RE: Seely's Views 2

From: Glenn Morton <glennmorton@entouch.net>
Date: Wed Sep 08 2004 - 06:37:19 EDT

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jwburgeson@juno.com [mailto:jwburgeson@juno.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 11:03 AM
>
> Glenn wrote: "Why believe a given set of beliefs, say, A, B,
> c... When one can't be sure if one is supposed to believe
> them or another mutually exclusive or partially exclusive set
> of beliefs, A, D, E, K and Z?"
>
> Why does not my "inference to the best explanation" concept
> not answer this, Glenn?
>

Because like in any system, one can't infer truth if one is having to
fit false experimental data. A probabilistic religion is not what can
give much comfort. Can we really say to people, "Please believe in
Christ because I think there is a 575 chance that is is correct?

> In the dialog so far you appear to be avoiding any direct
> comments on this idea and continuing to use the word "sure."
>
> George and Don have both responded with posts I can endorse
> on this issue.
>
> Glenn again: "Why should we expend such effort over something
> we simply can't know."
>
> Because it is of ultimate importance. Recall Pascal: "The
> heart has reasons that reason cannot understand."

And the heart is easily decieved. I cite Dora Lazurkina again. The
heart, in that case, said something I find decidedly false. So, I don't
see Pascal as an absolute authority on the human heart.

>
> As a modern Christian, I worship Christ, and look to Him as
> being of ultimate importance. Tillich worshipped "The ground
> of all being." I thing that's the same thing. I am also
> unwilling to judge all Mormons (or Muslims) as automatically
> outside the fold, for I don't know their hearts. Their
> relationship to God is God's problem, not mine.

The problem I have with this is that Jesus said he was the way the truth
and the life no one comes to the father through him. If that is true,
then at least for the Muslims the case is closed.

Would you rule out devout animists?

>
> Glenn: "Maybe God tells me one thing and
> George another and you a third?"
>
> Could be. As a matter of fact, I rather think it MUST be.
> And it has 0 to do with "information theory." jb

Then in that case, there is absolutely no way to know what God wants. If
you told your children three different standards of behavior, you would
have had a mess at home.
Received on Wed Sep 8 06:53:58 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Sep 08 2004 - 06:53:58 EDT