/lit/ - Literature

>>6061039
The Scripture saith, The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God; it is not said, The fool hath thought in his heart; so as he rather saith it, by rote to himself, as that he would have, than that he can thoroughly believe it, or be persuaded of it. For none deny, there is a God, but those, for whom it maketh that there were no God. It appeareth in nothing more, that atheism is rather in the lip, than in the heart of man, than by this; that atheists will ever be talking of that their opinion, as if they fainted in it, within themselves, and would be glad to be strengthened, by the consent of others. Nay more, you shall have atheists strive to get disciples, as it fareth with other sects. And, which is most of all, you shall have of them, that will suffer for atheism, and not recant; whereas if they did truly think, that there were no such thing as God, why should they trouble themselves? Epicurus is charged, that he did but dissemble for his credit’s sake, when he affirmed there were blessed natures, but such as enjoyed themselves, without having respect to the government of the world. Wherein they say he did temporize; though in secret, he thought there was no God. But certainly he is traduced; for his words are noble and divine: Non deos vulgi negare profanum; sed vulgi opiniones diis applicare profanum. Plato could have said no more. And although he had the confidence, to deny the administration, he had not the power, to deny the nature.

>>6061042
he Indians of the West, have names for their particular gods, though they have no name for God: as if the heathens should have had the names Jupiter, Apollo, Mars, etc., but not the word Deus; which shows that even those barbarous people have the notion, though they have not the latitude and extent of it. So that against atheists, the very savages take part, with the very subtlest philosophers. The contemplative atheist is rare: a Diagoras, a Bion, a Lucian perhaps, and some others; and yet they seem to be more than they are; for that all that impugn a received religion, or superstition, are by the adverse part branded with the name of atheists. But the great atheists, indeed are hypocrites; which are ever handling holy things, but without feeling; so as they must needs be cauterized in the end. The causes of atheism are: divisions in religion, if they be many; for any one main division, addeth zeal to both sides; but many divisions introduce atheism. Another is, scandal of priests; when it is come to that which St. Bernard saith, non est jam dicere, ut populus sic sacerdos; quia nec sic populus ut sacerdos. A third is, custom of profane scoffing in holy matters; which doth, by little and little, deface the reverence of religion. And lastly, learned times, specially with peace and prosperity; for troubles and adversities do more bow men’s minds to religion.

>>6061045
They that deny a God, destroy man’s nobility; for certainly man is of kin to the beasts, by his body; and, if he be not of kin to God, by his spirit, he is a base and ignoble creature. It destroys likewise magnanimity, and the raising of human nature; for take an example of a dog, and mark what a generosity and courage he will put on, when he finds himself maintained by a man; who to him is instead of a God, or melior natura; which courage is manifestly such, as that creature, without that confidence of a better nature than his own, could never attain. So man, when he resteth and assureth himself, upon divine protection and favor, gathered a force and faith, which human nature in itself could not obtain. Therefore, as atheism is in all respects hateful, so in this, that it depriveth human nature of the means to exalt itself, above human frailty. As it is in particular persons, so it is in nations. Never was there such a state for magnanimity as Rome. Of this state hear what Cicero saith: Quam volumus licet, patres conscripti, nos amemus, tamen nec numero Hispanos, nec robore Gallos, nec calliditate Poenos, nec artibus Graecos, nec denique hoc ipso hujus gentis et terrae domestico nativoque sensu Italos ipsos et Latinos; sed pietate, ac religione, atque hac una sapientia, quod deorum immortalium numine omnia regi gubernarique perspeximus, omnes gentes nationesque superavimus.

Based Bacon

Are you gonna make a point or just copy paste out of your pdf?

>god is real because the world would be confusing and scary to me if he wasn't

lel

>>6061352
>Being this dismissive of Francis Bacon

>>6061356
>dat appeal to authority
>god is real because a deceased but revered historical figure would have been scared and confused by the world if he wasn't

this is an even weaker argument than bacon's

> For it is a thousand times more credible, that four mutable elements, and one immutable fifth essence, duly and eternally placed, need no God, than that an army of infinite small portions, or seeds unplaced, should have produced this order and beauty, without a divine marshal.

If someone said this in this day and age he'd just be called intellecutally lazy.

>>6061361
But not as weak as simply mocking without provided any sort of analysis.

>>6061385
>implying an analysis is necessary for "muh imaginary friend is 100% real cause modern science confuses me i promise pls believe me"

>>6061397

>>6061397
Also, you're aware that Francis Bacon is considered the father of Empiricism?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Bacon

>>6061404
le epig feedora meme xD i wish i could upboat u more than once!!1!

>>6061408
>it's only shitposting when other people do it!

>>6061407
That doesn't mean he understood modern science or that his "argument" for God's existence isn't filled with fallacies.

>>6061412
I don't use meme images, my friend.

Is there a modern english translation of this text because there is no way im working through this dotheth bullshit at 11:30pm

>>6061407

And that makes everything he ever said automatically true?

test

>>6061445
No, but it makes his ideas worth considering and above being dismissed out of hand.

>>6061500

Not really, since someone's authority in one field doesn't guarantee that person's authority in other fields

For instance, Newton was arguably one of the most brilliant men that ever lived. He also believed in alchemy. Does that make alchemy worth considering?

>>6061544
It is interesting to read the thoughts of intelligent people regardless of their authority.

>>6061552

Not if it's not their field of interest, then their guess is as good anyone else's

>>6061566
Luckily philosophy was Bacon's field of interest.

>>6061599

Yes, and unfortunately he died in 1626

>>6061605
>presentism

lmao

>>6061361
I know you are long gone by now, but Isn't saying "dat appeal to authority" also an appeal to authority?

>lived before darwinism and the theory of evolution
>lived before modern physics
>and modern astronomy
regardless without all those things, a valid argument for atheism can be made and Bacon's argument basically boils down to
>it just don't make sense without god

>>6061352

It's really sad that the root of every religious and philosophical apology stems from this.

>>6061039

Yes, in the 16th century I would have been a theist too.
How does this help your stance?

Before we had good naturalistic explanations for reality and before anyone tried producing formal arguments for atheism believing in theism was justified.
This is completely irrelevant today.

>>6061397
"Everything science has taught me, and continues to teach me, strengthens my belief in the continuity of our spiritual existence after death." ~ Von Braun

"lel religion is for fags who dont know science. god btfo" ~ Fedora-wearing engineering undergraduate on an Indonesian claymation message board

>>6064329
Or it roots from observing divine actions

>>6064438
>Everything science has taught me, and continues to teach me, strengthens my belief in the continuity of our spiritual existence after death." ~ Von Braun

Given his past he better hope the Christians were not right.