15 Dec 05
Originally posted by no1marauder1. Do these "Christians" claim to be omniscient? If not, then they clearly acknowledge that "there may be things that Man ... cannot understand". If they don't claim to be omniscient, your argument doesn't work because they don't differ with "other spiritual belief systems" on the limits of human knowledge. The strawman is that your argument relies on the implicit premise that these Christians claim to be omniscient - which they don't.
You must be joking to say I'm setting up a "strawman" when this entire post is one! Let's actually look at what I said:
The "Christians" here want everything tied up in a neat little package with a big bow and a label saying "Just for You and the Other 1% of the Special People". Plus they want to pretend that only they can understand w ...[text shortened]... have a "gripe against Christianity" and actually read and try to understand what I'm saying.
2. Of course I deny its truth. No spiritual belief system I know of says "There may be things we cannot understand in our current state; perhaps we can understand them in another stage of being". Pick any system - either it will say there are (note the certainty!) things we cannot understand in our present state, or there aren't. Either we will be able to understand them in another "stage of being" - or we won't. Zen, AFAIK, may be the only exception but, as I said before, I think one can derive positive assertions from what Zen denies.
3. Is it more rational to believe that all men have limited knowledge than one (or a few) have special knowledge? Let's consider the mathematics of quantum theory - is it more rational to believe than all men have a limited knowledge of QT than to believe that a few men have special knowledge of QT? Clearly not. So, of course, I deny its truth.
15 Dec 05
Originally posted by no1marauderOkay - do the "Christians" on this site claim to have a complete and perfect understanding of God and salvation? Do they claim to know everything there is to know about these subjects? If not, my argument still stands.
You're being ridiculous; only a complete idiot could somehow read what I said into a claim that the "Christians" on this site claimed to be "omniscient" - I was obviously discussing spiritual beliefs (the "package" in the ignored by you first paragraph - they were meant to be read together). You have completely ignored the context of the discussio ...[text shortened]... s.
The rest is a grotesque misunderstanding of my sentences; try actually reading them.
They claim to know certain things about these subjects - that's no different from any other spiritual tradition.
15 Dec 05
3 edits
Originally posted by lucifershammerYes, they do. Please read blindfaith's and RBHILL's posts or better yet ask them; they'll be happy to tell you. That is the whole point of the "Secret Decoder Ring" theory; that once you become a "believer" God reveals it all to you whereas non-believers cannot understand by virtue of their non-belief.
Okay - do the "Christians" on this site claim to have a complete and perfect understanding of God and salvation? Do they claim to know everything there is to know about these subjects? If not, my argument still stands.
They claim to know certain things about these subjects - that's no different from any other spiritual tradition.
EDIT: At best you are nit-picking; the "package" was obviously meant to refer to the Bible; the WORD OF GOD which they believe is the full source of God's revelation to Man. My initial argument did not logically rest on these "Christians" having equal knowledge with God on all things.
15 Dec 05
Originally posted by no1marauderCalling out RBHill and bf101 - is no1's assertion true?
Yes, they do. Please read blindfaith's and RBHILL's posts or better yet ask them; they'll be happy to tell you. That is the whole point of the "Secret Decoder Ring" theory; that once you become a "believer" God reveals it all to you whereas non-believers cannot understand by virtue of their non-belief.
EDIT: At best you are nit-picking; the "p ...[text shortened]... nt did not logically rest on these "Christians" having equal knowledge with God on all things.
15 Dec 05
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI think the claim by some that they have "secret knowledge" that others can't possess by virtue of some factor extraneous to the knowledge itself is the core of the discussion, is it not? I'd say we're dead on-topic.
Speaking of which, I believe you and your segue have shifted the conversation from its origins.
15 Dec 05
Originally posted by no1marauderHow does anyone possess knowledge without recourse to some factor extraneous to the knowledge itself?
I think the claim by some that they have "secret knowledge" that others can't possess by virtue of some factor extraneous to the knowledge itself is the core of the discussion, is it not? I'd say we're dead on-topic.
15 Dec 05
1 edit
Originally posted by lucifershammerIf you want to talk like Coletti, fine. My statement is in plain, standard English and you are perfectly aware of what I am saying. But nitpick away. And try reading an entire sentence rather than picking out individual parts of it.
How does anyone possess knowledge without recourse to some factor extraneous to the knowledge itself?
17 Dec 05
Benedict XVI: "biblical knowledge is superior to plain and simple intellectual knowledge; it is a kind of communion between the knower and the known: the Lord is close to us, while we think and act."
The above is a quote from the first article in the thread named:
"Biblical knowledge, intellectual knowledge, VIS"
17 Dec 05
Originally posted by ivanhoeAnybody using the word "superior" send shivers down my spine.
[b]Benedict XVI: "biblical knowledge is superior to plain and simple intellectual knowledge; it is a kind of communion between the knower and the known: the Lord is close to us, while we think and act."
The above is a quote from the first article in the thread named:
"Biblical knowledge, intellectual knowledge, VIS"[/b]