"There is a word used in religion: "FAITH". All religions of Abrahamn are FAITH based."
I understand you want this word to mean "blind" faith, but it is anything but. Biblical faith is a trust or belief based UPON the evidence - not in spite of it. This definition of faith is hammered out very clearly within the scriptures.
I, too, have degrees in Philosophy and Religious studies, and came to the conclusion that Orthodox Christianity corresponds to the nature of Reality better than any other world religion out there. Now what?
"No one can prove the existence of any deity from any religious book is actually related to God."
This statement is patently false. One can ascertain certain qualities regarding the nature of the Cause of the universe by simply studying the nature of the universe itself - without even breaching the Bible once.
Here's a quick example:
Space, Time, Matter and Energy are all related - IOW, you can't have one without the other (Einstein proved this).
STME all came into existence at a finite point in the past (Modern cosmology proves this - the universe is not Eternal)
Whatever comes into existence must have a cause. The STME universe came into existence.
Therefore, the STME universe has a cause. And, by definition, that cause must be outside of Space, outside of Time (i.e Eternal), outside of Matter (i.e immaterial), and EXTREMELY powerful in order to bring all the energy in the universe into existence. One could argue at this point that the cause must be extremely intelligent as well, given the highly complex nature of the universe.
At this point we are getting pretty damn close to the Judeo-Christian description of "God."
Is this a mathematical proof? No. But mathematical proof is not required in almost every other aspect of life either. This is, however, a good argument with strong scientific/philosophical underpinnings. One can take this argument further to show that this cause must be the Judeo-Christian God (i.e Personal), but we can hold off at this point here for simplicity's sake.
Dont forget, too, that the overwhelming majority of the scientists who layed down the foundation for scientific inquiry during the Scientific Revolution were Bible believing Christians who believed that "doing science" was simply thinking God's thoughts after Him. This core belief is was the motivating/driving factor behind their magnificent leaps in understanding the universe we live in.
"Did you know Schopenhauer and Hegel extensively borrowed from Eastern mysticism to build up Western philosophy?"
Yup. Sure did. And the word "extensively" is debatable.
"Really? That sounds like the description of every God. Outside of the Universe and in absolute control of it. yawn all you've proved is there is a First Cause, a Prime Mover."
The Cosmological Argument actually goes beyond the concepts of Prime Mover and First Cause. This is why Aquinas took Aristotle and baptized him.
You keep using the word "prove." But I think you need to define what you mean by that word. That word can be very slippery in discussions like this and gets equivocated on quite a bit. If you wish to continue this discussion, then please define what kind of "proof" you are referring to.
"Because they were born in Christian societies."
I was born into a society that taught me certain mathematical truths. That doesn't mean that what I was taught is false. Your argument fails to demonstrate what you are implying.
"Then you should already also know Buddhist monks were in Israel centuries before Christ was. The message of "love everyone", isn't even historically unique to Christ in that region. His message wasn't first of its kind, it was the one that received the masses though. Not only that, but according to Jews, Christ never fulfilled prophecy. Everything you will offer up as proof is questionable beside from the rational conclusions the Greeks and the Vedics came to thousands of years ago."
This is all a Red Herring.
"In your claim you imply because the Enlightenment was a significant period and those involved were Christian that Christianity is correct."
My point regarding the Scientific Revolution does not hinge upon Christianity being true or not. Just that the motivating factor for those scientists were Christian principles and Monotheistic rational thought.
"Absolute proof."
You don't have this in ANY other discipline other than Mathematics. You don't even live your life this way - requiring "absolute proof" for everything you do. Almost ALL of your beliefs and viewpoints should be thrown out on your own criteria.
"Any system which would have provided humans the peace they needed to scientifically inquire into reality would have led to the same results. That's why you see in world history various regions coming to power with periods of great scientific and mathematical progress."
You're missing the point here again, too. We're in agreeance that there were other regions advancing in scientific thought (China was probably #2 during the time), the question is WHY did the Europeans advance so high? When one digs into this, ones finds out it was because of the Christian principles of thought and inquiry that drove them to their unparalleled success - regardless of whether Christianity is true or not.
"There is a word used in religion: "FAITH". All religions of Abrahamn are FAITH based."
I understand you want this word to mean "blind" faith, but it is anything but. Biblical faith is a trust or belief based UPON the evidence - not in spite of it. This definition of faith is hammered out very clearly within the scriptures.
I, too, have degrees in Philosophy and Religious studies, and came to the conclusion that Orthodox Christianity corresponds to the nature of Reality better than any other world religion out there. Now what?
"No one can prove the existence of any deity from any religious book is actually related to God."
This statement is patently false. One can ascertain certain qualities regarding the nature of the Cause of the universe by simply studying the nature of the universe itself - without even breaching the Bible once.
Here's a quick example:
Space, Time, Matter and Energy are all related - IOW, you can't have one without the other (Einstein proved this).
STME all came into existence at a finite point in the past (Modern cosmology proves this - the universe is not Eternal)
Whatever comes into existence must have a cause. The STME universe came into existence.
Therefore, the STME universe has a cause. And, by definition, that cause must be outside of Space, outside of Time (i.e Eternal), outside of Matter (i.e immaterial), and EXTREMELY powerful in order to bring all the energy in the universe into existence. One could argue at this point that the cause must be extremely intelligent as well, given the highly complex nature of the universe.
At this point we are getting pretty damn close to the Judeo-Christian description of "God."
Is this a mathematical proof? No. But mathematical proof is not required in almost every other aspect of life either. This is, however, a good argument with strong scientific/philosophical underpinnings. One can take this argument further to show that this cause must be the Judeo-Christian God (i.e Personal), but we can hold off at this point here for simplicity's sake.
Dont forget, too, that the overwhelming majority of the scientists who layed down the foundation for scientific inquiry during the Scientific Revolution were Bible believing Christians who believed that "doing science" was simply thinking God's thoughts after Him. This core belief is was the motivating/driving factor behind their magnificent leaps in understanding the universe we live in.
I digress....
"Did you know Schopenhauer and Hegel extensively borrowed from Eastern mysticism to build up Western philosophy?"
Yup. Sure did. And the word "extensively" is debatable.
"Really? That sounds like the description of every God. Outside of the Universe and in absolute control of it. yawn all you've proved is there is a First Cause, a Prime Mover."
The Cosmological Argument actually goes beyond the concepts of Prime Mover and First Cause. This is why Aquinas took Aristotle and baptized him.
You keep using the word "prove." But I think you need to define what you mean by that word. That word can be very slippery in discussions like this and gets equivocated on quite a bit. If you wish to continue this discussion, then please define what kind of "proof" you are referring to.
"Because they were born in Christian societies."
I was born into a society that taught me certain mathematical truths. That doesn't mean that what I was taught is false. Your argument fails to demonstrate what you are implying.
"Then you should already also know Buddhist monks were in Israel centuries before Christ was. The message of "love everyone", isn't even historically unique to Christ in that region. His message wasn't first of its kind, it was the one that received the masses though. Not only that, but according to Jews, Christ never fulfilled prophecy. Everything you will offer up as proof is questionable beside from the rational conclusions the Greeks and the Vedics came to thousands of years ago."
This is all a Red Herring.
"In your claim you imply because the Enlightenment was a significant period and those involved were Christian that Christianity is correct."
My point regarding the Scientific Revolution does not hinge upon Christianity being true or not. Just that the motivating factor for those scientists were Christian principles and Monotheistic rational thought.
"Absolute proof."
You don't have this in ANY other discipline other than Mathematics. You don't even live your life this way - requiring "absolute proof" for everything you do. Almost ALL of your beliefs and viewpoints should be thrown out on your own criteria.
"Any system which would have provided humans the peace they needed to scientifically inquire into reality would have led to the same results. That's why you see in world history various regions coming to power with periods of great scientific and mathematical progress."
You're missing the point here again, too. We're in agreeance that there were other regions advancing in scientific thought (China was probably #2 during the time), the question is WHY did the Europeans advance so high? When one digs into this, ones finds out it was because of the Christian principles of thought and inquiry that drove them to their unparalleled success - regardless of whether Christianity is true or not.