Hi Ham, Well said, my friend. Atheists should address some of the points you make, especially the role of Christianity in fostering individual freedom and morality.
Regards, Platt Quoting Ham Priday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Steve, Akshay, Ron, Platt, and all -- > > It seems to me that trying to categorize Faith as Religion, Intellect, or a > "social pattern" complicates the issue. Faith is simply what we as > individuals believe in, whether our belief requires intellect, religion, or > esthetic appreciation. If you are a rationalist, you believe in conclusions > drawn from logical reasoning. If you're an objectivist, you believe in > the empirical world as the primary reality. If you're an theist or a > mystic, you believe in an entity that transcends the empirical world. If > you're an MoQist you believe in Dynamic Quality and its four levels of > patterned phenomena. > > Akshay has made two assertions that seem ludicrous to me: > > The existence of God is of relatively low importance. We only > > have to define God and then find out if such an entity exists. > > If the existence of God is "of low importance", why do the atheists protest > so vehemently against theism? > Why, indeed, has belief in a divine being been fundamental to the history of > virtually every nation that has survived to become part of Western Society? > Is it just coincidental that the concept of individual freedom and human > morality is rooted in the Judeo-Christian beliefs of the Free World nations? > > Akshay's second assertion is easier said than done. By all means, let's > find out if "such an entity exists" and then define it. Theologists, > prophets, > mystics, philosophers, and cosmologists have devoted their lives to > "proving" and/or "defining" God for at least seven thousand years, yet > mankind is no closer to a definitive answer in our technological era than > were the medievalists. What has taken us so long? I might offer a > reasonable answer, but in deference to Steve's wish that "Ham should not see > my quoting him as an invitation to tell me more about Essentialism," I'll > simply suggest that perhaps we were not meant to know. > > It's far easier to profess atheism today. It doesn't require any intuitive > reasoning or belief in a supernatural source. It doesn't contradict > experiential reality or the findings of Science. It can't be criticized as > making dogmatic or idealistic pronouncements, setting up false idols, or > analyzing platypuses. Like egalitarianism, it's also "progressive" in that > it does away with magic, superstition, discrimination, spirituality, > wonderment, and all the other ideas that have wrought such evil in times > past. (I guess that's what is meant by "the end of faith".) > > Good luck to all, > Ham ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
