FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Biblical Criticism - 2001
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-16-2001, 08:28 AM   #71
Amos
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by emc2:
<strong>Amos:

Let me repost your last post to me, as this is how it sould read:

[OPINION]
That is because myth is real and therefore true. I post my perspective that you might realize that it is wrong to look for archological evidence because soon we will believe the literal interpretation and might even start bombing the rest of the world while laughing at stupidity of the Cargo Cults.
[/OPINION]

So again, no facts.

To all others:
Oh well, I tried to get an answer, but it just seems that their isn't one. But hey, why should I expect any different since I have been asking/debating this question to many religious individuals for many years, and as described by this posting, the attempted answers only get stranger and stranger. (Yes Amos, that is my opinion, but since I recieved no factual responses, I feel I am entitled.)

[ December 15, 2001: Message edited by: emc2 ]</strong>
Myth is real and therefore true but only in the metaphysical instead of the physical interpretation of the myth. Can't you comprehend that?

Parables are used to describe the event because there are no metaphysical words. This is not Disney world here but real life. Do you understand that? If not, keep looking.
 
Old 12-17-2001, 12:05 AM   #72
curbyIII
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: .
Posts: 187
Post

To Amos:
You are a lunatic.
curbyIII is offline  
Old 12-17-2001, 08:36 PM   #73
KeithHarwood
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Baulkham Hills, New South Wales,Australia
Posts: 944
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
<strong>

Myth is real and therefore true but only in the metaphysical instead of the physical interpretation of the myth. Can't you comprehend that?

Parables are used to describe the event because there are no metaphysical words. This is not Disney world here but real life. Do you understand that? If not, keep looking.</strong>

This is obviously some meaning of the word `real' that I have never encountered before. It seems to mean much the same thing as the word `imaginary'.
KeithHarwood is offline  
Old 12-18-2001, 07:04 AM   #74
Amos
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by KeithHarwood:
<strong>
This is obviously some meaning of the word `real' that I have never encountered before. It seems to mean much the same thing as the word `imaginary'.</strong>
That depends on how you use the word "imaginary" since only that which exists in reality can be conceived to exist in our imagination. ie, "pink" and "elephants."

The word "real" here describes mystical experiences or segments of it. Mystical experiences are descriptive of our "inner man" life as observed by our ego awareness. In other words, if we have an ego we are not our ego but we just think we are and this is where the word real comes is. This inner man desires to become exposed (exposition of "The Body of Christ" is symbolic of this) and Mary is the personified womanity of this inner man and thus the driving force begind this metamorphosis.

Amos
 
Old 12-18-2001, 07:08 AM   #75
CX
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Portlandish
Posts: 2,829
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
<strong>
The word "real" here describes mystical experiences or segments of it.
</strong>
And the phrase "word salad" describes every word of what you just wrote. Your misuse of lanugage and usage of poetic and flowery but meaningless strings of words doesn't even contain anything which to discuss. This is so common of newage (rhymes with sewage) jibber jabber that it's not even entertaining any more. I apologize to you and the forum for this blatant ad hominem, but really. Say something intelligent for christ sake.
CX is offline  
Old 12-18-2001, 07:49 AM   #76
Amos
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by CowboyX:
<strong>

And the phrase "word salad" describes every word of what you just wrote. Your misuse of lanugage and usage of poetic and flowery but meaningless strings of words doesn't even contain anything which to discuss. This is so common of newage (rhymes with sewage) jibber jabber that it's not even entertaining any more. I apologize to you and the forum for this blatant ad hominem, but really. Say something intelligent for christ sake.</strong>
Well Cowboy, I can see why your world has to be flat.
 
Old 12-18-2001, 02:52 PM   #77
KeithHarwood
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Baulkham Hills, New South Wales,Australia
Posts: 944
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
<strong>

That depends on how you use the word "imaginary" since only that which exists in reality can be conceived to exist in our imagination. ie, "pink" and "elephants."

Amos</strong>
Hm. The words are spelt correctly and the sentence structure appears to be English, therefore he is not a Christian Fundamentalist. It doesn't appear to non-communicative discourse, therefore he is not a politician. Is it content-free? It doesn't appear to be, it has the flavour of actually saying something.

I have it! Amos is Humpty-Dumpty: `Words means what I choose them to mean, neither more nor less'.

There is a theorem somewhere in the middle of communication theory to the effect that the systems at both ends of a channel must agree on the meaning of signals, otherwise communication can not take place.

By defining `real' to mean `anything that can be conceived of by the mind of man' Amos effectively cuts off communication in both directions, because his `real' does not correspond to ours and because we cannot express the concept we mean by `real' to him.
KeithHarwood is offline  
Old 12-18-2001, 03:07 PM   #78
Amos
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by KeithHarwood:
<strong>
</strong>
Believe me sir, even for every question that comes to your mind the answer already exist or the question could not come into being. If this was not true omniscience would not be true.

Amos

[ December 18, 2001: Message edited by: Amos ]</p>
 
Old 12-20-2001, 04:29 AM   #79
Oolon Colluphid
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Alibi: ego ipse hinc extermino
Posts: 12,591
Arrow

Quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
<strong>

Believe me sir, even for every question that comes to your mind the answer already exist or the question could not come into being. If this was not true omniscience would not be true.

Amos

[ December 18, 2001: Message edited by: Amos ]</strong>
QED I believe, Keith.

TTFN, Oolon
Oolon Colluphid is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:14 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.