Why theology seems unconvincing

[cerad2]

Needless to say things like revealed truth, tradition, spiritual authority etc don’t do much for me. But the main reason I find theologians unconvincing is that they can’t even convince other theologians of the truth of their arguments.

Does anyone seriously think that one day Catholic theologians will somehow convince Muslim theologians that Jesus was divine and that the trinity is a valid concept? Of course not. While individuals do occasionally convert, as a group there is simply no chance of accepting each others dogma.

What is truly puzzling is that some theologians are pretty smart people. They learn multiple languages, have strings of letters after their names, publish intellectual papers and often have successful careers of one sort or another. I suspect that some of them even go so far as to believe in what they write. They have a relation with a god, they appeal to the holy spirit, invite Jesus into their hearts, prayer for guidance and listen to that inner voice etc.

And yet there seems to be almost no chance that one group will ever convince another group of anything. So why should those of us who are skeptical of the entire field of study accept what any of the groups think?

 

[MrJaundicedEye]

Have you never noticed politics? Do you think that someday the people who want a syndicalist government in Ruratania will finally succeed in convincing the people who oppose a syndicalist government in Ruratania that syndicalism is the only hope for the nation?

Of course not.

And yet, this says pretty much nothing about the merits of either position; and the people on the one side do not consider the recalcitrance of the opposing side to point to any defect in their position.

I’d say you are just noticing people, doing what people do, not some special characteristic of theology.

 

[Agnikan]

Needless to say things like revealed truth, tradition, spiritual authority etc don’t do much for me. But the main reason I find theologians unconvincing is that they can’t even convince other theologians of the truth of their arguments.

“Had Allah willed, He would have made you one nation [united in religion]” – Qur’an 5:48

According to the Qur’an, diversity of religion (inclluding irreligion) is a good thing.

 

[Spock]

Incorrect comparision. Politics does not boast about “ultimate, eternal, absolute, unchanging truths” - religion and theology does. And yet there are many different “ultimate, eternal, absolute, unchanging truths” out there - allegedly, of course. And all claim that their “ultimate, eternal, absolute, unchanging truths” is the real McCoy - and none of them can bring up convincing arguments that their version is the “real” one… So the question is still there… how can they hope to convince the skeptics if they cannot convince the fellow believers? Moreover even the catholic church cannot convince the “heretic cafeteria catholics” of the “error” of their way.

Pretty funny spectacle… a bunch of people wearing blindfolds is some dark room, chasing a nonexistent black cat, and all “claiming”: "I got it! No, you did not - I got it!.. No, I did!.. ad infinitum. Pretty hilarious…

 

[Samuel63]

The real truth is evidenced by the existence of undisputed miracles. Go find these and you will be on the right trail.

There is only one true faith. Logic dictates there cannot be multiple Creators. It is up to you in this short time on earth to respond to the truth that has been revealed. You will be judged on your success.

The game is afoot!

 

[karebear92]

Well, it is rather simple, really. Religion is not provable, and that is what is needed to convince people in this day and age. How do you prove that scriptures weren’t corrupted over the course of 2,000 years of translation (I mean, the printing press wasn’t available for much of the time, so each and every Bible was done by hand)? I believe they weren’t and others believe they were. It is not possible to prove it, so the convincing is left for one to accept in faith, and that is hard to do.

It is like people who say that they were captured by a UFO. It sounds ridiculous and I would say that it is ridiculous, but can you really prove them wrong? No, so they will always say that it happened and people who believe that type of stuff will believe it most likely happened, but is it truth? No (well, most likely not). The truth is that it either happened or it didn’t happen, but since there is no definite evidence how can you ever convince the opposing party to drop what they believe to believe something completely different without any evidence as to why they should?

Try and convince a 9/11 conspiracy theorist that 9/11 wasn’t a conspiracy and then you will understand that this extends further than religion.

 

[Samuel63]

Religion is provable, but some refuse to believe no matter what is presented to them. That is the issue.

 

[Julia_Mae]

And yet there seems to be almost no chance that one group will ever convince another group of anything. So why should those of us who are skeptical of the entire field of study accept what any of the groups think?

You shouldn’t. This is too important to allow yourself to be swayed by whoever talks the best or writes most convincingly. IMO, you should listen to God and submit to His leading you. That takes time and effort to establish a relationship.

God bless you abundantly in your efforts.

 

[cerad2]

The real truth is evidenced by the existence of undisputed miracles. Go find these and you will be on the right trail.

I’m sure miracles form a part of theologian’s tool kits but only a part. Besides, I doubt if you can find any miracles that all theologians accept.

 

[cerad2]

Well, it is rather simple, really. Religion is not provable, and that is what is needed to convince people in this day and age.

I rather doubt that most theologians require religion to be provable.

 

[Bezant]

So why should those of us who are skeptical of the entire field of study accept what any of the groups think?

Even if you [sceptics] don’t accept all of it, you can still get something meaningful out of it.

 

[karebear92]

Religion is provable, but some refuse to believe no matter what is presented to them. That is the issue.

It is provable, but not in the “scientific” way people want things proven, as in “show me the evidence.”

Obviously I don’t have a 2000 year old loaf of bread from the last supper or the original transcript from Peter’s teaching, so I guess you have to believe what is written, and when you throw that out (which most do at this point) then there is no evidence. So it is them dismissing the evidence really that makes it unprovable. But when they do that, we can’t prove it isn’t true because we don’t have the original, as in the original gospels.

 

[JVSantos]

to OP,
Your question is not new, it’s been ask for last 2,000 years. I hate to break it to you theology is tested and proven to be true. My Savior answered this for me. Continue to seek the truth for your own salvation. God Bless

 

[cerad2]

You shouldn’t. This is too important to allow yourself to be swayed by whoever talks the best or writes most convincingly. IMO, you should listen to God and submit to His leading you. That takes time and effort to establish a relationship.

Listening to gods is exactly what many theologians do. They often claim to have spent their entire life establishing a relationship. And yet they still seem unable to convince other groups of god listeners of the truth of their conclusions.

 

[cerad2]

to OP,
Your question is not new, it’s been ask for last 2,000 years. I hate to break it to you theology is tested and proven to be true. My Savior answered this for me. Continue to seek the truth for your own salvation. God Bless

Get the theologians of the world to agree and then I might take them seriously,

 

[karebear92]

I rather doubt that most theologians require religion to be provable.

It is true regardless of profession or faith: it is human nature. We want proof and struggle to dismiss our previous beliefs until we have solid ground for dismissing them. If one says that the gospels are different from the original and another says they are true, then how do you refute their beliefs without the original document?

 

[cerad2]

It is true regardless of profession or faith: it is human nature. We want proof and struggle to dismiss our previous beliefs until we have solid ground for dismissing them. If one says that the gospels are different from the original and another says they are true, then how do you refute their beliefs without the original document?

Wouldn’t that be where the whole revealed truth and relationship with gods come in? Remember that this thread is trying to focus on theologians.

 

[karebear92]

Wouldn’t that be where the whole revealed truth and relationship with gods come in? Remember that this thread is trying to focus on theologians.

What exactly do you mean? Like God should give the theologians of other religions the grace to dismiss their previous beliefs and accept the beliefs of another religion?

 

[GEddie]

Since theologians are philosophers who have broadened their scope to the area of religion, and since philosophers, in my experience, are masters in the art of self-confusion, I don’t expect much better from theology.

 

[babylonsfalling]

Needless to say things like revealed truth, tradition, spiritual authority etc don’t do much for me. But the main reason I find theologians unconvincing is that they can’t even convince other theologians of the truth of their arguments.

Does anyone seriously think that one day Catholic theologians will somehow convince Muslim theologians that Jesus was divine and that the trinity is a valid concept? Of course not. While individuals do occasionally convert, as a group there is simply no chance of accepting each others dogma.

What is truly puzzling is that some theologians are pretty smart people. They learn multiple languages, have strings of letters after their names, publish intellectual papers and often have successful careers of one sort or another. I suspect that some of them even go so far as to believe in what they write. They have a relation with a god, they appeal to the holy spirit, invite Jesus into their hearts, prayer for guidance and listen to that inner voice etc.

And yet there seems to be almost no chance that one group will ever convince another group of anything. So why should those of us who are skeptical of the entire field of study accept what any of the groups think?

You apparently know very little of Christianity.
Mass conversion to Christ or to specific dogma will not happen at the hands of men. It will happen at the return of Christ.
Until that time, Christians are to do the best they can in that effort.

Also atheist have arguably had a lot longer than Christians to convince people about their disbelief, and it’s kind of self evident which side has the most believable assertions.