VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Thursday, May 16, 08:37:42am [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, [10] ]
Subject: Philosophies of the imaginary


Author:
Damoclese
 		[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 05/28/02 12:29am
In reply to: Wade A. Tisthammer 's message, "Yes. But so what?" on 05/27/02 5:06pm
 That's all well and good. I don't actually care all that much about "modern theistic philosophy" because it's underlying assumptions to me are useless.

Whether or not those questions are "petty and useless" I'm not so sure. They simply point out holes in a framework that is already riddled with them. They go back to fundamentals like "Can God logically really be all powerful?".

Even more fundamental is "Why should the Bible be considered God's word?"

Until these questions are answered, anyone, and allow me to emphasize anyone who believes in these things believes in them out of something other than logic, and something other than science and math. These are our most reliable friends for making determinations about what is deemed knowledge.

Feelings and intuition are far less reliable. Could they be right? Maybe. Maybe not. They have nowhere near the validation those other fields have, though it may be true that those fields have degrees of them in them, but the fact is those fields minimize those unreliable mechanisms to the highest degree possible.

We must throw feelings out when it comes to what constitutes genuine knowledge, for they are not reliable.

As for your story, well, it makes all sorts of presuppositions that someone who doesn't believe in any Christian sort of God chortle now and then.

Christians are too wrapped up in what the Bible says and it's technicalities. It all obviously doesn't make logical sense. It contradicts itself. It makes God's existance logically implausible because of the absolutes it generates.

I seriously doubt anyone would object to the sort of Christian who focuses on being at peace rather than trying to push their idea of God at all costs, their justifications of what they believe, and their pursual of Biblical reconcilation.

Alas, those Christians are far and few between, and the example they could set would be noticable to even the casual observer.

I guess it really isn't all that surprising to find a belief system generated to help control the masses offers them little actual peace.

Damoclese
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
Subject Author Date
Omnipotent/OmniscientRex06/24/02 5:52pm
    More on omnipotence and omniscience.Wade A. Tisthammer06/26/02 1:16pm

    Post a message:
    This forum requires an account to post.
    [ Create Account ]
    [ Login ]
    Forum timezone: GMT-6
    VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
    Before posting please read our privacy policy.
    VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
    Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.