Islamic arguments about God

[Franklin]

As long as Christians hold fast to that foundation of revealed truth then Christianity will thrive anywhere. It may have its differences within itself as believers apply their human reason to understand God's revelation in differing ways, but they are still bound together because they are drinking from the same well. The church in the West (though not elsewhere) has weakened over the last century to the extent that it has moved away from that foundation. The individual churches and denominations that do so write their own death warrant; on the other hand the churches which continue to thrive are those which maintain their primary focus on God's revelation.

What you wrote here is basically my point. There is a reason that Western Christianity has weakened and moved away from its foundation. The reason for this is the application (actually misapplication) of deductive reason to religion. Do you have a better explanation? And if not, don't you think it would make sense for Christianity to find a way to defend itself against this threat? Islam has already faced and handled this issue. Christianity hasn't which is why the only way for real Christianity to survive is to strongly limit exposure to mainstream culture and thinking. If Christianity developed a strong response to Plato, then it wouldn't need to hide to survive.

[haithabu]

Franklin, I think that Christianity is more robust than you give it credit for. It has always been under one threat or another, either external or internal, and yet 2000 years later here we are.

Inductive reasoning comes naturally to people, more so than deductive reasoning. And deductive reasoning is only as good as one's premise. If one understands that, then one can counter any line of reasoning by saying, "Let's talk about your premise."

Christianity is no stranger to Platonic influence. The Logos in John's gospel ("In the beginning was the Word [Logos]") appropriates a Platonic concept and baptizes it. Likewise the Letter to the Hebrews, when it speaks of the ceremonial aspects of Judaism being modeled on a pattern in heaven (Hebrews 8:1-6) shows echoes of Platonism.

So I don't see Platonism as being a threat to Christianity in and of itself. Secular humanism in both its modern and postmodern forms is such an adversary, but it is already in decay. A society built on postmodern progressive ideology is really post-Platonist, because by dismissing objective truth it is making reason obsolete.

We are moving from a society of what C.S. Lewis called men without chests to one of men (or persons of indeterminate gender ) without heads. And such a society is unsustainable if for no other reason than demographics. If census data is to be believed, Nones don't reproduce.

So setting aside Divine provision, which I believe in but I understand that you don't, the best guarantor of Christianity's future is not this or that strategy but the Darwinian principle of survival of the fittest. The societies which do the best and are the most liveable are those that are influenced by Christian values. And Christian values thrive best in those societies which leave room for Christianity.

As we are seeing in the progressive movement's present moral devolution, if you get rid of the faith you soon lose the values.

[Franklin]

Plato used "logos" because that was part of Greek vocabulary and it is actually very similar to the Hebrew "davar" and quite far from any word in English. So I understand the use of "logos" in John's gospel as being not especially Plato-related and actually being very compatible with Old Testament ideas.

And deductive reasoning is only as good as one's premise.

Deductive reasoning is as good (powerful) as the lack of intelligence of the listener. Someone of high intelligence can use deductive reasoning to convince someone of average intelligence of just about anything unless the person of average intelligence was taught to reject pure deductive reasoning in the first place.

All of modern culture, from secular humanism to modern Christianity, is in decay. Religious belief makes almost no difference in behavior for those who accept modern culture. Many secular humanists claim to be relativists, but this is just a lie. They firmly hold their own beliefs as absolute and don't see their own hypocrisy. So they really aren't post-Platonist.

The societies which do the best and are the most liveable are those that are influenced by Christian values.

I think you mean "The societies which do the best and are the most liveable are those that WERE influenced by Christian values." Traditional Christianity was an excellent religion that caused societies to excel. But that kind of Christianity is almost gone. Modern Christianity causes societies to decay in the same way that secular humanism does.

And Christian values thrive best in those societies which leave room for Christianity.

The Old Testament makes clear that there 2 distinct threats to religion. One is oppression and the other is seducing people away from religion with false promises and arguments. The second threat is actually much more serious than the first as the Old Testament makes clear.

As we are seeing in the progressive movement's present moral devolution, if you get rid of the faith you soon lose the values.

Of course. The question is how to defend (uncorrupted) faith, and my point is that Islam is doing this much more effectively than Christianity is. And that this is because Islam has already faced Plato and defeated him, while Christianity hasn't.

[Josh]

Franklin,

What do you think "traditional Christianity" is?

[Franklin]

What do you think "traditional Christianity" is?

Traditional Christianity takes "works" seriously. This can be from the Catholic or Orthodox view that both faith and works are required for salvation, or from the Calvinist view that works is proof of faith. I actually don't know the Anabaptist theology here, but it is obvious that Anabaptists take works seriously for whatever reason. Probably the best indicator of traditional Christianity versus modern Christianity is the divorce rate in the group. Traditional Christianity discourages divorce because Jesus made quite clear that he didn't approve of divorce. But for modern Christians, this doesn't really matter to them.