05 Apr '05 01:28>1 edit
see below lol
Originally posted by wibIf you want to know you have to read this article by René Girard.
And how exactly is that different from the Christian God? That seems to be one of the follow up questions Son of Saul is asking also.
Originally posted by frogstompThe great advantage of the scientific method is that it is unprejudiced: one does not have to believe a given researcher, one can redo the experiment and determine whether his/her results are true or false. The conclusions will hold irrespective of the state of mind, or the religious persuasion, or the state of consciousness of the investigator and/or the subject of the investigation. Faith, defined as belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence, does not determine whether a scientific theory is adopted or discarded.
The great advantage of the scientific method is that it is unprejudiced: one does not have to believe a given researcher, one can redo the experiment and determine whether his/her results are true or false. The conclusions will hold irrespective of the state of mind, or the religious persuasion, or the state of consciousness of the investigator and/or the ...[text shortened]... f faith required.
same site
That's why science and religion are different animals
Originally posted by ColettiI'm thinking he's referring to St. Anselm.
Woof!
That's the pot calling the kettle black.
Calling his dogma medieval to imply it's wrong is fallacious. The age of the dogma has no bearing on the validity. And your belief in the advances of mankind through science is a dogmatic faith in the concept of evolutionary progress. The question is, Rewind, does the evidence support your dogma. I think you dogma doesn't hunt.
Originally posted by bbarrCivilizing order? A bit of Foucault? Maybe.
Perhaps it is an evolutionary mechanism useful for preventing free-riding, which thereby allows us to solve prisoner's dilemma type collective action problems. The concept of God would be like an internalized panopticon.
Originally posted by ivanhoeOK, I read the article and I will admit that it is a powerful theological rationale for why the "story" of Jesus differs from prior, similar "myths". However, I still don't see how the article explains the dichtomy between the words of Jesus and the atrocities committed supposedly at His command in the Old Testament like the Midianite Massacre. I was particulary struck by this statement:
Please read the whole article.
Originally posted by no1marauder
OK, I read the article and I will admit that it is a powerful theological rationale for why the "story" of Jesus differs from prior, similar "myths". However, I still don't see how the article explains the dichtomy between the words of Jesus and the atrocities committed supposedly at His command in the Old Testament like the Midianite Massacre. I wa ...[text shortened]... nt message be reconciled with the mass murders committed at God's command in the Old Testament?
Originally posted by ivanhoe
If you want to know you have to read this article by René Girard.
http://print.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9604/articles/girard.html
...Lotsastuff
This is just another self referential diatribe, where a christian philosoher / theologian assures us of the truth of the gospels by refering to the gospels.
the answer to the question 'what is ...[text shortened]... ?' will not be found in the bible as the bible allows only for a justification of the christian god
Originally posted by KneverKnightWhy do you persist in projecting time (a creation) onto God? I find it telling that you cannot do such a simple thing as postulate a God outside of time.
If Man did not create God, rather the other way around, what was God doing in the 13 or 14 billion years between the Creation and the time we shuffled on to the Scene? Waiting?
Originally posted by ivanhoeI don't want to read too much into a two word, rather cryptic comment but does this mean that you do not believe that the parts of the Old Testament where God orders the slaughter of innocents is accurate? Specifically, do you believe that such passages were rationalizations by the ancient Israelites for their own barbaric practices which were not ordered by God (Jesus) and are fundamentally incompatible with Jesus' message in the Gospels?
.... beats me.