TABULA-RASA: RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, GOD AND PASTORPRENEURS.
Religion is a very delicate and controversial human activity necessitated by our bewilderment to decipher the universe as a result of which we have created dogmas, cultural systems, beliefs, sacred divinities and the concept of God a supernatural being.
The Philosophy of religion can be viewed therefore as a rational conceptual analysis of religious metaphysics (God) in differentiation to religious philosophy, this is so because it does not attempt to explicate problems of religiousness or a given belief mechanism.
I believe that we cannot know everything neither should we accept the religious proposition of omnipotence and omniscience of God which is a problematic conceptualisation in philosophy. Our epistemological limitation as humans can be taken as truism that is boundaryless the same goes for limitation of God's ability to be all knowing and it does not matter whether we are talking about A priori or A posteriori knowledge. Skepticism must always be at the background of our rationalism when we overheard or engaged people talking in absolute terms about scientific knowledge or religious beliefs.
We do not need to have religious experience before we start a conceptual analysis of the attribute of God or the ontological status of God neither must we adopt a reductive physicalism of science in our attempt to deny the existence of God this is because science has its own limitations when it come to the explanation of all phenomena in our universe.
We are dealing here with a subject matter that shows the pseudo incompatibility between scientific rationalism and the belief in supernatural causation that goes beyond theology or religious affirmations and proposition with a thread of dogmatism about the existence of (God) and all other conflicting subjects like revelation and evolution.
Most writers have posited that It is difficult and problematic to adopt a scientific mindset based on rational evidence that is independent spatio-temporally while at the same time accepting a high level of religious phenomena that are contradictory since that step can be regarded as an abandonment of logical reasoning for faith. But I do not concur with such argumentation. My view is that science and religion are not mutually exclusive rather they are complimentary.
According to Richard Dawkins, "not only is science corrosive to religion; religion is corrosive to science. It teaches people to be satisfied with trivial, supernatural non-explanations and blinds them to the wonderful real explanations that we have within our grasp. It teaches them to accept authority, revelation and faith instead of always insisting on evidence." -Richard Dawkins on Militant Atheism.
Here we are confronted with the question of meaning, skepticism and measureability though science is important in given explanation but not all things can be explicated by science that is where religion steps into the scope to unbundle the limitation of science by faith in other that complimentarity can be achieved.
If Creationism cannot give us incontrovertible evidence of the existence of God the same can be said of the Big Bang Theory since an entity outside existence cannot exist. Here again I am trying to let us see the complimentarity of scientific mentality cum religious beliefs given the fact of explanatory limitations inherent in both as early indicated therefore we will always need both as co-travellers in the explanation of our universe.
Continental philosophical rationalism and logical positivism should not be seen as absolute analytic instrumentalism to be used in denying the existence of God just because from our individual practical life reality we are dissatisfied with the unfolding pseudo religiousness in our commune wherein pentecosalism as a branch of christianity is bringing forth a very corruptive variant of proselytization or pentecostal evangelism that has been given the nomenclature PASTORPRENEUR is not enough to condemn God into abyss .
Our attempt to deny God existence is also necessitated by the feeling that there is something out there that we are trying to understand but beyond our comprehension and because we cannot comprehend the existence of God does not mean non existence of God.
We are the architect of our our own destination the ills of our society cannot be used as a sufficient requirement to blame or deny the existence of God neither can we take the concept of God away from the medulla oblongata of human specie.
It is our responsibility as individuals given the free will to design practical life solutions and existential methodology required to be able to cope with vicissitude of living by doing our best in that regard with the rejection of pseudo pastors or pastorpreneurs rather than denying the existence of God because of the fraudulent machinations of a few.
OTUNBA ADE ILEMOBADE is a philosopher
Twitter: @pearl2prince
The Philosophy of religion can be viewed therefore as a rational conceptual analysis of religious metaphysics (God) in differentiation to religious philosophy, this is so because it does not attempt to explicate problems of religiousness or a given belief mechanism.
I believe that we cannot know everything neither should we accept the religious proposition of omnipotence and omniscience of God which is a problematic conceptualisation in philosophy. Our epistemological limitation as humans can be taken as truism that is boundaryless the same goes for limitation of God's ability to be all knowing and it does not matter whether we are talking about A priori or A posteriori knowledge. Skepticism must always be at the background of our rationalism when we overheard or engaged people talking in absolute terms about scientific knowledge or religious beliefs.
We do not need to have religious experience before we start a conceptual analysis of the attribute of God or the ontological status of God neither must we adopt a reductive physicalism of science in our attempt to deny the existence of God this is because science has its own limitations when it come to the explanation of all phenomena in our universe.
We are dealing here with a subject matter that shows the pseudo incompatibility between scientific rationalism and the belief in supernatural causation that goes beyond theology or religious affirmations and proposition with a thread of dogmatism about the existence of (God) and all other conflicting subjects like revelation and evolution.
Most writers have posited that It is difficult and problematic to adopt a scientific mindset based on rational evidence that is independent spatio-temporally while at the same time accepting a high level of religious phenomena that are contradictory since that step can be regarded as an abandonment of logical reasoning for faith. But I do not concur with such argumentation. My view is that science and religion are not mutually exclusive rather they are complimentary.
According to Richard Dawkins, "not only is science corrosive to religion; religion is corrosive to science. It teaches people to be satisfied with trivial, supernatural non-explanations and blinds them to the wonderful real explanations that we have within our grasp. It teaches them to accept authority, revelation and faith instead of always insisting on evidence." -Richard Dawkins on Militant Atheism.
Here we are confronted with the question of meaning, skepticism and measureability though science is important in given explanation but not all things can be explicated by science that is where religion steps into the scope to unbundle the limitation of science by faith in other that complimentarity can be achieved.
If Creationism cannot give us incontrovertible evidence of the existence of God the same can be said of the Big Bang Theory since an entity outside existence cannot exist. Here again I am trying to let us see the complimentarity of scientific mentality cum religious beliefs given the fact of explanatory limitations inherent in both as early indicated therefore we will always need both as co-travellers in the explanation of our universe.
Continental philosophical rationalism and logical positivism should not be seen as absolute analytic instrumentalism to be used in denying the existence of God just because from our individual practical life reality we are dissatisfied with the unfolding pseudo religiousness in our commune wherein pentecosalism as a branch of christianity is bringing forth a very corruptive variant of proselytization or pentecostal evangelism that has been given the nomenclature PASTORPRENEUR is not enough to condemn God into abyss .
Our attempt to deny God existence is also necessitated by the feeling that there is something out there that we are trying to understand but beyond our comprehension and because we cannot comprehend the existence of God does not mean non existence of God.
We are the architect of our our own destination the ills of our society cannot be used as a sufficient requirement to blame or deny the existence of God neither can we take the concept of God away from the medulla oblongata of human specie.
It is our responsibility as individuals given the free will to design practical life solutions and existential methodology required to be able to cope with vicissitude of living by doing our best in that regard with the rejection of pseudo pastors or pastorpreneurs rather than denying the existence of God because of the fraudulent machinations of a few.
OTUNBA ADE ILEMOBADE is a philosopher
Twitter: @pearl2prince
Comments
Post a Comment