On Tue, Jul 17, 2012  Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:

> I feel like you give credit to the definition of theology given by the
> Roman Church, instead of using the term in its more general sense, which is
> well illustrated by the non necessary exclusively christian history.
>

I was a firm believer in that church until the age of 12 and even now I
don't think it's significantly stupider than most other religions, it may
have brought more evil to the world (although Muslims are working very hard
to catch up) but that is mainly just because its been around longer than
most.

> Theology is the search of truth
>

Not if the truth is something the theologian does not like, such as  the
truth that a omnipotent omniscient being (aka God) does not exist. Like
scientists theologians are often wrong but unlike scientists theologians
are always certain; science has humility theology has none.

>  Atheism is a respectable belief. But it is dishonest to pretend that it
> is not a religious belief.
>

That is true provided of course that you are free to define the words "God"
and "atheism"  to mean anything you want then to mean, but if you do that
then atheism is also a banana.

> Atheist accepts the definition of God given by the Church,
>

Before you can have a meaningful argument with someone you have to at least
agree about what you're arguing about, otherwise the discussion degenerates
into mush; that's why the endless debates over the "free will" noise never
leads to anything, people go on and on about whether people have "free
will" or not but never stop to ask themselves what exactly they're talking
about.

I say that "God" as defined by Christians or Muslims or Jews or any other
Church franchise does not exist and that's why I call myself a atheist. If
you redefine the word "God" to mean something very very different from what
those enterprises do (something more powerful than me, a higher power, the
unknown, the universe, a oak tree, a vague mystical blob, etc etc) then I
may or may not be a atheist depending on which of the potentially infinite
number of redefinitions of the word "God" you are using. For that reason
and in the interests of clarity I generally don't say things like "a yellow
God knocked down that tree"  instead I say "a yellow bulldozer knocked down
that tree".

> All propositions about machines can be translated into proposition about
> numbers.


Yes, including a machine that keeps talking about a omnipotent being who
delights in tricking the human race by pretending he does not exist.


> > You can defined science, or terrestrial science, by the set of provable
> proposition, and (proper) theology by the set of true arithmetical sentence
> (non provable by the machine).
>

So theology is the study of stuff you can't study. If theologians ever went
on strike how could you tell?

 John K Clark

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to