On Apr 23, 1:21=A0am, dh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 05:28:53 GMT, jesucris...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(marques de
sad=
e) wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:18:10 +0900, dh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
> >>On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 17:32:15 GMT, jesucris...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(marques de
s=
ade) wrote:
> >> =A0 =A0If God does exist, I believe he can and most likely does
> >>control what goes into books that are considered canonical
> >>...at least as much as he cares to. If you don't, then YOU
> >>explain why you don't think so.
>
> >because it's like saying to someone that he/she must believe in
> >Goku by handing them a Dragonball Z DVD as proof...
>
> =A0 =A0 It's not like that in any way.
To someone who does not believe in your mythology, it's *exactly* that
way. Humans have created thousands of mythical creatures. Why would I
give special consideration to yours? It's just somebody else's weird
idea.
> >>>so why do you act like you engage atheists in debate from a
> >>>scientific perspective when all is settled religiously for you...
>
> >> =A0 =A0I consider it to be a scientific perspective to try to think
> >>realistically about how God could exist, etc.
>
> >you go through some motions that mimic rational approach but in
> >the end what may be deduced through logic will get discarded in
> >favor of Divine Revelation,
>
> =A0 =A0 That would depend on whether they conflict or not.
Are you saying you would reject a rational conclusion because it
conflicted with the teachings of your mythology? Doing so would be the
very antithesis of the rational approach.
> >which cannot be questioned...
>
> >> You do too,
> >>but you just haven't figured that part out yet and very
> >>likely never will.
>
> >so called 'god' in divine scripture is not really male or
> >female... but the society of the time it was written in basically
> >didn't even consider women to be human, so the idea of a female
> >god was the farthest from anyone's mind of that day in age...
>
> =A0 =A0 If God exists, considering that he'd be billions of years
> old I don't believe he would be restricted to any particular
> form or gender, but refer to him as "he" out of convenience
> and also the way I've always been led to believe he would
> rather be referred to.
Or the way your parents taught you to refer to "him" when they
indoctrinated you as a child...
> >but for that day, you gotta admit they were pretty advanced...
>
> =A0 =A0 In some ways, but they were still a long way from the
> printing press. The fact that the Bible managed to survive
> even though people tried to eradicate it is evidence (not
> proof) to me of God's possible existence.
This in and of itself is not special. Rock and Roll music managed to
survive despite a serious, intense attempt to exterminate it-does that
mean it is superior to all other forms of music? Did it have some kind
of "divine protection" from its enemies? Or did it simply survive
because it met the emotional needs of a great many people?
> Without the
> ability to mass produce it, it seems likely to me that it might
> have been eliminated if God had not helped it maintain.
You are selling human ability short. Ideas fade because they fall from
favor, not because they cannot be protected and expressed. No one
worships the Greek pantheon today, but *those* tales still survive as
well..
-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015/KoBAAWA!
|
