 | | One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
is illustrated here: (URL) What sort of god thwarts his people out of spite? Not my sort. Brick Testament is absolutely gorgeous work and I think the Rev is to be commended for some very very well done models and pages. Bravo! But I can tell you (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Okay, this is a troll, but I'll bite, since Larry's my chum... Spite? Hardly. Larry, the picture is taken out of context. Presented by itself, yes, it depicts a spiteful god. However, so would a picture depicting only the scene of a parent (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) I choose not to believe in any god, but it's not because of the sort of god "he" may be. Especially as described by the OT prophets, whose words many scholars (christian & other) have raised doubts about anyway. BTW, what *is* your sort (of (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Don't you mean "this is a trawl" ... ? OW OW OW OW OWWWW MY HEAD LFB FUT-> you know where (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) (Ah carp! I see it's time to get off my bass and get punning!) Come on boys and gills, he may be bullheaded, but it's cold-blooded to call Larry shark bait. No need to put his head on a pike. Let's just pick up the Pisces, and get back in the (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Once the tower was, constructed was the plan not to shoot an arrow at God? But I agree with you, the story I remember is that God causes confusion in the tower workers by creating the language barriers – this was more to stop the tower (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) In that case, it's even more absurd than spiteful. Did God really think they'd reach Heaven? If so, then why doesn't he smite every satellite we launch? And if not, why didn't he let them try--and fail--since that would be a much more (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The Nam-shub of Enki (was Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament)
|
|
(...) Maybe a god who loves his people does these things, in the same manner that you would stop your children from stepping in front of a moving train -- even if you had to use force to stop them. You've come to the right place to ask your (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) I would rather it were "mostly harmless". =) -- Hop-Frog (23 years ago, 14-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)
|
|
(...) An even more recent example of this would be the utterance of Voldemort's name in the Harry Potter series. Maggie C. (23 years ago, 14-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 see your point, and I've heard that argument before, but as an analogy it fails because the alleged God is allegedly omnipotent, so comparisons between a God:Man equation and a Man:Man equation aren't really valid. An omnipotent being has (...) (23 years ago, 14-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)
|
|
Dave! Did you even read my post? -- Hop-Frog (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: The Nam-shub of Enki (was Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament)
|
|
(...) Post? What post? Actually, I was responding not to your post directly but to a point that resonated from what you wrote. To that end, I should have been more specific in identifying that your point was not really what I was addressing, and I (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) I'd offer that one shouldn't read a great deal of Old Testament history with a literal eye. Much of the ancient work has a very folklorish quality from which we are meant to learn certain truths (such as the folly of pride in the case of (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Oh, ship, here we blow again... (...) Mast of us wood agree that would be downright krill. (...) I appreciate a man who has morays. (...) Whale, tanks for shearing. (...) You're hooked? (...) And what would be the porpoise of that? -John (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: The Nam-shub of Enki (was Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament)
|
|
(...) Ah, then you fell for the misleading opening comments -- if you get to the end, it's all about how there is no god. Instead, there is just a story to describe a human experience that may have to do with evolution. (...) Nope, which sucks. Try (...) (23 years ago, 14-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)
|
|
(...) Well, that's just not inflammatory enough for me! (...) I'll try re-sending the reply just to verify that we're able to communicate. I didn't offer any great insights, but I don't want you to think I'm snubbing you, either. (...) Ah, I recall (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) But that puts us squarely back in the "is it all true or not" debate, and how does one distinguish biblical truth from biblical falsehood? I'm not putting this forth as an all-or-nothing question, and I'm delighted to accept the assertion that (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Learning, common sense, reason, faith, and experience, all in good measure, are the best approach to ascertaining Christianity's *validity*. Since we can't absolutely prove it to be true using empirical methods--nor can we prove it to be (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Herein lies the dilemma. The appeal of science (particularly mathematics) is that it doesn't change. Did science change when Einstein theorized that time wasn't constant? Nope. Only our understanding of reality changed. To posit Christianity (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Shouldn't that be bouys & gills? (...) 'Eel get over it. (...) Hey! That's my star sign! (...) I prefer mine grilled. Unlike my friend Sue-she prefers her fish raw! (...) Yep, take the bait every time! (...) Nah, that'd be a bad line to (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: The Nam-shub of Enki (was Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament)
|
|
Oooo... Well done! You really like 'Snow Crash' by Neal Stephenson? If you haven't read it, you should. The entire book is about Nam-Shubs and 'neurolinguistic hacking'. Very cyber.. "richard marchetti" <blueofnoon@aol.com> wrote in message (...) (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 -- why not ask Him? ;-) *IF* I were to second-guess the guy, I would imagine that He wasn't fearful of the tower builders actually succeeding. Rather, He was probably aware of the dangers of a prideful-then-disappointed people at such (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Oh Cod, not more fishy puns, well I suppose this is the plaice for them, so better not get in a flounder. (...) Maybe you should try whiting for a bit and mullet over before replying to these messages, that way you won't feel like a sprat. (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Yikes--easy there, fireball. Since this is an open forum, I address my comments to any who care to respond. With this in mind, I specifically stated that I don't hold you to the literal standard, but I don't excuse others. If you perceive it (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Yeah, I didn't want to make an-emone of the LUGNET polyps by posting in the wrong place. (...) Halibut puns? Heck!-av-iar no soul? Get in yer boat & roe away! ROSCO (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Nah, it's buoys and gulls-- at least that's what's on the restroom doors of every tacky seafood restaurant I've ever been to. Maggie C. (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the Cod of the old testament
|
|
(...) My cup is full to the bream with all this punishment. Stop it you seafood basket-cases. pete.w (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) So what's trolling, then? Isn't it trying to sucker someone into debating something? (albeit civilly or not) Was that the point of your sensationalism on Jeremy's point? To get someone *else* to respond who was such a fundamentalist? Not that (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | RE: trolling? (Was all that OT God stuff)
|
|
(...) I see your point, but if (hypothetically) I call someone a bonehead, there's nothing wrong with it either, except the connotation. If Jeremy was using "troll" to say "bravo to you for throwing down the rhetorical gauntlet and inviting (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Tried that. No answer. (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: trolling? (Was all that OT God stuff)
|
|
(...) Well, the thing that's wrong with that is the fact that there's nothing *but* connotation there. Being a "bonehead" is sufficiently without good definition, whereas a "troll" post has a definition as well as a connotation. If Jeremy only used (...) (23 years ago, 15-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 read Stephenson's novel last year, and while I liked it, I don't think he ever gets any more interesting than his obvious sources: Sumerian mythology, and William Burroughs. And I guess I fault Stephenson, and many other Cyberpunk authors, (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: trolling? (Was all that OT God stuff)
|
|
(...) Thanks for the tip. Haven't seen it work that way here, though. (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: trolling? (Was all that OT God stuff)
|
|
(...) And that would be incorrect in my understanding of the word "troll." troll (trol) verb 1. To post a message in a newsgroup or other online conference in the hopes that somebody else will consider the original message so outrageous that it (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: trolling? (Was all that OT God stuff)
|
|
(...) All right then. Stipulating that "troll" can reasonably be used as a neutral term, then I'll agree that I was trolling. Generally I don't accept that definition, however; never have I seen "troll" used with a positive connotation, and it's (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Indeed. I do not posit Christianity as an unchanging Thing. I do assert, however, that Christianity claims to have some insights about the ultimate nature of reality, insofar as it concerns us. Science didn't change with Einstein's theories, (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: trolling? (Was all that OT God stuff)
|
|
(...) No, I don't think you'd ever notice the trend in any sort of public forum, because while it works, the most common reply to a flame is to flame back. I've kind of noticed that in o-t.debate-- a rather alarming number of the regulars quite (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Forgive me if this comes across as trolling, but my understanding would benefit from a few points of clarification. Do you propose that morality is self-evident? I accept a priori your faith in God, but did God specifically create morality, or (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: trolling? (Was all that OT God stuff)
|
|
(...) I suppose if one defined it that way, sure. Perhaps it's my inexperience with outside newsgroups other than Lugnet, but I've more just seen it as a general (non-person-specific) goading into debate. Certainly the connotations associated with (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: trolling? (Was all that OT God stuff)
|
|
(...) Darn, and I just told Larry I don't usually get heated replies :) DaveE (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 helluva lot more rambling than I'm comfortable with... (...) Ah -- I think I see what happened. You had replied to my message, in a fairly (imho) personal kinda way ("personal" as though one person addressing another, not "personal" as in (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) 8^) What's your problem, anyway? I was getting set to demonize you and burn you in effigy, and then you turn out to have been reasonable all along! 8^) (...) Ah! My fault. My use of "nonsense" was intended with a note of irony (which, as is (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Let me see if I can phrase it better. I expect that you posit Truth (moral, judicial, 'heavenly') and God as unchanging; while Christianity (human understanding of Truth) changes as time goes on. Is that correct? (...) Not necessarily morality (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Oops-- miswording/typo on my part: That's why experimental developments in other things are palatable and are unpalatable in religion-- other things aren't expected to be "fair". DaveE (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) I propose that human moral awareness is self-evident from the fact that all non- intellectually or emotionally impaired humans for as long as we have record have possessed an innate belief, sense, and faculty for moral calculus. So yes, my (...) (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)
|
| |
| | 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
|
|
(...) 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
|
|
(...) 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
|
|
(...) 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
|
|
(...) 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
|
|
(...) 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
|
|
(...) 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
|
|
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
|
|
(...) 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
|
|
(...) 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
|
|
(...) 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
|
|
(...) 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
|
|
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
|
|
(...) 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
|
|
(...) I can't wait for the day when we have 2 Larrys & 2 Scotts.... ROSCO (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | 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
|
|
(...) Wait until a few Eric's show up, and maybe a Chris or two... Dave! (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to 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 with the god of the old testament
|
|
Dave Schuler wrote in message ... (...) And then there's the rapidly proliferating horde of Kevin's.... Bwahahahaha! Kevin (Wilson) ---...--- NEW Tank Engine custom train set: (URL) Annual SYSTEM Creativity Contest: (URL) Lego Kits & Custom models: (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | 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 (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 with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Really. You know better, Dave! There's only one Eric. Just many manifestations. This has already been established and no Eric/k persona has yet successfully proved the negative, so it must be true. (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | 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 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 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: 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)
|
|
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: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Hey, I think it'd be great to have another Dave! Now, it could be problematic if there was a Dave, or even a Dave. And what would we do with a Dave? Any of those could cause big trouble. Especially in multiples. But I think it'd be cool to (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
|
(...) 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)
|
|
(...) 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: 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)
|
|
(...) 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: 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 (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) If you're asserting that a universe in which more people are legitimately saved is less desirable than a universe in which fewer people are legimately saved, then I think we have another debate on our hands. Besides which, 'don't criticize (...) (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: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Wow. On face value I can't find any reason why I disagree with your summation of my view. I would ammend, however, the idea that God doesn't care about our measure against the yardstick, if we remain consistent with the level of our own moral (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) This 5-response string of linear debate was so remarkably thorough and compicated in its exigesis, and so many Jameses were postulated, quoted, and deconstructed that I am frankly coming to doubt my own identity. A friend and i have recently (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Like Dave? Dave? How about Dave!, (Dave), or even Dave!? ROSCO (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Peronhood (was One of my issues)
|
|
(...) a (...) On initial inspection, I'd say the latter - those memories & neural functions are (IMO) based on the combination of body / brain in which they reside. Suddenly changing that would cause...well I don't really know what it would cause, (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Or, when sojouring en España, ¡Dave! or even ¿Dave? Dave! (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Peronhood (was One of my issues)
|
|
(...) An even hairier one: Person X's brain is cut in half, as is Person Y's. One pair of lobes is swapped between the two of them (Person X's right lobe is fused with Person Y's left lobe, etc.) What has become of their singular personhoods? Do the (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Thinking for your self, whoever that is (Was Re: Personhood )
|
|
(...) There is a body of evidence--not really conclusive, but provocative--gleaned from the study of epileptics who have had the corpus callosum (the goop connecting the two hemispheres of the thinkbox) severed. Studies have shown that in some cases (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) I kinda agree-- I think I'd chew down all morals to "respect others" (justice), and "want best for others" (charity). And the one that people forget because it's generally so assumed: "want best for yourself" (selfishness). The rest is all (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Peronhood (was One of my issues)
|
|
Unfortunately, I don't think you're going to get an answer to ANY of these cases until they are actually tried (and make no mistake, they'll be tried sooner or later, we are too curious a lot to ignore them). (...) -- | Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) I'm not sure where you read that. I'm not asserting any outcome, I'm saying that the only honest answer I can give is "I don't know". Your whole beef appears to be that if it isn't verfiable by empirical science it's inferior, and then you go (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) disproven. (...) Well, the similarity was insofar as by asking "How about this criterion? No that's not the *real* Christian God", one assumedly is receding the Christian beliefs, but only to a point. IE, accepting the answers as true results (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking for your self, whoever that is (Was Re: Personhood )
|
|
What is this? The ugly return of the Julian Jaynes part of the argument? See: (URL) is exactly the kind of stuff that Jaynes would have used to support his seemingly radical theory. What's worse is that if you follow it further it seems to justify a (...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Peronhood (was One of my issues)
|
|
(...) Do we have Peronistas here? Ack. Something about Ross we did not know! Don't cry for me, Argentina! (and no, I am not going to give up my day job...) (23 years ago, 16-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Personhood[1] (was One of my issues)
|
|
(...) A (...) in (...) new (...) terms (...) body (...) adjustment (...) not (...) that? (...) swapped (...) Yep, exactly. How much of the "person" is in the "soul"? I say none, the soul doesn't really exist, but who knows? ROSCO [1] Lar, note (...) (23 years ago, 17-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) the S¢LDave ´Dave…………babyDave `Dave…………seriousDave .Dave…………historicalDave ;Dave…………colostomyDave =CDave………euroDave (this will look a lot cooler one of these days) =Ctr#Dave……eurotrhashDave C=Dave……… navalDave Dªve…………mysteriouslyhighDave (see (...) (23 years ago, 17-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Oooo, "Low" blow... ...by the way, how's the business? =oP -- Hop-Frog (23 years ago, 17-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) HEY! I still hold the copyright to this name from back in my Lego retail days! LegoDave was my name...don't wear it out! ;) -Dave 'still ticked off that he didn't register www.dave.com when he had the chance' Johann (23 years ago, 17-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Some people think that parents discipline children out of spite coupled with ignorance. The idea is that since they were hurt by their parents, they can't bear to inspect the notion that it wasn't actually beneficial for them...that instead it (...) (23 years ago, 17-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)
|
|
(...) It was high poetry for the modern age. If you want a neat story, Cryptonomicon holds together better. Chris (23 years ago, 17-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) I don't understand the goal in seperating this from the question of asking how believers know God to be. If you accept that they know that God exists at all, why not accept that they know God to be good as just part of the definition of God? (...) (23 years ago, 18-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) Let's start by trying to distinguish between two slippery terms... I am uncomfortable with even the idea of "morality" (i.e. conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct) because it suggests something beyond the conduct (...) (23 years ago, 18-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) Wow, and I didn't even have to pay him (much) to ask me that :) Phase I: Desire Humans have emotions about their state. Very basic. "Happy", "sad". (Normally I might say "good" or "bad", but that's easily equatable with morality, so I'll (...) (23 years ago, 18-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) For the record, I also think of this as a deeply romanticized notion of what I'm experiencing...not some literal description. (...) I certainly agree with this and your further characterization of our social nature and how that leads to an (...) (23 years ago, 19-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues (Warning: even wordier than usual)
|
|
(...) You are probably expressing neither morals nor ethics, but rather your own will. Knowing these things are "right" for you, doesn't make them "right" for everyone else. Moral and ethical acts are expressed in relation to agreed upon standards (...) (23 years ago, 19-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Morals & Ethics reprise (was ...)
|
|
(...) The way I define things (similar to Richard, but not quite the same), you would be expressing morals - that is, a system of conduct in accordance with right and wrong as you understand them. IMHO, morals are not universal. Ethics are much like (...) (23 years ago, 19-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Morals & Ethics reprise (was ...)
|
|
(...) Darn you! Now I wanna go reply to that oh-so-old-post... again. :) DaveE (23 years ago, 19-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Morals & Ethics reprise (was ...)
|
|
(...) That's REALLY good James! The lexicographers should be talking to us, Baby! "YOUR morals are not OUR ethics." I will always remember this point of distinction. Damned slippery words... -- Hop-Frog (23 years ago, 19-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Morals & Ethics reprise (was ...)
|
|
(...) Heh. I know what you mean... in hunting down the reference, I found myself rereading the entire thread. :) James (23 years ago, 19-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Morals & Ethics reprise (was ...)
|
|
(...) Me too! (and considering a post or two as well) (23 years ago, 19-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Morals & Ethics reprise (was ...)
|
|
(...) So-- ok, I've heard several times now that there's a distinction between ethics and morality. Personally I never was aware of the distinction, but what exactly is it for those who distinguish? At a guess, I'd say you're defining it as: - (...) (23 years ago, 19-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Morals & Ethics reprise (was ...)
|
|
That's more or less what *I* mean (agreeing with James' further tweaking of these words), but those are not the accepted definitions of the word, not exactly. Generally, the definitions for the words "moral(s)" and "ethics" are very similar, except (...) (23 years ago, 19-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Morals & Ethics reprise (was ...)
|
|
(...) Nope, that's pretty close. I would say that ethics are not a combined morality, but rather are a suggested morality, but that's only because it has a different implication of the derivation.(1) Further, something as broad as a societal ethic (...) (23 years ago, 19-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
