[Turing 2012] Christian Answer #2

Last updated on: January 11, 2013 at 11:53 pm by Leah Libresco

[Turing 2012] Christian Answer #2 2013-01-11T23:53:50-05:00 Leah Libresco

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

This is the second entry in the Christian round of the 2012 Ideological Turing Test for Religion. In this round, the honest answers of Christians are mixed in with atheists’ best efforts to talk like Christians. It’s your job to see if you can spot the difference. The voting link appears at the end of the entry, and you can look at all entries in this round here.

When (if ever) have you deferred to your philosophical or theological system over your intuitions?

I’ve always found that the Moral Law given to us by God through Scripture has been largely intuitive. Most of the wisdom found in Scripture has lined up perfectly with my intuitions. However, one issue I have struggled with in my faith is the Biblical and religious stance on homosexuality. This issue has been a hot-button topic on this blog (especially recently), and I’ve been following along anxiously. It’s hard to be torn between your intuitions and a conclusion that you think to be justified but still find unsatisfying.

I understand the arguments from my faith’s perspective, and I accept that they are valid and sound in concordance with a consistent theology. But each time I discuss this issue, I have to shake my intuitions that homosexuality is not morally problematic. It’s possible that my own feelings about this issue have been betrayed by growing up in a rather fundamentalist area, and have seen a more vile hatred for gays rather than a loving discontentment with their lifestyle choice. It’s very difficult to shake your intuitions, and that’s one reason I generally shy away from entering the fray on this issue.

Are there people whose opinions on morality you trust more than your own? How do you recognize them? How is trusting them different than trusting someone’s opinion on physics?

I generally trust religious leaders and those trained in Scripture to have valuable opinions regarding morality, often (although not always) more valuable than my own.

I’m not convinced that how I discern who to trust with regard to physics is much different than how I discern who to trust in moral matters. We trust someone’s opinion on physics insofar as they have relevant expertise, including but not limited to background knowledge and education, proper methodology, and research relevant to their field. Since I see the Bible as a source of divine revelation, those who have expertise pertaining to the Bible can be expected to have a more informed opinion. More specifically, those who have studied the Bible, relevant history and archaeology, theology, and philosophy will arguably have a better vantage point to make moral decisions.

We can vet the physicist’s opinion through empirical testing. We can see how it holds against the backdrop of prior theoretical physics, and how it compares to the opinions of other experts. Likewise, we can see how the religious leader’s opinion stacks up against a coherent Scriptural exegesis, how it manifests in a cohesive theology, and whether or not is buoyed by sound philosophical foundations.

Can you name any works of art (interpreted pretty broadly: books, music, plays, poetry, mathematical proofs, etc) which really capture the way you see life/fill you with a sense of awe and wonder? You can give a short explanation or just list a few pieces.

Many works of art have had a profound and lasting impact on my life, so it’s difficult to single out just one. While I cherish much of what C.S. Lewis has written, what comes to mind here is the “Space Trilogy.” The trilogy covers the adventures of Dr. Elwin Ransom (who was modeled after Tolkien) and the universal battle between good and evil over the course of three novels. It’s heavily allegorical and Lewis at his finest. There’s one passage in the book titled Perelandra that encapsulates my view of our position in the universe so adequately I’ll reproduce it in full here:

“The whole distinction between things accidental and things designed, like the distinction between fact and myth, was purely terrestrial. The pattern is so large that within the little frame of earthly experience there appear pieces of it between which we can see no connection, and other pieces between which we can. Hence we rightly, for our sue, distinguish the accidental from the essential. But step outside that frame and the distinction drops down into the void, fluttering useless wings.”

This passage serves as a powerful reminder of how limited a scope human beings actually have. Our minute sufferings, our trivial worries and ever-limited understanding wither away when we think of the Almighty.

Click here to judge this entry, and, once you’ve voted, feel free to speculate and trade theories in the comments or look at other entries in this round.

Ideological Turing Test

Christian Turing answers 2012

Turing answers 2012

Previous Post

June 2, 2012

[Turing 2012] Christian Answer #1

Next Post

June 3, 2012 All Entries in the 2012 Christian Round

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 7 Quick Takes Apologetics Atheism Book Conversion Debate Tactics Debates Epistemology/Philosophy Housekeeping Ideological Turing Test Marriage Morality in Practice Parsing Catholicism Possibly Heretical Radio Reviews/Recommendations Sequence Index Spiritual Practice Uncategorized

Select a Month April 2017 March 2017 January 2017 December 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

I wrote of a new covenant where God's law would be written not on stone but where?

Select your answer to see how you score.

In a book On scrolls On their hearts In the temple