|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 12 August 2008 21:44
Posts: 22,
Visits: 139
|
|
Beta. (15/05/2008)
Even Jesus did not claim to be good, but God only. Do you think though that when Jesus said that only God is good, it was also a challenge to the listener to accept His divinity or not?
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 16:08
Posts: 100,
Visits: 280
|
|
not
[[[waves (laconic) paws]]]
Quatenus in hebdomades quattuor et dies duos ire possumus?
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 00:16
Posts: 9,
Visits: 623
|
|
crusader (17/05/2008)
Beta. (15/05/2008)
Even Jesus did not claim to be good, but God only. Do you think though that when Jesus said that only God is good, it was also a challenge to the listener to accept His divinity or not? I think what Jesus said here was more to imply his own Humanity rather than his divinity.I think Jesus was here likening himself to the other Human Being he was talking to and as a natural man could in no way be considered good. That comparison could not have applied to Jesus' divinity as the son of God.(in that respect he would be good as was his father)
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 09:29
Posts: 24,
Visits: 109
|
|
| Dear All, I am a bit over my head achemdemically, having not studyed atheism, so first of all I am interested to read your ideas. I have nnow looked on wikipedea.com and it states that theism was invented after atheism, to show an opposing view and atheism is scientific (logical only). Well, this offends me (I oppologise) because philosohy (of which every scientist must /should know) is intuitive and able to see and record. Intuitive can be doing discernment. I beleive an human must use artistic licence to say that something is and describe /name it.
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Poster
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 12:36
Posts: 74,
Visits: 817
|
|
"I have nnow looked on wikipedea.com and it states that theism was invented after atheism, to show an opposing view and atheism is scientific (logical only)."
Which goes to show that you should never trust wikipedia uncritically! 
Theism comes first. As far back as human memory goes, there has been a belief in gods of some sort, from basic animism up to more advanced belief systems. In the Roman Empire "atheism" didn't mean the argument that there is no god, but a refusal to serve the Roman gods - so there are reports in the late 1st and early 2nd Cs of members of the Imperial household being sentenced to death for atheism, which are usually taken as evidence that they had become Christians and refused to sacrifice to the household gods. Since the gods were believed to hold up the whole Empire, refusal to sacrifice to them was seen as an act of sedition.
Atheism as we understand it (the argument that there is no God) is a product of the Enlightenment, the birth of the modern scientific age. It arises as part of a process. On the one hand, there was a reaction against the power-structure of the Church which had more or less ruled Europe for a thousand years. Deism was originally part of that, a rejection of traditional religion while not rejecting part of the philosophy behind it - people needed to explain where they had come from, and Deism did keep that. On the other hand, the development of scientific empirical method led to the rejection of the idea of the supernatural or spiritual dimensions. This necessarily leads to atheism.
Modernism as a world-view is now beginning to unravel, leading to the mish-mash known as postmodernism. The important aspect for this conversation is the popular interest in spirituality - while modernism argued that you can't believe in the supernatural because you can't prove it exists, people are instinctively aware that there is something beyond what can be proved. So we come full circle...
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 09:29
Posts: 24,
Visits: 109
|
|
| Thanks for informing - and I beleive it is essential to look beyond ones own understanding. Miracles are important and I think they ought to prove to any aethiest that God is doing good; and has been close to people doing good. Do you know the saying: "call it a coinsidence and have a dull day"? This is, I think, because creativity is beyond (maybe by half) our control. And yet something is made from creativity, somtimes greater than our own intensions. It is unintentionally through people. And it is more powerful than people/human ability.
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 09:29
Posts: 24,
Visits: 109
|
|
Hi Teddi Warrior!
What does the (your) quote, as follows, mean?
"Quatenus in hebdomades quattuor et dies duos ire possumus?"
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Member
Group: Forum Members
| | | |