Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,912 Year: 4,169/9,624 Month: 1,040/974 Week: 367/286 Day: 10/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Proofs of God
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 131 (33263)
02-26-2003 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by John
02-26-2003 11:13 AM


The ideas of C.S Lewis are incredible though if you desire to explain them away there's always the billions of years to hide behind.
paulk-
curious where you found this witchburning reference?
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by John, posted 02-26-2003 11:13 AM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by PaulK, posted 02-26-2003 12:35 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied
 Message 18 by John, posted 02-26-2003 1:17 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 17 of 131 (33274)
02-26-2003 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by PaulK
02-26-2003 12:35 PM


The witch burning reference you refer to is on page 14 of the book Mere Christianity.
First off at this point C.S Lewis is not even close to getting into Christianity, this comes much later in the book. So Christianity has no bearing on this section of the book, as he is trying to establish the fact that humans have some sort of moral code/or scale by which we measure right and wrong. A scale that is similar to all humans.
Someone Lewis talked to had tried to use the argument that morals had changed because 300 years ago people in England were burning witches.
Now Lewis is not condoning the burning of witches, rather trying to explain how if we lived in that period of time, believing that there were witches. People who sold themselves to the devil for supernatural powers, which they used to kill their neighbours, drive them mad and bring bad weather. That we would probably agree that if anyone deserved the death penalty then these people did.
Because we have advanced in knowledge, no longer believing in witches there is no moral advance in not executing witches when you do not think they are there.
Lewis also says "You would not call a man humane for ceasing to set mousetraps if he did so because he believed there were no mice in the house."
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by PaulK, posted 02-26-2003 12:35 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by PaulK, posted 02-26-2003 1:44 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 131 (33276)
02-26-2003 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by John
02-26-2003 1:17 PM


Yeah kind of like Darwin
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by John, posted 02-26-2003 1:17 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by John, posted 02-26-2003 5:51 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 131 (33279)
02-26-2003 1:55 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by PaulK
02-26-2003 1:44 PM


He's saying that the people of the time believed they were witches so it seemed to them that these people should be executed.
We today still believe that if someone kills their neighbour they should be punished. The standard hasn't changed.
It's an illustration, not a judgement on the witchburnings.
The darwin comment was a joke, hence the smiley face.
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by PaulK, posted 02-26-2003 1:44 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by PaulK, posted 02-26-2003 2:21 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 131 (33571)
03-03-2003 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by PaulK
02-26-2003 2:21 PM


burning witches
He argues that it would be acceptable to execute actual witches however he also admits that those executed were innocent of being witches. So he has not justified the actual executions - but the question asked was ABOUT the actual executions.
The question being asked was about the standard used to judge these witches. It was believed that these people were killing their neighbours. They felt that these people should be punished for their actions. We would do the same today if we thought there were people going around killing their neighbours.
Now these people were not witches, however there are people in our prisons who are not murderers (or guilty of any crime), yet are still being punished. The standard has not changed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by PaulK, posted 02-26-2003 2:21 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by PaulK, posted 03-03-2003 6:17 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 131 (33575)
03-03-2003 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by PaulK
03-03-2003 6:17 PM


Re: burning witches
I do have the book and have read it a few different times. What is frustrating me is that this reference we are discussing is a side note at the end of the chapter. And I'm wondering if you have read the book.
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by PaulK, posted 03-03-2003 6:17 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by PaulK, posted 03-04-2003 2:49 AM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 58 of 131 (33765)
03-06-2003 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by PaulK
03-06-2003 2:49 AM


fairness
I have been hoping to discuss the contents of this book for quite some time now, though I am finding this conversation unproductive. I will be reading this book over again to refresh my memory. I encourage Paul k and John to please read this book too, it is a very short and simple book that will not take up more than a few hours of your time.
Bamboo brought up the idea of fairness, we all seem to have this concept of fairness, even the very young. What are your ideas on where this came from?
I will have more to say when I have re read the book.
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by PaulK, posted 03-06-2003 2:49 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Gzus, posted 03-06-2003 2:12 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied
 Message 61 by PaulK, posted 03-06-2003 6:58 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied
 Message 75 by John, posted 03-09-2003 8:59 AM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 60 of 131 (33778)
03-06-2003 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Gzus
03-06-2003 2:12 PM


Re: fairness
what's wrong with 'we don't know yet'.
Nothing wrong with that, I was just wondering if there were some ideas.
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Gzus, posted 03-06-2003 2:12 PM Gzus has not replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 64 of 131 (33877)
03-07-2003 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by PaulK
03-07-2003 5:00 AM


moral law
In his book "Mere Christianity" Lewis proposes a "moral law", something like a natural law, ie. gravity. The difference he points out it is that unlike natural laws we have a choice whether or not to obey the "moral law".
Why do we feel some things are wrong? Why do we get that feeling of guilt when we disobey that law? Why do we get angry when we feel someone else has disobeyed that law? Where did the concept of conscience come from?
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.
[This message has been edited by funkmasterfreaky, 03-07-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by PaulK, posted 03-07-2003 5:00 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Coragyps, posted 03-07-2003 4:18 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied
 Message 68 by shilohproject, posted 03-07-2003 10:44 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied
 Message 71 by PaulK, posted 03-08-2003 11:30 AM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 66 of 131 (33882)
03-07-2003 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Coragyps
03-07-2003 4:18 PM


Re: moral law
I'm talking people here, and pissing on the floor isn't exactly a question of morals.
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Coragyps, posted 03-07-2003 4:18 PM Coragyps has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Coragyps, posted 03-07-2003 5:27 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 131 (33919)
03-08-2003 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by shilohproject
03-07-2003 10:44 PM


Re: moral law
Shiloh,
The section of the book that we are attempting to discuss C.S Lewis has not even brought up Christianity yet. Lewis is discussing mankind.
------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by shilohproject, posted 03-07-2003 10:44 PM shilohproject 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