Comments on: Sad State Of Affairs http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/ No One Expects The Spanish Inquisition! Fri, 04 Jul 2008 16:05:19 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=MU By: Tommykey http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3503 Tommykey Thu, 03 Jan 2008 00:02:59 +0000 http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3503 Thanks for the correction Chaplain. I apologize for my misinterpretation! Thanks for the correction Chaplain. I apologize for my misinterpretation!

]]> By: PhillyChief http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3497 PhillyChief Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:27:44 +0000 http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3497 I would have responded to BJ but the Deacon has far exceeded anything I'd write so I'll direct my comment where it belongs, to the original article: Bush may have said he's a unifier, but he's said repeatedly that he's "the decider". Decider trumps unifier, unless he decides to unify, but I doubt he'll ever decide to do that. I believe his idea of "unify" means make everyone do what you decide. I would have responded to BJ but the Deacon has far exceeded anything I’d write so I’ll direct my comment where it belongs, to the original article: Bush may have said he’s a unifier, but he’s said repeatedly that he’s “the decider”. Decider trumps unifier, unless he decides to unify, but I doubt he’ll ever decide to do that. I believe his idea of “unify” means make everyone do what you decide.

]]> By: the chaplain http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3494 the chaplain Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:04:16 +0000 http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3494 Tommykey: The Deacon's final paragraph is not a statement of his beliefs, it is a statement of the logical outcome of a strong Calvinist "once saved, always saved" and "double predestination" mindset. Let me assure you that the deacon never held that view himself, nor does he believe that atheists are doomed to hell. Tommykey:
The Deacon’s final paragraph is not a statement of his beliefs, it is a statement of the logical outcome of a strong Calvinist “once saved, always saved” and “double predestination” mindset. Let me assure you that the deacon never held that view himself, nor does he believe that atheists are doomed to hell.

]]> By: Tommykey http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3488 Tommykey Wed, 02 Jan 2008 03:17:04 +0000 http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3488 Real great mindset you have there Deacon. Real great mindset you have there Deacon.

]]> By: the deacon http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3487 the deacon Wed, 02 Jan 2008 03:13:55 +0000 http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3487 BJ …. forgive me for assuming you would use the hermeneutic principles pastors and teachers of the Bible encourage their congregants to use when reading the Bible. Take the statement in context and not to take the statement too broadly and thereby stretching it beyond covering more than the presenting question. The context was atheism…. Let me be explicit and clear so that the same mistake will not be made … test your thesis by interviewing individuals who have left the church, who once claimed to have a dynamic faith and who are now take an atheist stance. With sincerity, listen to their hearts and statements. Listen to them describe their walk, including the orthodoxy to which they use to testify, teach and live out with passion. Set aside any bias and assumptions that they were never truly Christians … accept their testimony. If you cannot set aside the assumption because you hold that once a person is saved that they are never lost, then I have two questions to ask. Why are you engaged is this dialogue? Why waste your time since those who are predestined due to divine fiat before the foundation the world will be saved regardless of such dialogue? Those who are atheists are predestined to be eternally condemned, and as Betza noted, the Church should celebrate that the heathen exist as they act as the means for the God to show his justice in action. BJ …. forgive me for assuming you would use the hermeneutic principles pastors and teachers of the Bible encourage their congregants to use when reading the Bible. Take the statement in context and not to take the statement too broadly and thereby stretching it beyond covering more than the presenting question. The context was atheism…. Let me be explicit and clear so that the same mistake will not be made … test your thesis by interviewing individuals who have left the church, who once claimed to have a dynamic faith and who are now take an atheist stance. With sincerity, listen to their hearts and statements. Listen to them describe their walk, including the orthodoxy to which they use to testify, teach and live out with passion. Set aside any bias and assumptions that they were never truly Christians … accept their testimony.

If you cannot set aside the assumption because you hold that once a person is saved that they are never lost, then I have two questions to ask. Why are you engaged is this dialogue? Why waste your time since those who are predestined due to divine fiat before the foundation the world will be saved regardless of such dialogue? Those who are atheists are predestined to be eternally condemned, and as Betza noted, the Church should celebrate that the heathen exist as they act as the means for the God to show his justice in action.

]]> By: Spanish Inquisitor http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3486 Spanish Inquisitor Wed, 02 Jan 2008 03:11:28 +0000 http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3486 <blockquote>Spanish: Wrong. Aesthetic experience is not subjective. You need to acquire some knowledge of philosophy instead of shooting from the hip.</blockquote> What philosophy? You said <blockquote>Of course, there are other forms of cognition that don’t depend on evidence and reason, e.g., the perception of the sublime and the beautiful. </blockquote> I agree. But if I say a rose is beautiful, or the vista of the Grand Canyon is awe inspiring, I'm not making a truth claim. I am voicing my emotional, subjective response to my perception of both. But, if I say the rose was created by god, or the Grand Canyon by Noah’s flood and that is why they are both beautiful and sublime, then I AM making a truth claim. Big difference. If you want to extrapolate from my subjective response to a rose to conclude that atheism is also based on faith, well, you're going to need a lot more than philosophy to do so. But we seem to have gone off track. We were originally talking about the Christian Right, which I compared, tongue in cheek, to gonorrhea, implying that we're stuck with both. You countered that gonorrhea had a vaccine (Oh, to have a Christian Right vaccine!). I then agreed, (though, truth be told, I don't know that we have a vaccine for gonorrhea) but indicated that despite the vaccine for religion (reason, logic, clear thinking), we still have religion. That then sparked your little riff on the cognitive basis for atheism, which, I indicated, is nonsense, but which most theists like to convince themselves is true, in order to justify their irrational dependence on their beliefs. ("See? Atheists are irrational, so it's OK if I am too.") What next?

Spanish: Wrong. Aesthetic experience is not subjective. You need to acquire some knowledge of philosophy instead of shooting from the hip.

What philosophy? You said

Of course, there are other forms of cognition that don’t depend on evidence and reason, e.g., the perception of the sublime and the beautiful.

I agree. But if I say a rose is beautiful, or the vista of the Grand Canyon is awe inspiring, I’m not making a truth claim. I am voicing my emotional, subjective response to my perception of both. But, if I say the rose was created by god, or the Grand Canyon by Noah’s flood and that is why they are both beautiful and sublime, then I AM making a truth claim. Big difference.

If you want to extrapolate from my subjective response to a rose to conclude that atheism is also based on faith, well, you’re going to need a lot more than philosophy to do so.

But we seem to have gone off track.

We were originally talking about the Christian Right, which I compared, tongue in cheek, to gonorrhea, implying that we’re stuck with both. You countered that gonorrhea had a vaccine (Oh, to have a Christian Right vaccine!). I then agreed, (though, truth be told, I don’t know that we have a vaccine for gonorrhea) but indicated that despite the vaccine for religion (reason, logic, clear thinking), we still have religion. That then sparked your little riff on the cognitive basis for atheism, which, I indicated, is nonsense, but which most theists like to convince themselves is true, in order to justify their irrational dependence on their beliefs. (”See? Atheists are irrational, so it’s OK if I am too.” ;)

What next?

]]> By: Spanish Inquisitor http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3485 Spanish Inquisitor Wed, 02 Jan 2008 02:43:14 +0000 http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3485 <blockquote>Leaving a church is not atheism.</blockquote> And your point is...

Leaving a church is not atheism.

And your point is…

]]> By: Blog Justice http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3483 Blog Justice Wed, 02 Jan 2008 02:13:55 +0000 http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3483 Deacon: Leaving a church is not atheism. Deacon:

Leaving a church is not atheism.

]]> By: Blog Justice http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3482 Blog Justice Wed, 02 Jan 2008 02:12:45 +0000 http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3482 Spanish: Wrong. Aesthetic experience is not subjective. You need to acquire some knowledge of philosophy instead of shooting from the hip. Spanish: Wrong. Aesthetic experience is not subjective. You need to acquire some knowledge of philosophy instead of shooting from the hip.

]]> By: the deacon http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3481 the deacon Wed, 02 Jan 2008 01:25:06 +0000 http://spaninquis.wordpress.com/2007/12/31/sad-state-of-affairs/#comment-3481 BJ ….. To say “Atheism, or the denial of religion, seems to derive from a motive, which is a deep felt anger towards God for our predicament” is a broad sermonic-like statement that may sound great simple statement from the pulpit. Test the thesis. I doubt that it is not sustainable when put under the examination of life. I agree there are some who have left the faith with a deep anger over the human predicament, but I would strongly agree that atheism is motivated or derived from a deep anger toward “God”. By enlarge atheists are not convinced that a divinity in any form exists, at least not as articulated by any religion. I would challenge you to test your statement. Meet at least an half-dozen atheists who have left the Church and truly listen to their hearts, issues and questions. Also listen similarly to three or four humanists and atheists who have never been associated with the formal religion. Then, see if the thesis statement holds up. You also mentioned “Christian love or charity (agape) is not without an element of moral guidance, after which follows penitence and forgiveness.” Paul used a Greek term and concept that had long predated the founding of the Church. The concept as such does not contain the elements of moral guidance, penitence and forgiveness. The concept in Greek, including how Paul uses it, is a relationship term that speaks of motivation and orientation one has towards another or an object. BJ ….. To say “Atheism, or the denial of religion, seems to derive from a motive, which is a deep felt anger towards God for our predicament” is a broad sermonic-like statement that may sound great simple statement from the pulpit. Test the thesis. I doubt that it is not sustainable when put under the examination of life. I agree there are some who have left the faith with a deep anger over the human predicament, but I would strongly agree that atheism is motivated or derived from a deep anger toward “God”. By enlarge atheists are not convinced that a divinity in any form exists, at least not as articulated by any religion. I would challenge you to test your statement. Meet at least an half-dozen atheists who have left the Church and truly listen to their hearts, issues and questions. Also listen similarly to three or four humanists and atheists who have never been associated with the formal religion. Then, see if the thesis statement holds up.

You also mentioned “Christian love or charity (agape) is not without an element of moral guidance, after which follows penitence and forgiveness.” Paul used a Greek term and concept that had long predated the founding of the Church. The concept as such does not contain the elements of moral guidance, penitence and forgiveness. The concept in Greek, including how Paul uses it, is a relationship term that speaks of motivation and orientation one has towards another or an object.

]]>