welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

11.08.07 - I Can't Change 3
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> Sinfest
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mouse



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 17101
Location: under the bed

PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 11:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pytheus wrote:
Well thats my final shot, if you still don't get it I dunno what to tell ya.

oh, i get what you are saying. you are saying:
Pytheus wrote:
I don't believe the human mind could deal with a direct interaction with god. I'll give you only that by chance Adam and Eve may have done so but after eatiting the apple, humanity lost its direct connection with god and now we have to speak to him by proxy.


which is a follow up to:
Pytheus wrote:
All reported human interaction with god as always in every case been "a messenger of god" AKA an angel. No human to my knowledge of the monotheistic religion has ever talked directly to god. Everything has been second hand.


except "reported" human/god interactions are reported via various religious works, like, say, the bible. except you apparently don't believe the bible, the source literature for a major monotheistic religion. now, any neutral observer, reading said bible, could point to places where it says, straight out, that god talked to so-and-so. what you apparently are saying is that this is not true because you don't believe it. ok, that's fine - but you can't say that no monotheistic religion believes that god had talked directly to humans because the religion itself believes he/she/it has. and says so, right there in their literature. _you_ don't believe it, but you aren't the religion.

just because you don't believe the report doesn't mean the report doesn't say what it clearly says.
_________________
aka: neverscared!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sojobo



Joined: 12 Jul 2006
Posts: 2437

PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What I have trouble with, by which I mean where I think what Pytheus is saying rather misses whatever mark he's aiming at, is, if:

Pytheus wrote:
Angels are just a part of him and how he communicates with us and manages the workings of the universe.

Then, in what sense is:

Pytheus wrote:
No human to my knowledge of the monotheistic religion has ever talked directly to god. Everything has been second hand.

A meaningful distinction?
_________________
"To love deeply in one direction makes us more loving in all others."
- Anne-Sophie Swetchine
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bun bun
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 1:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guys, you're missing out a really, really big consideration in all this.

This person is really stupid.
Back to top
kame



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 2565
Location: Alba Nuadh

PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 2:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Genesis 3:8-9 wrote:
Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the LORD God called to the man, "Where are you?"


You don't read your bible, do you good sir?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Pytheus
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bun bun wrote:
Guys, you're missing out a really, really big consideration in all this.

This person is really stupid.


Ya know, I'm trying to be considerate and not bash people on their beliefs. I have reason to believe what I do and just cause it doesn't follow what you've been taught doesn't make me or you any smarter or stupid. Its all myth till we meet our end and find out for ourselves.

I'm not real big on the bible I haven't read it front to back. Just picked up a lot of facts along the way and If I'm wrong then I'm wrong and I will admit to that. I'm not so full of myself to believe everything I say is the truth, I re-examine my ideas based on new information all the time. Not everything is written in the bible, its not the only source and last stop for information.

My ideas maybe too complicated for you, I don't believe the afterlife can be explained in simple terms and I see it as a complex web. Maybe I'm over thinking the whole thing and its as simple and neat as people describe. But I don't see black and white, good an evil. Its bigger then that, shades of gray and much more colorful.

Call me stupid, thats fine. In the end your just being an ass and probably really have no interest in really understanding me.
Back to top
Pytheus
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kame wrote:
Genesis 3:8-9 wrote:
Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the LORD God called to the man, "Where are you?"


You don't read your bible, do you good sir?


Ok I give. Adam and Eve spoke to god. Got it. Moving on. Though I'm curious. Why would god need to ask "Where are you?"
Back to top
Yorick



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 12101
Location: In the undersnow

PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

bun bun wrote:
Guys, you're missing out a really, really big consideration in all this.

This person is really stupid.

oh, c'mon. Stupidity is never a barrier to debate.
_________________
Currently experiencing: not summer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bun bun
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pytheus wrote:
Call me stupid, thats fine. In the end your just being an ass and probably really have no interest in really understanding me.

I generally equate "stupid" with "illiterate", and unless English is your second language, you're at least that.

Pytheus wrote:
My ideas maybe too complicated for you, I don't believe the afterlife can be explained in simple terms and I see it as a complex web. Maybe I'm over thinking the whole thing and its as simple and neat as people describe. But I don't see black and white, good an evil. Its bigger then that, shades of gray and much more colorful.

An illiterate with ideas too complicated for me to possibly understand. I'm going to flex my e-penis here and say that in all likelihood, you wouldn't know ideas too complex for me to understand if they bit you in the arse, because I'm attempting to take analytic philosophy at Princeton after I graduate.

Have a go at interpreting Wittgenstein:
Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico Philosophicus wrote:
3.315 If we turn a constituent of a proposition into a variable, there is a class of propositions all of which are values of the resulting variable proposition. In general, this class too will be dependent on the meaning that our arbitrary conventions have given to parts of the original proposition. But if all the signs in it that have arbitrarily determined meanings are turned into variables, we shall still get a class of this kind. This one, however, is not dependent on any convention, but solely on the nature of the pro position. It corresponds to a logical form--a logical prototype.
3.323 In everyday language it very frequently happens that the same word has different modes of signification--and so belongs to different symbols--or that two words that have different modes of signification are employed in propositions in what is superficially the same way. Thus the word 'is' figures as the copula, as a sign for identity, and as an expression for existence; 'exist' figures as an intransitive verb like 'go', and 'identical' as an adjective; we speak of something, but also of something's happening. (In the proposition, 'Green is green'--where the first word is the proper name of a person and the last an adjective--these words do not merely have different meanings: they are different symbols.)


In your interpretation, please write the logic that you used to support your argument in truth-functional notation.
Back to top
sojourner



Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Posts: 366
Location: down a' shore

PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 5:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Moses talked directly to God throughout the wilderness period, starting on mount Sinai and then periodically in the holiest room in the tabernacle as the Israelites wandered their 40 years.

to wit:
Quote:
Thus the LORD used to speak to Moses face to face, just as a man speaks to his friend. (Exodus 33:11 NASB)



Not without being effected though. He did get a divine sunburn.

Quote:
And when Aaron and all the children of Israel saw Moses, behold, the skin of his face shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him." (Exodus 34:28-30 KJV)

_________________
Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we
have lost in information? -T. S. Eliot
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
bun bun
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 5:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just totally went off-topic there, didn't I? Anyway, mouse has got it right.
Back to top
Pytheus
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Your correct me so dumb. Now get off your ego trip. Maybe my ideas are stupid. But you know what? Religion isn't logical and subject to alot of interpetation. You can agree or disagree but nobody knows the truth til your dead.

You have no idea who I am, what I do. All you have is some silly idea I brought up to judge me on. I'm not going to play your little game to prove who is smarter then the other. You maybe intelligent but you lack maturity.
Back to top
DeD CHiKn



Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 10223
Location: Baltimore, Maryla*gunshot*

PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pytheus wrote:
I'm not going to play your little game.


But you will keep fueling the fire?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
bun bun
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm sorry, the correct answer was

Quote:
In the sentence "Green is green," the seemingly logical interpretation is p=p. Wittgenstein postulates, however, that the logical interpretation of this sentence is

where the extension of "N" is {things named "green"}, and the extension of "G" is {things that are green}.


To answer your response more "maturely", I would have to go into the reasons why religious scholars treat religion as a logical subject, why religion becomes metaphysics when one does not follow nor attempt to interpret a religious text as you are doing, and so forth, but I liked the "immature" answer better.
Back to top
Mr_Moustache



Joined: 01 Oct 2006
Posts: 9123
Location: The thing in itself that is Will

PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dudes.
_________________
When life gives you lemons, some people make lemonade. I just eat them and make a sour face.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pytheus
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DeD CHiKn wrote:
Pytheus wrote:
I'm not going to play your little game.


But you will keep fueling the fire?


To answer, no. This will offically be my last post on this thread. My inital feeling that people wouldn't accept my ideas and bash me on them were correct. I didn't expect people to believe me, but at least have the maturity to discuss the topic in an adult manner. I admit I maybe wrong. But it wasn't something that merit such abusive behavoir. Just everything I've read aside from the bible had an angelic messenger.

I'm not a researcher or a proffessional in the feild of theology. We all draw our own conclusions from religion, each sees things a bit differently. People shouldn't be judged on their beliefs. Some really smart people have some silly ideas on religion. Religion is a personal journey of discovery, no answer is wrong or right. I don't use the bible so I don't consider it when gathering ideas and information. My idea was harmless and wouldn't destroy the very foundation of christanity, why such passionate and aggressive attacks were warranted baffles me.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> Sinfest All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 5 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group