
I have become a creature of suspicion. I won't give you the benefit of the doubt, but I won't dismiss you altogether if you're wrong. There is a story in the Old Testament of Jonah and the city of Ninevah. Jews and Christians regard Jonah as a prophet. He prophesied that the city of Ninevah would be destroyed. It wasn't. The account in the Bible indicates that the people of the city repented (in sackcloth and ashes) and were spared. Applying paradoxical reasoning - Jonah wouldn't be a prophet. I think it's also important to note that critics trying to disprove religious prophets such as Joseph Smith, Edgar Cayce, Muhammad, or even Nostradamus are generally doing themselves a disservice. In circular logic, the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. This figure wasn't a prophet because he/she got this prophecy wrong. A is false because B is false. In this fallacious argument, the "incorrect" prophecy has no constant/control. When dealing with religion, you're working with evidence of absence (proving/disproving a negative).
Everyone, other than the ignorant, fights continuous battles in their minds. Occasionally, empirical data proves our premises wrong. Sometimes, this data isn't accurate and our premises are still alive. Other times, our environment changes, and our premises were never meant to adapt. Just because your religion, your parents, and/or your teachers were wrong about something doesn't necessarily mean that they were wrong about everything. In the end, everyone will die with false premises. At least they believed in something.
0 comments:
Post a Comment