tribes.tribe.net/interpara...bb2a46650f
tribes.tribe.net/interpara...c871497158
tribes.tribe.net/interpara...8dd88445f5


prometheuspan
3/28/2001 2:35 PM 1 out of 21

who knows what they are and can tell us about them?



faeriegoddaughter
3/29/2001 12:56 AM 2 out of 21

Paradigm: [from the Greek paradeigma, to show side by side] 1: EXAMPLE, PATTERN, esp. an outstandingly clear or typical example or archetype; 2: an example of a conjugation or declension showing a word in all its inflectional forms; 3: a philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated.
--Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition

I believe the definition with which we are concerned is the third, no?

Most of what I've heard about paradigms is dealing with paradigm shifts. The discovery that the world was not, in fact, flat, led to a huge paradigm shift, as did the discovery of quantum mechanics. Changes in the world's paradigm affects not only the scientific community, but the mass consciousness of the world. How can anyone think the same once they've realized that Man is not the Center of the Universe, as the Catholic Church had taught for years? Each new discovery deals a blow to the stability of mass consciousness... but brings out new strengths in the human mind.

Enough of that; I'm only generalizing. Anyone want to fill in some detail here? Go somewhere with this? I'm just trying to provide a springboard, here... because I have no idea where this topic should go.

~Faerie



prometheuspan
4/9/2001 8:05 PM 3 out of 21

thank you fairie!

Paradigms are important beause they are how ideas and thoughts evolve.

We can only do so well at any given level. WE build something, and it is what it is. It serves us until we grow out of it, and then its time to build something else, or to add on to our structure.

When we thought the world was flat at least this allowed us to navigate. It was hard for many people to accept the idea that the world was round for religious and social reasons. But it is the truth about the nature of reality and it allows us now to naviage more correctly.

So these changes are neccassary. Books that are two thousand years old or whatever were written for societies and cultures and by societies and cultures then and there. Modernly, not only does much of what such texts have to say not apply, but we have evolved in many cases past the need to even contemplate such levels.

Its not a bad thing to be in a position where its time to make the next paradigm. Its a birthday celebration for all of humanity.

The next paradigm coming in the religious sense is the multifaith paradigm. As the internet makes all information accessible, our grandchildren will be able to pick and choose to educate themselves about the religious ideas of dozens or hundreds of cultures. And they will increasingly pick those thing which merely suit them.

As it is right now, many people allready describe themselves as multifaith, and most profiles on b-net mention more than one religious affiliation.

There is no reason why we cannot with wisdom begin this integration as a lucid movement, and start to explore what is possible.

The truth is that from Where I sit, having studied all of the world religions I posted
to a greater depth than I can really even hope to go into here, That they don't just sit side by side, that they actually compliment each other and fill in for each other.

Where Christianity teaches us to pray hinduism teaches us that there are seven levels of ourselves to communicate with.

Where Physics describes the relationship between matter and energy and technology so far is an exploration of same, Judaic Qaballah predicted this at least a thousand years ago, perhaps longer.

And The Qabalah helps to show us that technology is a toy we will have until we learn to be gods and goddesses, past which we won't need it...

Whats the true and absolute nature of reality? I think that question is too vast for any one aproach to answer. But I think that the collective unconscious conspired to give us the answer, if we knew to look, in the ideas of each other, however foreign they may seem at first to us.



subdeaconkevin
4/10/2001 11:43 AM 4 out of 21

{{{{{{The next paradigm coming in the religious sense is the multifaith paradigm. As the internet makes all information accessible, our grandchildren will be able to pick and choose to educate themselves about the religious ideas of dozens or hundreds of cultures. And they will increasingly pick those thing which merely suit them.}}}}}}

Whose to say that post-modernism will still be in vogue by then? Hopefull there quest is more for what is true, than for what suits them.

{{{{{As it is right now, many people allready describe themselves as multifaith, and most profiles on b-net mention more than one religious affiliation.}}}}

If your paradigm is that it is impossible for a community to be lead by God, and that God has not revealed himself, then your approach makes sense. But if your parasigm is that God is there, and that He is not silent, then your appraoch is misdirected. In any event, either paradigm must be taken on faith. Can we respect each other and agree to disagree?

{{{{{There is no reason why we cannot with wisdom begin this integration as a lucid movement, and start to explore what is possible.}}}}}

What are you going to do with those of us with the latter paradigm? Will be free to excersize our faith? Or will be sacrificed to the "god of tolerance?"

{{{{{The truth is that from Where I sit, having studied all of the world religions I posted
to a greater depth than I can really even hope to go into here, That they don't just sit side by side, that they actually compliment each other and fill in for each other.}}}}

Another paradigm. Yours (correct me if I am wrong) is that the individual is best suited to "find their way." Mine is that I am in this together with my neighbor, and that God can lead us together into all Truth.





RichardB
4/10/2001 3:09 PM 5 out of 21

The term "paradigm" entered public consciousness through the writings of Thomas Kuhn, philosopher of science. Kuhn was trying to replace the older positivist tradition of philosophy of science, which held that scientific theories were refuted by evidence. Kuhn argued instead that theories were replaced in a "paradigm shift" which occurred when the difficulties faced by the old theory got to such a point that people began looking around for some completely new model of understanding.

A couple of examples are the shift from the geocentric to the heliocentric model of the solar system. The old geocentric model was never really refuted, in the sense of having any data that could not be fit into the model. It was replaced by the new model that worked more smoothly and with fewer assumptions. A different sort of example is from medicine in which the germ theory replaced the old humour theory. Once we had microscopes and could verify the existence of microscopic organisms we had a powerful new way of understanding disease. When this occured researchers then started to look for germs as the cause of every disease they didn't understand and the results are that now we understand many more diseases and have cures for many of them. But not all however. There are many diseases that do not fit the germ paradigm. So progress in medical science may depend on the discovery of some new paradigm.

(Excuse the minilecture but I am a philosophy professor!)

Is the shift to a multifaith perspective a new paradigm for understanding the human relationship to God? I think so, but new doesn't mean correct. The paradigm has to be argued on its merits.



prometheuspan
4/10/2001 10:30 PM 6 out of 21


If your paradigm is that it is impossible for a community to be lead by
God, and that God has not revealed himself, then your approach
makes sense.
-----------------
my paradigm kevin, is that has revealed herself, and that it is only because fascist war criminals conquered the world that the real truth has not been applied.
------------
But if your parasigm is that God is there, and that He is
not silent, then your appraoch is misdirected.
--------------------
My god is so vocal I could get checks from the government for being sciztophrenic. Is yours? My god is present and vocal, your either or scenario is yours alone.
--------------
In any event, either
paradigm must be taken on faith.
-------------
No, following my path you operate only from direct knowledge.
"Faith?" is the homing signal of con artists.
-------------

Can we respect each other and
agree to disagree?
---------------
sure. But there is a point where you have to give up disagreeing and telling the rest of us how it is and start listening and I think you have more than crossed that line. I respect you and thats
why I haven't asked b-net to take you out of this area. You are in my estimation a well intentioned person. But you are not acting
like you joined this area for any other reason than to argue against the premise of it. If that is true, then I am asking you plainly, Please stop.
-----------------

{{{{{There is no reason why we cannot with wisdom begin this
integration as a lucid movement, and start to explore what is
possible.}}}}}

What are you going to do with those of us with the latter paradigm? Will
be free to excersize our faith? Or will be sacrificed to the "god of
tolerance?"
------------------
I don't have any reason to believe that the "old" faith will be anything other than integrated into the new pattern. The earth being round instead of flat didn't change the subjective experience of its flatness. It just broadened our perspective.
-----------




prometheuspan
4/10/2001 10:39 PM 7 out of 21


What are you going to do with those of us with the latter paradigm? Will
be free to excersize our faith? Or will be sacrificed to the "god of
tolerance?"
----------------
I have no intention of advocating violence against anybody for any reason.
I do advocate violence against lies and false information. No body gets sacrificed.
Old ideas get let go of. New ideas come in. Its the path of evolution, and its not my fault.
----------------

{{{{{The truth is that from Where I sit, having studied all of the world
religions I posted
to a greater depth than I can really even hope to go into here, That they
don't just sit side by side, that they actually compliment each other and
fill in for each other.}}}}

Another paradigm. Yours (correct me if I am wrong) is that the
individual is best suited to "find their way." Mine is that I am in this
together with my neighbor, and that God can lead us together into all
Truth.
------------------
on the face of it, I can agree word for word with that entire statement. The problem is that its yours and only yours version of god that you are speaking about. That makes it implicitly false. Your God is yours. Not mine. Your relationship with divinity is yours. Not mine. IF we are both truly on to something, then the mask behind the relationship is the same force, one same divinity. I don't believe thats the case, I think that you worship a vengeful egotist named paul. You think I worship Satan.
So I guess we are even. I was trying to come at this from the perspective of both of us being right, but I have run out of patience and time.

How about this then, we both connect to god imperfectly. Our relationship with god can improve. We both have a relationship with our own shadow, and that relationship can also improve. You don't have all of the answers and niether do I.
Your VERSION of god is jsut that. YOUR version. The Reality behind it is half your shadow and half God. Same thing with everybody. Are you ready to make a better ratio for yourself? The only way to do that is to admit that you don't have ALL of the answers.

I do pray for you and people like you kevin, believe me I do.




prometheuspan
4/10/2001 10:47 PM 8 out of 21


RichardB
4/10/01 3:09:41 PM

The term "paradigm" entered public consciousness through the
writings of Thomas Kuhn, philosopher of science. Kuhn was trying to
replace the older positivist tradition of philosophy of science, which
held that scientific theories were refuted by evidence. Kuhn argued
instead that theories were replaced in a "paradigm shift" which
occurred when the difficulties faced by the old theory got to such a
point that people began looking around for some completely new
model of understanding.

A couple of examples are the shift from the geocentric to the
heliocentric model of the solar system. The old geocentric model was
never really refuted, in the sense of having any data that could not be fit
into the model. It was replaced by the new model that worked more
smoothly and with fewer assumptions. A different sort of example is
from medicine in which the germ theory replaced the old humour
theory. Once we had microscopes and could verify the existence of
microscopic organisms we had a powerful new way of understanding
disease. When this occured researchers then started to look for
germs as the cause of every disease they didn't understand and the
results are that now we understand many more diseases and have
cures for many of them. But not all however. There are many diseases
that do not fit the germ paradigm. So progress in medical science may
depend on the discovery of some new paradigm.

(Excuse the minilecture but I am a philosophy professor!)

Is the shift to a multifaith perspective a new paradigm for
understanding the human relationship to God? I think so, but new
doesn't mean correct. The paradigm has to be argued on its merits.

-------------------------------
Thank you so very much for that.
You are quite right.
A paradigm must be argued on its own merits.

In this case, I like the cosmology model. The earth still revolves around the sun but the sun is not he center of the universe. Almost all of the details simply get integrated in a new way. You still have the same stars, the same planets, the same
everything. But we get a better and more accurate understanding about the nature of reality. Not to mention the fact that the old way was simply mistaken.

Germs and viruses and diet and so many things contribute to disease.
The cellular collective unconscious within each human body... now theres a new paradigm for medical science, a paradigm older than medical science which it could use if only it understood same.


We must realize that we are evolving, and that as we evolve, our ideas will evolve, and that we will find that we have mistakes behind us. 20 centuries of Christianity etc and we still don't have a perfect world. In fact, you could argue that its imperfections were shaped entirely by the mistakes of these belief systems.
Its time for us to quit clinging like children to things that have been logically demonstrated to be irrational, its time for religion to grow up.





subdeaconkevin
4/11/2001 9:57 AM 9 out of 21

{{{{{Is the shift to a multifaith perspective a new paradigm for understanding the human relationship to God? I think so, but new doesn't mean correct. The paradigm has to be argued on its merits. }}}}}

On a personal level, my conversion to Orthodoxy entailed a major paradigm shift. As an Evangelical Orthodox, I only saw life as how it rleated to me personally. My faith, my walk w/ God, my salvation, my Jesus etc. My new worldview is best depoicted by teh story that Doestoyevski told in one of his works:

"There once lived a very selfish, ornery and mean spirited old woman. She died and did not like the place where she ended up very much. She asked the angel, please let me up, I do not like it here at all! The angel asked her, why should I let you into heaven?Have you ever done anything good? She thought and thought. Finally she said, "I once gave a begger an onion." "Ah, so you have!" replied the angel. As a matter of fact, I have the onion right here. Go ahead and grab on to it." So she grabbed onto it, and the angel began to pull her out of hell. The other residents saw what was happening, and began to grab on to her and the onion as well, that they mnight be lifted up too. She began to beat them off saying, "this is MY onion! MY onion!" Wherupon the onion broke in two and she fell back in to hell where I understand she is to this day."



subdeaconkevin
4/11/2001 10:07 AM 10 out of 21

{{{{{If your paradigm is that it is impossible for a community to be lead by
God, and that God has not revealed himself, then your approach
makes sense.
-----------------
my paradigm kevin, is that has revealed herself, and that it is only because fascist war criminals conquered the world that the real truth has not been applied.}}}}

;-)

------------
{{{{{{But if your parasigm is that God is there, and that He is
not silent, then your appraoch is misdirected.
--------------------
My god is so vocal I could get checks from the government for being sciztophrenic. Is yours? My god is present and vocal, your either or scenario is yours alone.}}}}}

No. I left my personal ideas behind, and embraced the collective wisdom of 2,000 year old Christinaity. The world is full of people that say they hear form God. Is there a way that we can tell the genuine form the lunatics and fakes?

{{{{{{--------------
In any event, either
paradigm must be taken on faith.
-------------
No, following my path you operate only from direct knowledge.
"Faith?" is the homing signal of con artists.
-------------}}}}}

Direct knoweldge? How do you know that voice that you hear is god, and not a deceptive spirit?

{{{{{{{But there is a point where you have to give up disagreeing and telling the rest of us how it is and start listening and I think you have more than crossed that line. I respect you and thats
why I haven't asked b-net to take you out of this area. You are in my estimation a well intentioned person. But you are not acting
like you joined this area for any other reason than to argue against the premise of it. If that is true, then I am asking you plainly, Please stop.}}}}}}

I have stated such. I have sincere reasonable questions about some of your assertions. I also expect to learn, and I have. I also hope to make freindly acquainteances of all people who are made in the image of God. Therfore, even if you disagree with me, I still have a basis to respect and value you.





{{{{{I don't have any reason to believe that the "old" faith will be anything other than integrated into the new pattern. The earth being round instead of flat didn't change the subjective experience of its flatness. It just broadened our perspective.}}}}}


But the world being flat was a false paradigm. you couldn't very well go on trying to negotiate the world with charts that continued to say the world was flat, now could you?




subdeaconkevin
4/11/2001 10:20 AM 11 out of 21

{{{{{I have no intention of advocating violence against anybody for any reason.
I do advocate violence against lies and false information. No body gets sacrificed.
Old ideas get let go of. New ideas come in. Its the path of evolution, and its not my fault.}}}}}


Lies and false information defined by you? The tactics of the inquisitors were acceptable to you, they were just arguing the wrong ideas, eh? I mean if some of won't let go of the "old ideas" in embracing the new? The bosheviks already tried that, in the long run it doesn't work. Little old ladies will still crawl out of the rubble grasping their icons.


{{{{{Another paradigm. Yours (correct me if I am wrong) is that the
individual is best suited to "find their way." Mine is that I am in this
together with my neighbor, and that God can lead us together into all
Truth.
------------------
on the face of it, I can agree word for word with that entire statement. The problem is that its yours and only yours version of god that you are speaking about.}}}}}

No. I am talking about the 2,000 year old Church's "version."

{{{{{That makes it implicitly false. Your God is yours. Not mine. Your relationship with divinity is yours. Not mine. IF we are both truly on to something, then the mask behind the relationship is the same force, one same divinity. I don't believe thats the case, I think that you worship a vengeful egotist named paul. You think I worship Satan.}}}}}}

I don't think you worship satan. Please believe me that I do not worship Paul. On some level you are correct, that I embraced Orthodoxy due to MY paradigm about the world. You say that I am then false. But you are evangelizing for YOUR view of God. How is it then not false?

{{{{{{So I guess we are even. I was trying to come at this from the perspective of both of us being right, but I have run out of patience and time.}}}}}

Your right, there really is no middle ground. Either Truth is absolute, or purely subjective.

{{{{{{How about this then, we both connect to god imperfectly. Our relationship with god can improve. We both have a relationship with our own shadow, and that relationship can also improve. You don't have all of the answers and niether do I.
Your VERSION of god is jsut that. YOUR version. The Reality behind it is half your shadow and half God. Same thing with everybody. Are you ready to make a better ratio for yourself? The only way to do that is to admit that you don't have ALL of the answers.}}}}}

Dude, you are way right. I am very imperfect, and really have no answers. As Paul or seombody said, don't follow me lest you become twice the son of hell that I am. Can you at least see the attraction, for someone like me seeking out legitimate authority? Its because I really do not trust myself...and that is based upon good reason, I have led myself down the wrong road one too many times.

For my part, I do see why you find "multi-faith" attractive. You really love your neighbor, and don't want to see him going to hell for believing the wrong thing. Is this accurate?

{{{{{I do pray for you and people like you kevin, believe me I do.}}}}

Thanks guy, I sincerly appreciate it. And for what its worth, I will keep you in my poor prayers. May God hear us both.








subdeaconkevin
4/11/2001 10:28 AM 12 out of 21

{{{{{We must realize that we are evolving, and that as we evolve, our ideas will evolve, and that we will find that we have mistakes behind us.}}}}

Is there anything good behind us? Is modern (or post-modern really) better off then the ancients? Well, we do have indoor plumbing. But are we better people? I don't think so. And that of course goes in to the development of my paradigm.

{{{{20 centuries of Christianity etc and we still don't have a perfect world. In fact, you could argue that its imperfections were shaped entirely by the mistakes of these belief systems.}}}}}

Oh certainly. The Christian would argue that the imperfections of our society is due to the less than imperfect adherance to the Gospel. That argument has merit. All I know, is that my life goes much mmore smoothly when I live it by what I have been taught in the Church. Grant it, I have only five years to go by, but when compared to my previous 25 years outside of the Church, the statement seems valid enough.

{{{{{Its time for us to quit clinging like children to things that have been logically demonstrated to be irrational, its time for religion to grow up.}}}}}

Christianity has not been shown to be irrational. Would you like me to point out what I see as irrational in your view?



prometheuspan
4/11/2001 5:01 PM 13 out of 21



No. I left my personal ideas behind, and embraced the collective wisdom of 2,000 year
old Christinaity.
---------------
1054 was it you said? thats not 2000 years. In order to claim 2000 years you would have to be essene or gnostic.
------------
The world is full of people that say they hear form God. Is there a way
that we can tell the genuine form the lunatics and fakes?
-----------
reason. Logic.
-----------

-------------
No, following my path you operate only from direct knowledge.
"Faith?" is the homing signal of con artists.
-------------}}}}}

Direct knoweldge? How do you know that voice that you hear is god, and not a
deceptive spirit?
--------------
because it tells me things that are verifiable through direct experience.
Because the things it leads me to do in life are good.
Because reason and logic and the rational mind all come together in one
single corroboration.
------------


I have stated such. I have sincere reasonable questions about some of your
assertions. I also expect to learn, and I have. I also hope to make freindly
acquainteances of all people who are made in the image of God. Therfore, even if you
disagree with me, I still have a basis to respect and value you.
----------------
I don't see you asking many questions. I do see you making many assertations.
I state once again, the purpose of this area is for us to explore a truth which I feel is self evident. I am not going to defend that truth to you or anybody. I know I am right.
This is my discussion area. The point of this area is to take the axiom I have put foreward and to move foreward from it, not argue for or against it. If I wanted the latter, I'd still be in ccc.
----------------




prometheuspan
4/11/2001 5:09 PM 14 out of 21


{{{{{I don't have any reason to believe that the "old" faith will be anything other than
integrated into the new pattern. The earth being round instead of flat didn't change the
subjective experience of its flatness. It just broadened our perspective.}}}}}


But the world being flat was a false paradigm. you couldn't very well go on trying to
negotiate the world with charts that continued to say the world was flat, now could you?
-----------
And there being only one true way and one true god etc is a false paradigm.
You couldn't really mean to tell us you intend to navigate the way to heaven with
charts that are ethnocentric, now could you?
-------------------

Lies and false information defined by you?
----------------
No, as defined by logic and rational science. Ethnocentrism is an idea and a word taken from a social sciences text book kevin. I don't think you have even yet to comprehend who you are talking to.
---------------
The tactics of the inquisitors were
acceptable to you,
----------------
No kevin, you twist everything to suit you.
I am getting sick of it quickly.
---------------

No. I am talking about the 2,000 year old Church's "version."
---------------
No, you are talking about a 1000 year old churches version.
----------------
, I
think that you worship a vengeful egotist named paul. You think I worship Satan.}}}}}}
-----------------
I don't think you worship satan. Please believe me that I do not worship Paul. On some
level you are correct, that I embraced Orthodoxy due to MY paradigm about the world.
You say that I am then false. But you are evangelizing for YOUR view of God. How is it
then not false?
------------
I am evangelizing for everybody elses view of god. Not my view kevin. Everybodies.
You don't think I am Hindu and Jewish and etc all of them all at the same time do you? No. MY view is backed by social science and rationality. My view is universal.
I am arguing for universal acceptance. You are arguing for your own superiority.
See the difference?
------------




prometheuspan
4/11/2001 5:18 PM 15 out of 21


{{{{{{So I guess we are even. I was trying to come at this from the perspective of both of
us being right, but I have run out of patience and time.}}}}}

Your right, there really is no middle ground. Either Truth is absolute, or purely
subjective.
------------
Truth is absolute. Human experience can only be subjective.
You got caught again in one of those binary either or loops.
Thats the main failure of the christian trip. Excessive duality.
-------------


Dude, you are way right. I am very imperfect, and really have no answers. As Paul or
seombody said, don't follow me lest you become twice the son of hell that I am. Can
you at least see the attraction, for someone like me seeking out legitimate authority?
------------
Yes Kevin, I understand. But you have to realize that I understand as a psychologist understands. I empathize with you, but in my book, you are simply evading the harder problem of accepting your own responsibility. As long as its "authority" that you lean on, its not your fault if you are right orwrong. But thats false kevin, its still your choice. You are still giving your power away and its still true after all is said and done that you are the equal of any pope, bishop, etc.
-----------
Its because I really do not trust myself...and that is based upon good reason, I have
led myself down the wrong road one too many times.
------------
Yes, exactly. So you have to find a way to trust yourself, but the answer is not to give up having faith in yourself. The answer is you should have been more responsible to yourself in the first place. And you still can be that. You can still be your own parent, and you can still make it work. Its hard to choose that instead of being forever the child, but sooner or later, we all have to face the truth of personal responsibility, personal power, and the fact of our own individual shadow, and our own individual divinity.




prometheuspan
4/11/2001 5:26 PM 16 out of 21


For my part, I do see why you find "multi-faith" attractive. You really love your neighbor,
and don't want to see him going to hell for believing the wrong thing. Is this accurate?
-------------
I don't believe in hell. My purpose in being here is all about whats going on here.
In my book everybody gets to heaven sooner or later. The only question is how long it takes. I want that time to be easy, the path to be clear. I am here to make THIS world a better place, not to dwell on premortal or post mortal existence.
--------------
{{{{{I do pray for you and people like you kevin, believe me I do.}}}}

Thanks guy, I sincerly appreciate it. And for what its worth, I will keep you in my poor
prayers. May God hear us both.
---------------
God hears me and you. Theres no point in worrying on that one.
-----------

{{{{{We must realize that we are evolving, and that as we evolve, our ideas will evolve,
and that we will find that we have mistakes behind us.}}}}

Is there anything good behind us?
-------------------
Of course there is. All I am doing is trying to pick up all of that good behind us so that we don't loose a bunch of it .
---------------
Is modern (or post-modern really) better off then the
ancients? Well, we do have indoor plumbing. But are we better people? I don't think
so. And that of course goes in to the development of my paradigm.
-----------------
Little of what I propose is that new. Its the combination of old parts that have not been combined.
------------

Oh certainly. The Christian would argue that the imperfections of our society is due to
the less than imperfect adherance to the Gospel. That argument has merit.
--------------
I had always assumed that this is what they thought but never heard anybody dare to voice it. There are numerous religious societies in the world and most of them have higher crime rates and more problems than non.
I don't see the merit, I see it the other way. In my book, whacked out religion is directly responsible for most of our problems as they are.
-------------
All I know,
is that my life goes much mmore smoothly when I live it by what I have been taught in
the Church. Grant it, I have only five years to go by, but when compared to my previous
25 years outside of the Church, the statement seems valid enough.
------------
Any kind of order is better than chaos. But some kinds of order are better than others.


prometheuspan
4/11/2001 5:28 PM 17 out of 21


{{{{{Its time for us to quit clinging like children to things that have been logically
demonstrated to be irrational, its time for religion to grow up.}}}}}
-------------------

Christianity has not been shown to be irrational.
---------------
Yes, it has.
---------------
Would you like me to point out what I
see as irrational in your view?
--------------
by all means. Not on this thread.
go for it.




subdeaconkevin
4/16/2001 12:14 PM 18 out of 21

{{{{{No. I left my personal ideas behind, and embraced the collective wisdom of 2,000 year
old Christinaity.
---------------
1054 was it you said? thats not 2000 years. In order to claim 2000 years you would have to be essene or gnostic.}}}}}

I didn't want to join some ancient religion that could not endure the test of time. I was interested in the Church that I read about in the book of Acts. And I discovered that it indeed is prevailoing agsint the gates of hell, and still being led by the Holy Spirit. 1,000 years ago, Rome left because we would not bow to her claims of universal authority, nor tolerate changes to the faiht handed down to the Apostles. But it is the same Church 500 years ago, 1500 years ago, or 2,000 years ago, in faith, worhip and doctrine. The evidence is there for any that would see.

{{{{The world is full of people that say they hear form God. Is there a way
that we can tell the genuine form the lunatics and fakes?
-----------
reason. Logic.}}}}}

And if they all calim reason and logic? Am I then left to my subjective and biased opinion again?

{{{{{{How do you know that voice that you hear is god, and not a
deceptive spirit?
--------------
because it tells me things that are verifiable through direct experience.}}}}}

You need a voice to tell you that? ;-)

{{{{{Because the things it leads me to do in life are good.}}}}

But do you leave it to yourself to judge? Or is there accountability to another?

{{{{{Because reason and logic and the rational mind all come together in one
single corroboration.}}}}}

What does this mean? (Forgive my dimwitedness)


{{{{{{I don't see you asking many questions.}}}}}}

Might be because I have had to be so busy defending what I believe! ;-)

{{{{{I do see you making many assertations.}}}}

And please continue to question them.

{{{{{{I state once again, the purpose of this area is for us to explore a truth which I feel is self evident. I am not going to defend that truth to you or anybody. I know I am right.}}}}}

Is there anybody who doesn't think they are right? I would imagine Hitler thought he was right?

{{{{This is my discussion area. The point of this area is to take the axiom I have put foreward and to move foreward from it, not argue for or against it. If I wanted the latter, I'd still be in ccc.}}}}

CCC? Campus Crusade for Christ?





subdeaconkevin
4/16/2001 12:24 PM 19 out of 21


{{{{{And there being only one true way and one true god etc is a false paradigm.}}}}}}

And the reason I should believe this premise is?

{{{{{You couldn't really mean to tell us you intend to navigate the way to heaven with
charts that are ethnocentric, now could you?}}}}}

You keep referring to this...how do you mean?


{{{{{Lies and false information defined by you?
----------------
No, as defined by logic and rational science. Ethnocentrism is an idea and a word taken from a social sciences text book kevin.}}}}

I still don't know what you are talking about. Can you enlighten this dullard?


{{{{{{I don't think you have even yet to comprehend who you are talking to.}}}}}

I know I am talking to a child of God created in His image. But in another respect, it doesn't matter who is doing the talking, it is the issues that are important.

{{{{{{The tactics of the inquisitors were
acceptable to you,
----------------
No kevin, you twist everything to suit you.
I am getting sick of it quickly.}}}}}

I am sorry if I am. That seemed to be what you were implying.


{{{{{No. I am talking about the 2,000 year old Church's "version."
---------------
No, you are talking about a 1000 year old churches version.}}}}}

How do you mean?

{{{{{I don't think you worship satan. Please believe me that I do not worship Paul. On some
level you are correct, that I embraced Orthodoxy due to MY paradigm about the world.
You say that I am then false. But you are evangelizing for YOUR view of God. How is it
then not false?
------------
I am evangelizing for everybody elses view of god. Not my view kevin. Everybodies.}}}}}

Except for those of us who do not believe as you do.


{{{{{You don't think I am Hindu and Jewish and etc all of them all at the same time do you?}}}}}

No, I don't think you are either.

{{{{{ No. MY view is backed by social science and rationality.}}}}

Thats what L Ron Hubbard claimed too.

{{{{My view is universal.}}}}}

Hardly.

{{{{I am arguing for universal acceptance. You are arguing for your own superiority.}}}}}

No, I have only been defending my right to believe as I do against your syncretistic doctrein that you want to shove down my throat. I think I have been pretty patient with you mocking of what I believe, and you unwillingness to give me a fair hearing, as you state you so for everyone. Where have I argued for my Superiority, or even implied that I believe such a foolish notion? I believe that what I believe is true, but then so do you right?

{{{{See the difference?}}}}

I see that unless someone agrees with you, you have no use for them.






subdeaconkevin
4/16/2001 12:35 PM 20 out of 21


{{{{{Your right, there really is no middle ground. Either Truth is absolute, or purely
subjective.
------------
Truth is absolute. Human experience can only be subjective.
You got caught again in one of those binary either or loops.
Thats the main failure of the christian trip. Excessive duality.}}}}}}


So, am I to rightly understand that their is no such thing as right or wrong?

{{{{{Can you at least see the attraction, for someone like me seeking out legitimate authority?
------------
Yes Kevin, I understand. But you have to realize that I understand as a psychologist understands. I empathize with you, but in my book, you are simply evading the harder problem of accepting your own responsibility. }}}}}

No, you don't understand. Orthodoxy is exactly about taking responsibility for your life. Understanding that you will one day stand before God and make an account for how you lived your life. No one to blame for my sin, but myself. I beleive in truth, and I confess my failure to live up to that truth.

{{{{As long as its "authority" that you lean on, its not your fault if you are right orwrong.}}}}}

No, authority in the sense of knowing whats right or wrong. I alone am responible for how I live the Truth.

{{{{{{ But thats false kevin, its still your choice. You are still giving your power away and its still true after all is said and done that you are the equal of any pope, bishop, etc.}}}}}

Absolutely. Having leadership in the Church does not mean that I blame them for my own sin. We will all stand naked before God. An you are right, realizing the powere of decision is indeed very powerful.



{{{{{So you have to find a way to trust yourself, but the answer is not to give up having faith in yourself. The answer is you should have been more responsible to yourself in the first place.}}}}}

To whom?

{{{{{And you still can be that. You can still be your own parent, and you can still make it work.}}}}}}}

No, children need parents and I am indeed a child.

{{{{{Its hard to choose that instead of being forever the child, but sooner or later, we all have to face the truth of personal responsibility, personal power, and the fact of our own individual shadow, and our own individual divinity.}}}}}

OK, this is what you believe. I respect that, and for the most part agree with it. But, individual divinity?





subdeaconkevin
4/16/2001 12:41 PM 21 out of 21

{{{{{{I don't believe in hell. My purpose in being here is all about whats going on here.
In my book everybody gets to heaven sooner or later. The only question is how long it takes. I want that time to be easy, the path to be clear. I am here to make THIS world a better place, not to dwell on premortal or post mortal existence.}}}}}}

I agree. This earth can be heaven or hell, despite what our circumstances are. I know people that have evcerything, that seem to be living in their own hell. I know others who live in sickness and abject poverty, who are so much in heaven that they bring you there with them.



{{{{{{. There are numerous religious societies in the world and most of them have higher crime rates and more problems than non. }}}}}

Amen. So simply being religious is not necessisarily the key.

{{{{{I don't see the merit, I see it the other way. In my book, whacked out religion is directly responsible for most of our problems as they are.}}}}}

I agree. But I don't think my religion is whacked out, and I don't suppose you think your is either.
{{{{{Any kind of order is better than chaos. But some kinds of order are better than others. }}}}


Sure, I'd agree.
{{{{{Its time for us to quit clinging like children to things that have been logically
demonstrated to be irrational, its time for religion to grow up.}}}}}
-------------------

Christianity has not been shown to be irrational.
---------------
Yes, it has.}}}}}

Speaking of children, now we sound like four year olds.

{{{{Would you like me to point out what I
see as irrational in your view?
--------------
by all means. Not on this thread.}}}}

Sure. Please point the way Jose! ;-)

Christ is Risen!