Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,810 Year: 3,067/9,624 Month: 912/1,588 Week: 95/223 Day: 6/17 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   God says this, and God says that
forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 323 of 417 (26882)
12-16-2002 7:23 PM
Reply to: Message 296 by nator
12-16-2002 2:51 PM


quote:
Originally posted by schrafinator:
quote:
Originally posted by Chara:
quote:
Originally posted by schrafinator:
Religions say they know. I say that nobody can know. Therefore, religion is not valid. Not any of it.
Schraf,
Can you explain how you got to "therefore" from the previous statements? I'm confused.

Hmm. Religions claim to know the unknowable. If someone claims to know the unknowable, their claims are not valid.

not very convincing, schraf... what religions claim that? who invalidated another's knowledge claim? i know God, are you saying God is unknowable? if so, on what basis do you make that statement... if not, please clarify your position

This message is a reply to:
 Message 296 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 2:51 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 339 by nator, posted 12-18-2002 9:22 AM forgiven has replied

forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 324 of 417 (26885)
12-16-2002 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 317 by robinrohan
12-16-2002 6:06 PM


quote:
Originally posted by robinrohan:
I suppose you could call yourself a Catholic and not believe in the Immaculate Conception but it is an official doctrine.
you *could* call yourself a catholic i guess... a heretical catholic... there is no room here, if one is a catholic one believes in all the church says to believe or one is anathema

This message is a reply to:
 Message 317 by robinrohan, posted 12-16-2002 6:06 PM robinrohan has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 326 by John, posted 12-16-2002 7:41 PM forgiven has replied
 Message 334 by Weyland, posted 12-17-2002 10:01 AM forgiven has replied

forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 325 of 417 (26887)
12-16-2002 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 319 by nator
12-16-2002 6:20 PM


quote:
Originally posted by schrafinator:
Something is unknowable if we cannot detect it with our senses.
It doesn't mean it doesn't exist, but it does mean that we can't detect it, so it is effectively and for all practical purposes non-existent.
but schraf, you said
Religions say they know. I say that nobody can know. Therefore, religion is not valid. Not any of it.
all i've seen you do is give your opinion, and even then you don't show upon what it's based... and the above is simply incredible... if only that which is material (detectable with our senses) can exist, what tools are you utilizing to have these correspondences?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 319 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 6:20 PM nator has not replied

John
Inactive Member


Message 326 of 417 (26888)
12-16-2002 7:41 PM
Reply to: Message 324 by forgiven
12-16-2002 7:32 PM


quote:
Originally posted by forgiven:
quote:
Originally posted by robinrohan:
I suppose you could call yourself a Catholic and not believe in the Immaculate Conception but it is an official doctrine.
you *could* call yourself a catholic i guess... a heretical catholic... there is no room here, if one is a catholic one believes in all the church says to believe or one is anathema

It wasn't always so. It didn't become doctrine until 1854.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by forgiven, posted 12-16-2002 7:32 PM forgiven has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 327 by forgiven, posted 12-16-2002 7:46 PM John has not replied

forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 327 of 417 (26890)
12-16-2002 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 326 by John
12-16-2002 7:41 PM


quote:
Originally posted by John:
quote:
Originally posted by forgiven:
quote:
Originally posted by robinrohan:
I suppose you could call yourself a Catholic and not believe in the Immaculate Conception but it is an official doctrine.
you *could* call yourself a catholic i guess... a heretical catholic... there is no room here, if one is a catholic one believes in all the church says to believe or one is anathema

It wasn't always so. It didn't become doctrine until 1854.

unfortunately, that isn't all one must believe if one is a catholic... mary must have remained a virgin, mary must have been bodily assumed into heaven, mary *must* be deemed "Co-Redemptrix" with her son.. so much more

This message is a reply to:
 Message 326 by John, posted 12-16-2002 7:41 PM John has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 328 by robinrohan, posted 12-16-2002 7:53 PM forgiven has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 328 of 417 (26892)
12-16-2002 7:53 PM
Reply to: Message 327 by forgiven
12-16-2002 7:46 PM


Yes, but you have to allow room for liberal Catholics or liberal anything else. For example, the "holy war" against the infidels by Muslims. Many liberal Muslims interpret this in a different way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 327 by forgiven, posted 12-16-2002 7:46 PM forgiven has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 332 by forgiven, posted 12-16-2002 8:11 PM robinrohan has not replied

Chara
Inactive Member


Message 329 of 417 (26893)
12-16-2002 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 319 by nator
12-16-2002 6:20 PM


quote:
Originally posted by schrafinator:
Something is unknowable if we cannot detect it with our senses.
This is of course presuming that we can trust our senses.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 319 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 6:20 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 330 by forgiven, posted 12-16-2002 8:09 PM Chara has not replied
 Message 340 by nator, posted 12-18-2002 9:27 AM Chara has not replied

forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 330 of 417 (26895)
12-16-2002 8:09 PM
Reply to: Message 329 by Chara
12-16-2002 8:02 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Chara:
quote:
Originally posted by schrafinator:
Something is unknowable if we cannot detect it with our senses.
This is of course presuming that we can trust our senses.

good pernt chara... and of course i trust mine... schraf, i'm sure, trusts hers... however, therein lies a problem eh?... chara, do you remember elijah and his servant? on the mountain? the servant couldn't understand elijah's lack of fear, given the army coming against them... and elijah asked God to give his servant "sight"...
there are senses and there are senses... i guess we could only accept the senses that the largest number of people say they have... leave it up to a vote, as it were

This message is a reply to:
 Message 329 by Chara, posted 12-16-2002 8:02 PM Chara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 337 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 7:56 PM forgiven has replied

zipzip
Inactive Member


Message 331 of 417 (26896)
12-16-2002 8:10 PM
Reply to: Message 252 by nator
12-16-2002 12:46 PM


Forgive me if I came across that way. No, all people are prideful, including me. To acknowledge someone greater than myself in every possible way is to put self-pride to death. And that can be painful if that has been (as it was and in some ways still is) the basis of my life. That is why I have found being a Christian is incredibly difficult and is a life-long struggle with which I rely on God's help every day.
I do not condescend; I include myself in this category. That is why I can speak of how difficult it can be -- every day, even (and especially) for a Christian.
True Christians are "gentle and humble of heart" just like Christ, not arrogant. I don't have all the answers; I'm sad that your experience with Christians has been as you say. Examine Christ's teachings and decide for yourself what he stands for. Chances are there are Christians out there who act more like him than the folks that you've run across.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by nator, posted 12-16-2002 12:46 PM nator has not replied

forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 332 of 417 (26897)
12-16-2002 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 328 by robinrohan
12-16-2002 7:53 PM


quote:
Originally posted by robinrohan:
Yes, but you have to allow room for liberal Catholics or liberal anything else. For example, the "holy war" against the infidels by Muslims. Many liberal Muslims interpret this in a different way.
yayus.. and i'm sure within the muslim community all the "sects" vie for the right to proclaim theirs *the* truth...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 328 by robinrohan, posted 12-16-2002 7:53 PM robinrohan has not replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 333 of 417 (26925)
12-16-2002 11:52 PM
Reply to: Message 310 by joz
12-16-2002 4:29 PM


No, not bad at all.
[This message has been edited by gene90, 12-17-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 310 by joz, posted 12-16-2002 4:29 PM joz has not replied

Weyland
Inactive Member


Message 334 of 417 (26971)
12-17-2002 10:01 AM
Reply to: Message 324 by forgiven
12-16-2002 7:32 PM


quote:
Originally posted by forgiven:
you *could* call yourself a catholic i guess... a heretical catholic... there is no room here, if one is a catholic one believes in all the church says to believe or one is anathema
I put it to you that you don't actually know too many Catholics.
The catholics I know cover the range from the devout and dogmatic to the liberal, just like the members of every other religion.
Protestants have it easy - every time you disagree with someone else in your church over religion you can schism and found a new church with a more "accurate" set of beliefs

This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by forgiven, posted 12-16-2002 7:32 PM forgiven has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 335 by gene90, posted 12-17-2002 1:23 PM Weyland has not replied
 Message 336 by forgiven, posted 12-17-2002 6:56 PM Weyland has not replied

gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 335 of 417 (27018)
12-17-2002 1:23 PM
Reply to: Message 334 by Weyland
12-17-2002 10:01 AM


Yeah, I know ultraconservative Catholics, for example, that reject evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 334 by Weyland, posted 12-17-2002 10:01 AM Weyland has not replied

forgiven
Inactive Member


Message 336 of 417 (27083)
12-17-2002 6:56 PM
Reply to: Message 334 by Weyland
12-17-2002 10:01 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Weyland:
quote:
Originally posted by forgiven:
you *could* call yourself a catholic i guess... a heretical catholic... there is no room here, if one is a catholic one believes in all the church says to believe or one is anathema
I put it to you that you don't actually know too many Catholics.
The catholics I know cover the range from the devout and dogmatic to the liberal, just like the members of every other religion.
Protestants have it easy - every time you disagree with someone else in your church over religion you can schism and found a new church with a more "accurate" set of beliefs

i'm not saying that individual catholics don't part company with rome, weyland.. i'm saying that if they believe the teachings of the church they believe they are accursed if they *do* part ways with the holy see

This message is a reply to:
 Message 334 by Weyland, posted 12-17-2002 10:01 AM Weyland has not replied

funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 337 of 417 (27098)
12-17-2002 7:56 PM
Reply to: Message 330 by forgiven
12-16-2002 8:09 PM


quote:
Originally posted by forgiven:
quote:
Originally posted by Chara:
quote:
Originally posted by schrafinator:
Something is unknowable if we cannot detect it with our senses.
This is of course presuming that we can trust our senses.

good pernt chara... and of course i trust mine... schraf, i'm sure, trusts hers... however, therein lies a problem eh?... chara, do you remember elijah and his servant? on the mountain? the servant couldn't understand elijah's lack of fear, given the army coming against them... and elijah asked God to give his servant "sight"...
there are senses and there are senses... i guess we could only accept the senses that the largest number of people say they have... leave it up to a vote, as it were

Now this is were it hurts that pride. Or else you can deny the existance of other senses. Realizing that you may be intellectually advanced but spiritually barely even a fetus. Until that part of you is nurtured I guess it's easy enough to say it doesn't exist. But then again this is the same as me saying "i don't understand evolution and therefore it doesn't exist". There is evidence on my life of the reserection of Jesus Christ, it's not sufficient for you so you dismiss it. There is evidence to support fluke life, it's not sufficient for me so I dismiss it.
Something to think about here, when someone marches into a scientific debate at starts spouting off when they aren't at all trained or qualified, how much thought do you give to what they say?
Now if someone who doesn't believe in God comes after your faith spouting who did what in the name of what therefore your faith is not credible, though all they have is a percieved view of what you believe, do you give to much to what they say?
Maybe, just maybe that person is a little more in the know about that faith than you are?
I'm trying to avoid being condescending or preachy here, I'm just saying if someone is claiming a personal relationship with God, that maybe they have an extra "sense" or a divinely given "understanding".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 330 by forgiven, posted 12-16-2002 8:09 PM forgiven has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 338 by forgiven, posted 12-18-2002 6:28 AM funkmasterfreaky has not replied
 Message 341 by nator, posted 12-18-2002 9:33 AM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024