Hacker News Reader

Comment by b800h | Hacker News Reader

There's a substantive difference between a religious argument on Twitter and proper theological argument which leans into philosophy. The problem is that people aren't typically exposed to the good stuff because teachers and the media don't know it either. Sadly even local religious leaders; that's a serious issue.

View on HN

It's still all make-believe. And I say this as someone who has had an interest in Fortean and occult lore for years - it's just folklore people choose to pretend is real.

No its not. Its metaphor for truth which is unable to be expressed with precise language - because we lack understanding.

How can theology be a metaphor for truth when the core of what it's trying to reason about is unknowable?

"Theology is the systematic study of the nature of the divine and, more broadly, of religious belief" [1]. The latter part I get, lots of people and groups (and regions) have religious beliefs and differences, so it's definitely worth some effort to figure out (from a sociological or anthropological view) what's going on within and between groups of people.

I also get the ethics and philosophy parts, trying to what it means to be "good" etc. But this study of the divine is pure horses*t - even if it's not all just made up, then by definition it's still unknowable. If it's something that someone has just concocted on a whim and claimed it was dictated to them by the Almighty, then it's at best a 2nd or 3rd hand source and a dubious one at that.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theology

I think he means the occult, not theology.

The occult is a form of theology. The sense I take is that he's taking a pot-shot at the lot of it. But I could be wrong.

You might like to look at some apologetical writing. Christian apologetics, for example, are often split into three layers, essentially:

1. Is there a God - this is actually fairly straightforward to argue, simply because we can use analytical philosophy to reason about the unknowable and first causes and so on.

2. Is Jesus God - much tougher to approach for obvious reasons, but can at least be reasoned about if you've gone through step 1.

3. Should I be x sort of Christian - easier to reason about if you accept 1 & 2.

That first step is very approachable if you're already interested in things like logical proofs and higher physics.

Your first layer isn't really "Is there a God" but "Does the Judeo-Christian God exist?" Like Pascal's Wager, Christian apologetics begins by assuming that the only God that can possibly exist is the one Christians already believe in.

And neither logic nor higher physics proves that Christianity has the right idea out of the multitude of human religions and infinitude of possibilities beyond.

@krapp - Disagree on that point. Obviously the three above are going to break down into further stages, but there are plenty of apologetic arguments which squarely fall into a broad question of "is there a God?" and not a more specific question.

You're right about the starting point though. By its very nature it has to start there, but it doesn't assume that the people it'll be arguing with will be in the same place.

In my estimation it is, in its basest explanation, a means of hacking religious reward system of ones own brain. We have this spiritual nature to us which cannot be explained, but the study of the divine is an excercise in honing and directing that spiritual aspect. This can absolutely affect real change in ones own mindset and behaviour. In this way, I say it is metaphor that reveals truth. It reveals truth about the way our brains work, what motivates us, how to direct ones own will, etc.

Now, on a more abstract and heady level, I would posit that because these techniques do induce real change in our brains, that they may point at a truth outside of ourselves. For instance- when I hear of occult practicioners worshipping demons of greed in order to obtain personal wealth- it makes me think that the idea of "demons" ought mot to be tossed out ebtirely. In a certain sense, theyre real. Worship of these demons amounts to giving oneself over to the spirit of that demon (e.g. greed) now does this mean there is a real flying bat like demon creature - no, but it is a lesson in the nature of these demons within ourselves. We all have inner aspects which are base and immoral, and when we choose to feed them, it is akin to worshiping a deity- i creasing the influence and control it has over your thought processes.

Hope this made sense. I find the intersection of occult practice, jungian psychology, and judeo christion demonology to be a very very rich subject where surprising insights abound.

If you lack understanding of the truth, and can only refer to it through metaphor, then how do you know it is true?

> If you lack understanding of the truth, and can only refer to it through metaphor, then how do you know it is true?

Sure, then why bother systematizing its study in theology, would it be better to just study English language usage of metaphor?

Do you have any theological reading recommendations? Preferably not oriented (at least not wholly) around Christianity.

I'll go out on a limb here because the alternative is recommending a load of Christian stuff in combination with Philosophy and Eastern theology. David Bentley Hart is quite good, and his book "You Are Gods" may well be what you're looking for. I haven't read that specific title though. I ought to, it's sitting in my bookcase.

I am a Sikh (this isn't the reason I am not so keen on christian literature, I've just already been exposed to a fair bit) so I would definitely be interested in some material related to Eastern faiths, I'll check out David Bentley Hart too.

Plato is pretty good. He does this cool thing where the theology and morality of the city state is presented in a way which enables further development of the sciences and arts.

Really blows your mind when you start to put it all together.

I just picked up You are Gods and it's actually pretty dense stuff and would be a poor choice if you were tired of Christian thought (even if he winds Vedanta into it). It might be worth having a look at Bentley Hart on Wikipedia and seeing if some of his other work appeals. "The Experience of God" is very good, as is "The Beauty of the Infinite". But obviously he's writing from a Christian perspective. From a completely different tack, you might read the "Tripura Rahasya", that's a good Eastern book of mystical philosophy.

Some of the stuff I found most satisfying was proper modern Christian Apologetics, such as the Handbook of Catholic Apologetics. But the Eastern writing is excellent getting across the scale of the infinite and relating that to people on a personal level.

I just want to say thank you both for the back and forth, this is one of the most thought-provoking things I've seen in a while.

Plus, a book recommendations is always good :).

You might want to take a look at Rebuttal of the Logicians by Ibn Taymiyyah and The Incoherence of the Philosophers by Al-Ghazali, as far as classical Islamic theological works that have been translated, those will be your go to books but they're by no means introductory works.

That's a good shout. What are invaluable and in sadly limited supply are religious teachers who can explain things one on one. As a result of (amazingly and sadly) the Second World War, this sort of training fell out of fashion in seminaries, and led to all sorts of dire consequences.

As a contrast to those works, Summa Contra Gentiles by Aquinas would be a good follow up.

Then to pull both together try Christian-Islamic Preambles of Faith - An Exercise in Philosophy of Religion or Kalâm for Our Day Modeled after Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles, Books I-III by Joseph Kenny, OP.

https://www.crvp.org/publications/Series-IIA/IIA-10-Contents...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com