Brian: Freethinking

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

DAVE
The response was to someone on the list who claims to be
a freethinker, not a Christian, and seemed to be a valid comment.  I would
suggest that the "off-topic" discussion seemed suitable when broached by
someone other then a Christian and that you hold the same standards for all.
As well, I too have been around long enough to often see people avoid
questions by dismissing it as a "useless presuppositional argument".
I'd be interested in what you actually think about what I said - we're not
talking about the "nature of truth", but of the discovery of truth and the
knowledge of truth and the means of attaining it.  I'm sure you've thought
this out completely before you take on such claims (of truth) as the Bible
being errant etc

POOBAH
Suggest a better forum and perhaps we can discuss it. If all's you want to
discuss evolution & metaphysics (given what you chose to post about here),
why don't you go to a list that is appropriate for them? Yes, we all get
off-topic from time to time, but do you actually have anything to offer on
questions that show the bible to be errant?

I know why you want to go off in this direction; if you can "prove" that
none of us are really certain of anything, then like some twisted
first-cause argument where you say everything must have a beginning but then
assert one that doesn't, you can then trumpet the "one thing" you are
certain of, Gawd in your heart, and then we can all be rapt pawns hanging on
your every word. Well that might be a lovely plan, but to get there you'll
have to confuse truth with provisional acceptance, logical or mathematic
proof with empirical correlation, and before you know it we'll be discussing
what "is" really "is."

It's just quite tedious, that's my real objection.

So if the sum of your proof consists of you having some direct line to the
big-guy above, first simply admit that you have no reasonable, objective
(meaning *jointly* sharable by all) for your beliefs, and that with your
direct line to Gawd in your heart you are simply a Gnostic heretic. Then I
personally will let you question-beg all you want because there will be no
point in having a rational discussion with you.

If Glenn or someone else wants to discuss this topic with you, more power to
them.

If instead you'd like to discuss presuppositions as they apply to the topic
at hand, instead of beating this dead horse, why don't you take up the
suggestion I gave above? I guarantee you that NO ONE has ever even attempted
it around here, so your lucid insights would be quite welcome. So before I
ask again I'll remind you of your own words:

DAVE
It would be nice if Brian takes your lead and discusses the issue
intelligently - I would like to think that anyone who has a certain opinion
on something or belief would readily discuss the process by which they come
to that point of knowledge or belief.

POOBAH
Since that's how you feel, then you won't mind telling us what criteria you
use to determine which non-Biblical miracles you choose to accept and which
Biblical miracles you choose to reject without begging the question of the
accuracy of the Bible? Or is it just because of some warm-fuzzy feeling in
your chest?

• Previous message: Brian: Freethinking
• Next message: Brian: Freethinking
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]