If you can’t point to at least one verse/fact that runs contrary to your doctrinal position that makes you at least a little bit uncomfortable, or if you can’t cite at least one good argument against your position you might just be a bit too dogmatic and probably haven’t read widely enough. While I think we can be confident in what we believe, very few matters of intellectual dispute are so cut and dry that there aren’t decent arguments for contrary positions. If you are not aware of those other arguments, and if you are not made at least a bit uncomfortable by any of them, this should be a sign that your confidence in your doctrinal position might be a bit premature.
Generally, one should not adopt an idea or doctrine without first subjecting it to those of a contrary opinion. What do those who hold to a different idea/doctrine have to say about the idea? What are their criticisms of it, and what is their case for a contrary idea/doctrine? As Solomon said, the first to present his case seems correct until another examines him. It is way too tempting to read just one book on a subject and walk away thinking you just heard the last word, and dogmatically teach that view as if it were settled truth. It may be, but you’ll never know until you’ve tested its ideas against the ideas of those who argue for a contrary position. I’ve heard it said that he who reads one book on a subject is confident he knows the truth and he who reads three books on a subject is confident that he doesn’t know the truth, but he who reads 10 books on a subject is able to formulate an informed position. I’ve found this to be true in my own intellectual life. While contrary voices may not upend your original position, at the very least they will refine it and help you to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of your position, as well as your opponents’, and give you a greater appreciation for the complexities involved and a deeper understanding of the truth.
January 19, 2016 at 11:07 am
Jason, well said. I like the cartoon, that’s funny !
We are at over 140 posts on one of your threads and we are way off topic at this point. I apologize for this and if you want us to refrain we will put an end to it, just say so.
Naz
LikeLike
January 19, 2016 at 12:06 pm
Naz, Jason has already said that posts should be on topic. I’ve reminded you of that as well, to no avail. IMO, he’s been way too indulgent in that regard.
On topic, Jason, I kindly suggest Feser’s Aquinas for a good introduction to Thomism? 🙂
LikeLike
January 19, 2016 at 1:49 pm
Perfect Scalia thank you, as always your comments are graceful and sympathetic. Next time I’ll just keep my mouth shut and follow the rules.
Naz
LikeLike
January 19, 2016 at 9:52 pm
Now, Naz, I was graceful and sympathetic the first time around. I only get less so with continued malfeasance. 😉
LikeLike
January 20, 2016 at 6:31 am
I’m sorry I missed the previous discussion. I quit reading the omnipotent/omnibenevolent thread after about post #30. Getting back on topic:
I wholeheartedly agree that everyone should read multiple sources, both pro and con to one’s philosophical position, when formulating opinions about any given subject, with one caveat. You also need to take into account the scholarship of the authors. In this day and age, most of us get a large portion of our information from the internet. It’s not good enough, in my opinion, to rely on internet authors whose scholarly sources are other internet sites. A lay minister with a pretty website (present company excluded) quoting other lay ministers with pretty websites doesn’t cut it. I want peer reviewed published scholarship, not just in science, but also in philosophy, ethics, history, etc. I apply a similar standard with regard to the validity of scripture. Quoting the Bible to justify an interpretation of a given text isn’t enough for me. I am going to give much more weight to the interpretations of those who can actually read and understand 2500 year old Hebrew or 2000 year old Greek or at least reference the scholarship of those who can read such texts. So, yes, read 10 books on any given subject and try to make sure they are from 10 different viewpoints. And try to comprehend what the 10 different viewpoints are saying. At least that way Richard Dawkins won’t be able to claim you are ignorant, stupid or insane when you go to express your views, views that are tempered with an understanding of alternate possibilities.
LikeLike
January 20, 2016 at 11:57 am
Bob, just curious…are you the same “Bob” that used to post on Ed Feser’s site?
LikeLike
January 20, 2016 at 11:59 am
Nope, different Bob.
LikeLike
January 21, 2016 at 12:12 am
Bob,
Yes, I agree. Mere quantity of sources is not enough. The quality of the sources also matters. That typically affects what matters most, however, which is the quality of the arguments.
Jason
LikeLike
January 21, 2016 at 12:14 am
Naz, at this point that thread is what it is. I have not had the time to go back to it to moderate.
Jason
LikeLike
January 27, 2016 at 6:20 pm
Bob,
Regarding post # 5 in which you wrote:
“I apply a similar standard with regard to the validity of scripture. Quoting the Bible to justify an interpretation of a given text isn’t enough for me. I am going to give much more weight to the interpretations of those who can actually read and understand 2500 year old Hebrew or 2000 year old Greek or at least reference the scholarship of those who can read such texts.”
Perhaps this will help:
http://whatcounts.com/dm?id=5176F7991005AEEB019BD69F18DCBF9A915EC6EF07403FE9
Just a thought,
Frank
LikeLike
January 28, 2016 at 4:42 am
Frank,
LOL. I’ll take that under advisement. Maybe someday, when I run out of English language books to read. Nice try, however.
Bob
LikeLike
January 28, 2016 at 6:31 am
Bob,
I’ve got a feeling that someday’s a far way off. You do have other options though. You could learn Greek. That would actually kill two birds with one stone. Then you could handle the NT and study the OT by way of the Septuagint (LXX) which is the authoritative translation of Hebrew Scripture made by 70 Hebrew scholars from the original Hebrew into Greek some 300 years before the birth of Christ. It’s the Scripture that was used by Messiah and His disciples to proclaim the Gospel.
As to the English language books you might try:
New Updated Edition BIBLE HISTORY OLD TESTAMENT A classic biblical reference to help you understand and apply the history of the Old Testament by Alfred Edersheim. Copyright 1995 by Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.
ISBN 978-1-56563-832-7
“AND IN HIS NAME THE NATIONS WILL HOPE.” (Matthew 12:21)
Truly,
Frank
LikeLike
January 28, 2016 at 10:36 am
Frank,
As I understand it, learning to read Greek is almost as bad as learning Hebrew. The book is not in my public library, but the Kindle edition is only a buck. I’ll download it. Thanks. Bob
LikeLike
January 29, 2016 at 11:00 am
You’re welcome, Bob.
LikeLike
February 3, 2016 at 1:01 pm
Well said Jason.
Our religious leaders seem more worried about imposing their beliefs on us instead of allowing us to find our own way with the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
LikeLike