 | | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) But as you of all people konw, science doesn't declare truths; it's a system of explanation endlessly refined to fit more closely with observation. Christianity, by contrast, declares certain absolutes that remain absolute regardless of (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) The most basic moral law that I can postulate would be some derivative of selfless love. Any lesser principle would be subservient to this, and thus, morally broken. Theft could clearly be moral, if, for example, one were stealing guns from an (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Faith Issue
|
|
Hi Rick and all, The main points in this post that I agree with, are: (...) Oh-so-totally-true. What *you* believe is what matters. My beliefs are very different than, say, my Jewish friend Mimi's beliefs. It doesn't matter that we are both Jewish - (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) We're arguing semantics, I think, over the meaning of "impossible". I am suggesting that if there are absolute limits, they limit everything (including God). You are stating that if there are are absolute limits, God can't exist. That doesn't (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Faith Issue
|
|
(...) May not be your way of thinking, but I actually thought that the above was fairly brilliant. Sorry for the compliment -- I'll try to piss you off later to make up for it, K? (...) Windowpane? Blotter? What? No microdot?! =) I am very serious (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) That's ok. I think the subject of debate in this thread is James' (pick one) view on Christianity. You'll have to take the battles as they come. Certainly I could try the turn-around on you: - Science is wrong, cuz it says the world is flat. - (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) What I was attempting to do was provide a conception of a being that can perform what throughout this debate has been considered a logical impossibility. I don't see how offering one criterion without excluding others is a restriction on (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Faith Issue
|
|
(...) Me too, sometimes. I think (1) the Koran may have the same problems. But when I asked about it what I got was a load of "you're not being tolerant enough, how dare you ask"... at least that's how I read the net net of what I got back. Would it (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Nam-shub of Enki (was Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament)
|
|
(...) Errr.. -Kurt- Vonnegut - sorry, it's 2.00am here... (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) So in other words, you're changing your definition of impossible. You are restricting impossible to mean "impossible within my frame of reference". (...) Dave E addressed this more eloquently than I can, I suspect, so I will only comment that (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Nam-shub of Enki (was Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament)
|
|
Actually, while I stand by my previous post, you bring up some pretty decent arguements here... "richard marchetti" <blueofnoon@aol.com> wrote in message news:GMunx4.D0I@lugnet.com... (...) you (...) he (...) mythology, (...) techniques (...) it. I (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Faith Issue
|
|
(...) For my interest, since on Lugnet I've pursued a more atheist posture than theist, I would say that my enthusiasm for this debate (elsewhere, as much as here) stems from my desire to prevent others from legislating their beliefs and from a (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Faith Issue
|
|
(...) It's probably hostility against the actions of such persons inappropriately expressing itself as antipathy for the ideas held by such persons. Just a thought, -- Hop-Frog (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) In that case we must be careful, or else we're once again presented with a receding target: A. How about this criterion? B. Well, that's not the *real* Christian God. A. Okay, how about this criterion? B. Well, that's not the *real* Christian (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Nam-shub of Enki (was Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament)
|
|
(...) Yeah, it's a decent read. I'll give it that. It's just that I liked all the extensive quoting more than the actual story. (...) Doh! But don't you think that Stephenson is developing an ethical system defended by his Hiro? We agree with those (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Nam-shub of Enki (was Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament)
|
|
I just thought it was a neat story with a groovy idea is all... If you want to read motivations or morals into a book, there's always the bible. I'm sure it even talks about the evils of a hirarchical government in there -somewhere- ;0) "richard (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 14 posts by Scott just now
|
|
You could always just add him to your kill file. In Outlook Express - Message/Block Sender Easy... "Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GLo4nt.BF6@lugnet.com... (...) something (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) The more I think about it, I think we *did* invent math. The fact that numerical analysis appears basic to us merely meaning that math is likely to be conceived of similarly elsewhere. (...) About math? Sure. About God's ability to *change* (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Faith Issue
|
|
(...) I've more often envisioned that when they came to my house, I'd invite them in, and explain my religious perspective to them. I'd probably quite enjoy it. Presuming I wasn't in the middle of something. Actually, someone did that to me on the (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The Faith Issue
|
|
Hey Y'all: Reading another thread has put me squarely in mind of my real problems with Xtianity, and more particularly with Xtians in a more general way. [note: I don't so much mean the Xtians taking part in the other thread, many of whom are making (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Hmmm...I partly agree with you here. God indeed cannot make 1=2, because that would be an absurdity. I wouldn't say that humans invented the rules of math, insofar as 1+1 actually equals 2 across time and space. (Obviously, though, our (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) I completely disagree. You're forcing a Christian God into something that it doesn't need to be. Certainly there are *some* sects of Christianity that would require it as you say, but again, they don't disprove the whole of Christianity. (...) (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) asked (...) And his mum, quick as a flash, said "What did you say 'What did you bring that book that I didn't want to be read to out of up for' for?" ROSCO FUT: .o-t.fun (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Any of us can construct nonsensical statements. How big is yellow? A square circle. 2+2=5. Whatever. How can any being *do* the logically impossible? That which our imaginations may conceive cannot be the standard which a Greater Being must (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) I can conceive of such a being in at least abstract terms, such as "that being which is not bound by our definition of logical impossibility." (...) And mine too, but I'll stand by the logical impossibility requirement. If you have any notion (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Simply because something is used as a crutch does not make it inherently a crutch. Many people use a professed athiesm as a basis to attack and ridicule anyone who believes in a higher power, but that doesn't make atheism a crutch any more so (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Brown writes: [...] Dang... If you thought it was confusing before with 2 Dave's and one James, wait till you try it with 2 Dave's and 2 James's! :) DaveE FUT fun (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) You're saying (in essence) that if God exists, that existence must by definition be without limits. If that's what you're getting at, then I think you need to take a look at how you are using impossible. Impossible, by my understanding, is (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Why do you feel the need for Lego? Isn't it pleasant? Don't you want it? Some people want a crutch. Is that incorrect? What good is morality, then? Is it not only your desire to be seen by yourself and others as "good"? Does it matter in the (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Very Descartian of you :) I think the only rebuttal I can say is "Why must it be that way?" I guess I just don't see a problem with a God for whom certain things are impossible, such as the absurdity of changing 4+3=9, while leaving the rest (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Um-- I don't think that's what I mean... The "good" deemed by God is that which he judges upon, whatever that may be. I've been told repeatedly that there are... I dunno... 3? aspects to God's judgement. 1. Your faith in God 2. Your love of (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
I consider having to rely on some higher power to explain the good and bad in the world a crutch. Stuff happens, deal with it. Requiring a higher power to explain it is a crutch IMO. It also denies the inherent good in people - so many religious (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) This is a pretty blatant leading question, so here's the obvious turn-around right back at you: Why do you feel it is a crutch? James (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) But why do you feel the need to have a crutch? I believe a person is far stronger without a crutch, and religion is simply a crutch for feelings people cannot handle. Why is it so wrong to believe our "fate" is in OUR hands, and ours alone, (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) A few posts back I put forth "God is that being greater than which nothing can be thought" as a rhetorical assumption. It's not my personal belief, but, in my attempt to understand the Christian source of morality, it seemed an okay starting (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Judged by the same criterion that he is beholden to, yes. (...) I'm not sure that I understand this, but on face value, I'd say that I have to disagree. I believe the Sermon on the Mount teachings because they strike a chord within me of all (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) I dunno. What makes you so sure that he shouldn't be? Is it a logical fallacy to say that he shouldn't be? Is there a flaw with such a belief that makes it invalid? (...) Demonstrated, no. At least not within our abilities. But again, is there (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Sort of, but I'm not sure that I agree with it. Why should an infinite being be constrained by our notions of impossibility, even if those notions seem absolute to us? I'm also not sure about the practical equivalence of math and morality: our (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Just jumping in for James, my guess is that he'd say that it's akin to mathematics. God can't suddenly make 1==2 or 3+9=234. Humans "invented" the basic rules mathematics, and the rest is true based on those rules, no matter what. To take away (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Hmm. One of the long-standing concepts of God is "greater-than-which-...-thought." That is, of course, a formulation of the ontological argument and is therefore insufficient to prove His existence, but let's assume it (those of us who don't (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
