Dear non participating, non discussing Mary, The kind of discussions I'd like to participate in are, well, kind discussions. Beyond that, I'd like to see us all defend our positions rather than just making assertions.
I've been accused of making dogmatic statements. I look at it as the opening argument, say in a legal argument. It is but the opening statement. The problem is that many are too offended, set in their ways and biases, or too threatened, or are unable, to seriously defend their positions. I would like to see a serious, mutually respectful and kind, certainly civil, presentation of the facts, the reasons, the evidence behind your claims. And I will likewise present my evidence, and supporting arguments. Even those of us set in our ways should not really be so threatened when they are challenged, if we truly believe they are valid. And a course in creativity I once taught said that viewing an issue from the opposite perspective from your own leads to creative insight. Anyway, that's what I have in mind. And I would appreciate it if you and others would also try to bring forth evidence and arguments for your positions, as opposed to simply making assertions of your opinions and the articles of your own faith, and passing over the issues you disagree with as if they have been resolved for all time, simply because you said so, or think so. Often these discussion/debates devolve in -"a way that reminds me of two kids arguing on a playground-IS SO!..IS NOT!...IS SO!...IS NOT! Surely, we can do better. I hope so. I don't think anyone on the list is omniscient, so I imagine we might all be able to learn something new. Good evening, Jon On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Mary <[email protected]> wrote: > Geez... I said I wasn't going to do this, but I guess you are baiting me. > :) > > For good or ill (and I think ill) at the time of the American Revolution > 99.9% of the people involved believed in God (or at least paid lip service > to the idea). So, if you make a political claim in that kind of > environment > like "inalienable rights from God", then who is going to argue with you? > Nobody in their right mind. > > The God thing is a form of tyranny. > > The "inalienable rights" you mention are not true and correct just because > God said so - though it's nice that he did. They are true and correct > because they are of high Quality. Why are they of high Quality, you ask? > Because these ideas work. They are practical, they are useful, they are > "fair". In the parlance of the MoQ, they are "better" ideas than some > others. They support their level and they support the levels below them > too. They bring stability to the system. > > Mary > > - The most important thing you will ever make is a realization. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:moq_discuss- > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Jon Bennett > > Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 12:14 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [MD] The Roots of Freedom > > > > Mary, > > Just a very brief reply and then to sleep. > > The idea in your that this God stuff isn't too thought out reveals an > > important difference between the Christian and the Moq, and many other > > world > > views. > > > > If I get a chance I want to start a thread on eoq tomorrow. But the > > Christian view is that God reveals truth to his creatures. Man and his > > reason does not and cannot legislate reality. Man's and his autonomous > > reason is not the starting point for the Christian. > > > > This is why Paul when addressing the Greeks at the Aeropagus said that > > the > > gospel was "foolishness to the Greeks". I'd like to share with you what > > Cornelius van Till says of this, but it will have to wait. > > > > But this difference is quite crucial for giving you the rights you > > have. If > > man gave rights, he could take them away. > > The whole idea of an unalieanble right, is that it is from God, that's > > why > > it most be acknowledged in and protected by law. > > > > And the Christian position is that this is the source of knowledge, > > God's > > revealed truth. And that makes a very crucial difference in our > > epistemologies, and it is why Christian philosophy is so radically > > different > > than those that start with man and his autonomous reasong as absolute. > > > > Nighty Nite, > > Jon > > On Wed, Apr 'k1, 2010 at 11:56 PnoM, Mary <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > [Jon said] > > > You have freedom, even the freedom to read these words, not because > > you > > > were > > > envisioned as a static pattern continually being transformed by a > > dynamic > > > pattern. This includes the freedom not to be arrested at will, > > dragged from > > > your house and imprisoned or tortured for your thoughts and speech- > > and all > > > the other freedoms and rights you enjoy and take for granted. These > > rights > > > did not arise and were not acknowledged in the East where moq ideas > > were > > > prevalent. > > > > > > You have these freedoms because you were seen as created in the very > > image > > > of God. And you were endowed by your Creator with these rights > > because your > > > life was seen as sacred. Not a static, certainly not a dynamic > > pattern, but > > > a child of the living God. That is the source of freedom, personal > > and > > > political. > > > > > > [Mary Replies] > > > Well, thank God for that! Funny how a higher level can use the > > givens of a > > > lower level to go off on purposes of its own. Really glad of that > > too, > > > since I wouldn't like to have to get up early on Sunday's to go to an > > > institution. Do you ever get the idea this God stuff was not thought > > out > > > too well? I mean, I'm not sure all this freedom was what was > > intended. > > > But > > > hey, I'll take what I can get! > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Mary > > > > > > 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/md/archives.html > > > > > 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/md/archives.html > > 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/md/archives.html > 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/md/archives.html
