mfbukowski Posted May 2, 2014 Posted May 2, 2014 I guess my knee-jerk response is always going to be, "Establish plausibility, then there is freedom to accept or reject on the basis of faith."No, that is just being reasonable, and I agree. The question for me is what is "reasonable" in the final analysis. My problem as an extreme skeptic and also mystic is that all the scholarship in the world will never make religious belief more "plausible" for me. Using standard logic as we practice it with an Enlightenment mindset, it is all preposterous! I mean when I was a Buddhist, I never worried about what the person Gautama Buddha "really said" or whether or not what he allegedly said was "translated correctly" or the history of each of the principles of Buddhism and where they came from or when they came from. What matters for me is not the Big Bang but the Big Bonk. When God Bonks you over the head and says "Do THIS!" I listen. I am not about to take some scholar's word for anything that is going to mess with my eternity. In God we trust- no one else's "credit score" is high enough. 3
Recommended Posts