doesn't exist. The more we know about God, the more we change our thinking to reflect what we know.

Blessings Blastcat!

[marco]

I'll give you an example of how to study God. Suppose we define him as immutable and omniscient. I can show that those two attributes are mutually exclusive by referring to how we experience linear time. I began to compose this post at 11:35 Seattle time. That is my knowledge of the present, that it is 11:35. In the intervening span, my knowledge of the present has changed to 11:38. An immutable God cannot change, so the simple knowledge of what time it is remains beyond God's ken. And that negates his omniscience.

It illustrates relativity and your failure to use it regarding God. On the other hand it says nothing of how theology and number theory are similar, which was the question.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 10 by Hawkins]

Christianity is a set of theology written in the Bible. The NT Bible is written by a group of direct or indirect witnesses.

Your question makes no difference in asking that is the content in a history book opinion or fact.

Oh, I know that a lot of Christians don't care if their Bible is true or not.. they just assume that it is.. and go from there.

But isn't theology ABOUT what the Bible means and ABOUT God? Aren't people in disagreement as to the CORRECT theology the Bible represents?

If you can't answer the questions, I get that.
They ARE a bit tough. Too bad you can't.

Guess you can't participate, then.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 4 by Talishi]

Theology is very much like number theory. Numbers themselves are abstractions, but we can try to think about their properties in non-contradictory ways.

I can't figure out from your post if you think theology is about fact or opinion.
Is MATH fact or opinion, for that matter?

Let me use an analogy for theology. I'll call it Bombadilogy. Tom Bombadil appears in the works of J.R.R. Tolkien. Suppose we are replying to a post on the Debating Bombadilogy forum titled, "What order of being was Tom Bombadil?"

Using evidence from the text (mostly The Fellowship of the Ring, but also in snippets of other works) some Bombadilogists would assert that he was a higher order of being than man, because the One Ring did not turn him invisible when he put it on, nor did he fail to see Frodo when Frodo put it on.

Then the question would turn to whether he was an elf, a Maiar, a Valar, or even the One (Eru Iluvatar) gone native in Middle-Earth. Some would reject the elf theory because he said he was the first of creation, prior to the dwarves even, which would also seem to reject the theory he was the One. Others would suggest he was the Valar named Ulmo, god of waters (sort of like Neptune), who seldom was seen in Valinor. And so on. Some of the Bombadilogists would believe this stuff was real, and perhaps even pray to Bombadil, but they would be able to discuss all these things on a level with people who didn't believe a word of it.

im figuring a yes or no would have sufficed

BUT.. If i reach WAY back to my childhood.. tom was a tree whisperer? Tree wizard.. like.. UBER but uberly ALOOF wizard.. is that the guy? It's been a while.

Are you trying to make the Blastcat remember stuff?

IS that your point?

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 15 by Peds nurse]



[center]The four confusions of Peds.[/center]

So, you are asking people to prove their relationship with God?

Not in the OP, no.

I'm asking about theology, since this is the theology subforum.
I want to know if theology is about facts or opinions?

How we interpret those attributes, is quite different because it hinges upon our understanding, which forms our belief. How we interpret which understanding is accurate, requires both the study of scripture, as well as intervention from the HS.

And what human, precisely is going to arbitrate just who has found the accuracy of another human's understanding of the Bible?

Two things can be true at the same thing, especially when it comes to explaining an object or thing. If I looked at my trees in the summer, I would say they have beautiful green leaves. If someone else looked at my trees in the winter, they would say that they have no leaves at all, but are completely bare. Both interpretations are correct, based on the season of which one experiences them.

Oh the same tree at different TIMES.. ok.
A tree looks different depending on the time of the year..

What I was referring to was how two opposite things cannot be the same at the same TIME.. youre a little confused. When I say X X , I mean at the very same time.. in your example, the tree wasn't in the same TIME... one in summer.. one in fall and so on... NOT THE SAME TIME, Peds.

Right now, I can plainly see that you are confused about subjective reality and objective reality. And how X X .

Another way of putting that is that you are confused between fact and fiction, fact and fantasy.. fact and dream.. hope.. faith.. desire.. fact and ANYTHING other than fact. You seem utterly confused as to the difference between fact and OPINION.

You seem confused about logic.

But we would ALL agree that the tree is either REAL or FANTASY... if we all agree that a real tree is happening... then we say that it's a FACT. If some of us don't see a tree.. but can imagine a tree and so forth.. that tree might NOT be factually real.

Maybe you didn't understand what I meant by X = X

X means "NOT X"

So, would you say that X is identical to NOT X?
IF you do.. then I can't make sense out of your logic.

The Pope?
Yourself?

Blastcat?

I would say, all of the above.

Then you are talking about a subjective truth and not an objective truth.

If something is said to be true OF THE PERSON.. that's called a subjective truth.
Do you see any difference between a subjective truth and an objective one?

If everyone can have a different personal "truth" about something, it's said to be subjective. Does that help?

If everyone can verify something is true, like the shape of the world, that would be an OBJECTIVE truth. Help you?

We would have to assume that's true.
If it's all true.. then.. what is there to debate?

Your revelations are better than other Christian's revelations ?
Why isn't God revealing himself a little more.... I don't know... perfectly?

I don't know how such a perfect communicator can communicate so POORLY that everyone has a different idea about what he is communicating.. by REVELATION.. isn't that a DIRECT communication from a GOD?

You might find that odd, Blastcat, but I find that perfectly acceptable.

You are right on the money.. I find it EXTREMELY odd.

It's as if you are saying that a PERFECT COMMUNICATOR isn't a PERFECT COMMUNICATOR.

That's saying that X = X again.
I cannot FOLLOW that logic.

At all.

God works differently in everyone's life. In the Old Testament, He did exactly that...met people in a way that they could understand perfectly. We don't think alike, nor do we learn alike, or even understand everything alike. We could watch a movie, and my views could be completely different than yours, does that make me wrong, or even yourself?

If "God" is just a matter of taste.. then no. Subjective "truths" are NOT debatable.. nor, would I say very interesting.

Are you interested in the weird "truth" about me personally that I prefer chocolate ice cream EVEN on apple pie?

Doesn't seem to me that you have a solid grasp of the distinction between the subjective and the objective, Peds.

There's a big difference between my preference for chocolate ice cream over vanilla which is a SUBJECTIVE truth about me.. and the fact that ice cream exists, which is an OBJECTIVE fact that everyone can verify.

Maybe a little Googling here?

Why does he even BOTHER with revealing himself, if the communication doesn't WORK?

Something has worked BC, or we wouldn't even be discussing this issue on this forum. Christianity has been around for over 2000 years, and their have been millions upon millions of followers. How is that not working?

Yeah, SOMETHING has worked.. but it hasn't worked PERFECTLY. has it? Everyone is debating about what that perfect communication MEANS. Some like me, it might surprise you to know, don't see the communication at ALL Peds.. RIGHT?

Hello God? .. Hello?
No communication, Peds.. sorry. Not for ME there isn't. Not for any outsider to your faith.

God either communicates perfectly OR HE DOES NOT communicate perfectly. Take your pick, it's either/or.

My point was the God communication doesn't SEEM to work PERFECTLY.. something is going wrong. God MUST communicate perfectly, right? Then how come his PERFECT communication doesn't always get his MESSAGE across perfectly? I'm not getting it, Ped's, what is going ON?

What's going on.. a perfect communication that ISN'T so perfect after all?

Perfect = Perfect?

How many logical contradictions are you going to MAKE?

I am saying that 2=8=10.

IN math.. the technical term for that kind of equation is WRONG.
Another one is MEANINGLESS.

It is also true that 5+5, 9+1, 6+4, 7+3, all equal 10.

That's more like it.
10 = 10 no matter how we write 10. In math, the expression 5+5 is IDENTICAL to 10, that's why we use the EQUAL sign ... "=".

5+6 = 10
5+6 does NOT equal to 10

Not in math.
Math is a LOGICAL system.

But maybe your point is that theology is illogical.
I would agree with that.

When you define theology as the study of God....

I have to ask if you think that theology is in the business of studying an actual God or opinions about a God that theologians have to first ASSUME is an actual God?

Does that question make sense to you?
Does theology worry about the truth of the beliefs at all?

It would be kind of silly to devote one's time and energy to something that one does not believe exists. I would assume that Christian theologians, do believe in God.

Again, Peds, it seems that you don't really understand what I'm asking you.
I didn't ask if theologians BELIEVE... I think that most of them do.. but that was NOT my question.

It sure does look now that the question DID NOT make sense to you...
Would you like a clarification, or would you like to pretend the question never existed in the first place?

Blastcat says : "Grrrrr", Peds.

As I stated earlier, two things can be true at the same time.

Yeah, I noticed that.
Maybe you didn't notice that you are saying X = X.

If so, then you aren't making sense.
So.. now you are being illogical.

Up is down.. good is evil... and EVERYBODY is right... and wrong.. and neither.. and spaghetti.

WHO CARES now?
It's all good, right?

Is science always true?

I can't assume that you want a logical answer.
Yes is no.. two opposite things are the same.

So.. yes and no and neither and foot care products.
All true....

Peds, I can't have a reasoned discussion with someone who abandons reason. What do you want now? POETRY?

I write pretty bad poetry.. at the drop of a hat I do.

Sorry.. we can talk gibberish to each other .. but I'll pass.
I'm trying to MAKE sense out of your thoughts.... and that might be too AMBITIOUS.

Try to understand why X = X doesn't make any SENSE.. otherwise.. you don't make any sense to me. Sorry.

Can two things of science be true at the same time? Does science change as we know more about the world around us?

No, in science they use LOGIC.. so two opposing propositions cannot be true at the same time. Sorry.

Its all on Google if you care.

We can have two or more completely true views of God.

And that's the PROBLEM with the "God" concept.

I can imagine, let's say 12 kinds of ideas about gods.. all kinds of gods..
If I want more.. I can do a little research.

But where oh where can I go to CHECK if any of those myriad versions of "God" are true? In space? In books?

WHERE DO I LOOK, PEDS?

But to say that two opposing view are both TRUE defies LOGIC.

X = X defies logic.

Somethings, what we thought were true, can change after more study of scripture. Not everyone agrees to what the scripture means, but it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist.

Well, that makes sense.

Just because two theologians disagree WHAT "God" is.. doesn't mean that "God" doesn't exist at all.. but it also doesn't mean that he does exist or that either of these fine feathered theologians have the CORRECT views.

They could BOTH be wrong...

We STILL don't have a clue if God exists or not.. so.. after all of their work.. WHERE are we on that topic? Is there a God or not?

How does theology help with that? They just ASSUME that God exists.. and in this forum that the Bible is the final authority.. so.. ASSUME away.. tally ho !

Does ASSUMING prove anything? .. of course not.. not at all.. not in our dreams does it prove anything.

Let's just assume that you owe me a thousand bucks.
Now what?

If I believe the world is square, and someone else believes it is round, it doesn't mean the world doesn't exist. The more we know about God, the more we change our thinking to reflect what we know.

Well, again, we can go out and CHECK the shape of the world... because the WORLD objectively EXISTS.. there is no QUESTION that the world exists...

That's NOT the same for any god ... GOD seems to be a subjective reality.. everyone has an opinion .. except for us agnostics who dont.

So, to me, it really looks that you don't understand 4 concepts that I was talking about:

1. X X
2. Subjective vs. objective.
3. Opinion vs. fact.
4. And if you REALLY believe that 2=8=10, basic arithmetic. ( I'm hoping that was a typo )

It's going to be VERY difficult for me to relate to you in a meaningful way.. until you do understand these three concepts..

But nice chatting with you!

[dakoski]

[Replying to Blastcat]

Is theology merely about opinions?

This depends on your starting assumptions:
a) If God doesn't exist then of course its simply opinions - as Dan Barker would say theology is a 'subject without an object'

b) If there is a God but it cannot or will not communicate with human beings - then again theology is simply opinions

c) If God exists and is able to communicate with human beings - then God is knowable. If this is the case then knowledge as opposed to mere opinion is possible. Though I don't think anyone who holds this assumption would claim to have absolute knowledge of God in the same way that those who hold the assumption that our world is knowable would not claim to have absolute knowledge of the world we live in.

There maybe other ways of answering the question but I imagine these are the main ways.

Questions of whether God exists or is knowable have been debated likely as long as humans have been around. These are foundational questions about the ultimate source of life and reality. I don't think foundational questions like these can be objectively 'proven' in the way other questions can (e.g. what I had for breakfast this morning).

If theology is about facts, how are we to tell fact from opinion in this case

Again, depends on your assumptions. Of course as before if you don't think God exists, or if God exists but is not able to communicate with us then of course all we have is opinion by definition.

If God is able to communicate and we are able to know him - then we can discern fact from opinion based on what he has communicated to us.

Is theology putting a justification for "us against them" thinking?

I'm not sure how it logically follows from your argument that theology is a justification for 'us against them' thinking.

I think really you're asking how do we peacefully co-exist in diverse multi-worldview, multi-cultural societies?

Can theology/religion lead to 'us against them' thinking? Absolutely I agree it can - theology can lead to incredible self-righteousness. However, I don't think theists are alone in such pride and self-righteousness.

If we take your question as an assumption that theology is a justification of tribalism and 'us and them' thinking. Then surely religious people who engage in theology are the problem. Further, isn't the solution then that these people who don't think like you become more like you? Is that not also a form of 'us against them' tribalism?

My view is that self-righteousness and pride are the main problems of peacefully co-existing in a multi-cultural society - whether the person happens to be a theist or an atheist.