It is currently Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:49 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Put some Prayers up for Zach Miller
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:17 pm
Posts: 919
R S wrote:
Veritas,

I just spent some time on Crete and did a tour of Knossos (the most famous Minoan palace). They revered the bull but I'm quite sure it didn't involve having sex with them. :lol: They vaulted over bulls kinda like the ancient version of the gymnastic events. It's also where the ancient myth of the Minotaur came from. Still, no sex involved. :lol:


I guess they read a little more into this painting than what was actually going on

Image

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Put some Prayers up for Zach Miller
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 7983
I don't think intercourse with bulls was part of Minoan religious practice.

Religious theology depends on divinely revealed principles from which it uses reason to make demonstrations.

Science and philosophy depend on rationally (human) grounded principles from which they use reason to make demonstrations, the former exclusively relying on observation and experience, the latter on both experience and deductive reasoning.

So, Veritas, you are wrong that atheism is a religion if atheism does not rely on divinely inspired first principles.

You cannot test divinely revealed principles, either by reason or experimentation, and this is the source of the requirement of faith for religion.

Atheism requires that one be persuaded by reason, but persuasion is not the same as faith.

_________________
Frank Sinatra, Jr. 'Black Night'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jdwl7X6Jruo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Put some Prayers up for Zach Miller
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:17 pm
Posts: 919
Still Lit wrote:
I don't think intercourse with bulls was part of Minoan religious practice.

Religious theology depends on divinely revealed principles from which it uses reason to make demonstrations.

Science and philosophy depend on rationally (human) grounded principles from which they use reason to make demonstrations, the former exclusively relying on observation and experience, the latter on both experience and deductive reasoning.

So, Veritas, you are wrong that atheism is a religion if atheism does not rely on divinely inspired first principles.

You cannot test divinely revealed principles, either by reason or experimentation, and this is the source of the requirement of faith for religion.

Atheism requires that one be persuaded by reason, but persuasion is not the same as faith.


Yeah RS gave me the site research on that. Something I read tried to legitimize the minotaur myth without bringing aliens into the mix. My discourse was to show that atheism falls into the same traps as organized religion thus could be considered one. What holds it back from achieving true theological gains is its lack of faith in anything outside of themselves and science fact of today.

_________________
Image


Last edited by VeritasSteel on Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Put some Prayers up for Zach Miller
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:47 am
Posts: 3556
Still Lit wrote:
I don't think intercourse with bulls was part of Minoan religious practice.

Religious theology depends on divinely revealed principles from which it uses reason to make demonstrations.

Science and philosophy depend on rationally (human) grounded principles from which they use reason to make demonstrations, the former exclusively relying on observation and experience, the latter on both experience and deductive reasoning.

So, Veritas, you are wrong that atheism is a religion if atheism does not rely on divinely inspired first principles.

You cannot test divinely revealed principles, either by reason or experimentation, and this is the source of the requirement of faith for religion.

Atheism requires that one be persuaded by reason, but persuasion is not the same as faith.


Atheism is a world view. The only "requirement" to be a believer is to believe it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Put some Prayers up for Zach Miller
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:17 pm
Posts: 919
Havoc wrote:
Atheism is a world view. The only "requirement" to be a believer is to believe it.


Same could be said about any religion at first. Humans have a basic need to complicate things in order to legitimize them.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Put some Prayers up for Zach Miller
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:52 pm
Posts: 410
Still Lit wrote:
I don't think intercourse with bulls was part of Minoan religious practice.

Religious theology depends on divinely revealed principles from which it uses reason to make demonstrations.

Science and philosophy depend on rationally (human) grounded principles from which they use reason to make demonstrations, the former exclusively relying on observation and experience, the latter on both experience and deductive reasoning.

So, Veritas, you are wrong that atheism is a religion if atheism does not rely on divinely inspired first principles.

You cannot test divinely revealed principles, either by reason or experimentation, and this is the source of the requirement of faith for religion.

Atheism requires that one be persuaded by reason, but persuasion is not the same as faith.


Atheism, at least if you take the word literally (no god), requires one to believe in the absence of something (god). To hold with any degree of conviction a worldview that hinges on the absence of a thing…in all of space and time…is to hold a worldview the basic premise of which cannot be proven by observation and experience. Atheists—at least as much as any world religion—hold an “I believe this because I believe this” position. One cannot have sufficient observation and experience to conclude that a thing does not exist, since observation and experience cannot account for the part(s) of the universe that exist outside of one’s scope of observation and experience. Agnosticism, leaning toward atheism, is much more credible.

Atheism says, “there is no God.” Agnosticism says, “I don’t know, but I don’t think there is a God.”

I believe there is a God. And I have mentioned Zach Miller to Him several times in the last day or so.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Put some Prayers up for Zach Miller
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 3:08 pm
Posts: 5061
Atheism as a "belief system" wouldn't exist if it weren't for religion.

The 501 (c) (3) designation is for non profits, specifically those that are considered public charities, private foundations or private operating foundations. Not strictly religious organizations.

Also, Saying atheists have saints is an oxymoron.

saint
sānt/Submit
noun
1.
a person acknowledged as holy or virtuous and typically regarded as being in heaven after death.
2.
used in titles of religious saints.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Put some Prayers up for Zach Miller
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 7983
Havoc wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
I don't think intercourse with bulls was part of Minoan religious practice.

Religious theology depends on divinely revealed principles from which it uses reason to make demonstrations.

Science and philosophy depend on rationally (human) grounded principles from which they use reason to make demonstrations, the former exclusively relying on observation and experience, the latter on both experience and deductive reasoning.

So, Veritas, you are wrong that atheism is a religion if atheism does not rely on divinely inspired first principles.

You cannot test divinely revealed principles, either by reason or experimentation, and this is the source of the requirement of faith for religion.

Atheism requires that one be persuaded by reason, but persuasion is not the same as faith.


Atheism is a world view. The only "requirement" to be a believer is to believe it.


Yes. And?

Belief requires persuasion and persuasion is only present in rational beings.

And because atheism and religiosity are arguably both "world views" (an uninstructive phrase), calling atheism a world view hardly distinguishes it from religion.

_________________
Frank Sinatra, Jr. 'Black Night'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jdwl7X6Jruo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Put some Prayers up for Zach Miller
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 7983
Quixotic wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
I don't think intercourse with bulls was part of Minoan religious practice.

Religious theology depends on divinely revealed principles from which it uses reason to make demonstrations.

Science and philosophy depend on rationally (human) grounded principles from which they use reason to make demonstrations, the former exclusively relying on observation and experience, the latter on both experience and deductive reasoning.

So, Veritas, you are wrong that atheism is a religion if atheism does not rely on divinely inspired first principles.

You cannot test divinely revealed principles, either by reason or experimentation, and this is the source of the requirement of faith for religion.

Atheism requires that one be persuaded by reason, but persuasion is not the same as faith.


Atheism, at least if you take the word literally (no god), requires one to believe in the absence of something (god). To hold with any degree of conviction a worldview that hinges on the absence of a thing…in all of space and time…is to hold a worldview the basic premise of which cannot be proven by observation and experience. Atheists—at least as much as any world religion—hold an “I believe this because I believe this” position. One cannot have sufficient observation and experience to conclude that a thing does not exist, since observation and experience cannot account for the part(s) of the universe that exist outside of one’s scope of observation and experience. Agnosticism, leaning toward atheism, is much more credible.

Atheism says, “there is no God.” Agnosticism says, “I don’t know, but I don’t think there is a God.”

I believe there is a God. And I have mentioned Zach Miller to Him several times in the last day or so.


But I do not think belief and faith are the same thing. See the distinction I drew in my post. Revealed principles are not rational principles because they are not derived from reason. Embracing them is what faith is. If you like, faith belongs to the genus belief. The species difference is that faith is grounded in the revealed word of the divine. Not so science or philosophy which embraces principles derived from human reason. Such principles admit of demonstration. Not so with the revealed word of god.

It is not possible to hold a belief without having been persuaded to it and to be persuaded is an act of reason. Is faith an act of reason or...faith. I think there is real difference here.

My aim is not to belittle religion but point out what makes it special. I think Cody's comments are silly and I am hardly religious.

It's not only about what can and cannot be proved. It's about the nature of the principles.

You are right that the atheist is in no position to demonstrate that there is no god. But the atheist is someone who refuses to embrace principles that are not derived from human reason. The atheist has belief, not faith. Those who wish to reduce faith to belief do not do religion any favors.

_________________
Frank Sinatra, Jr. 'Black Night'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jdwl7X6Jruo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Put some Prayers up for Zach Miller
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:52 pm
Posts: 410
Still Lit wrote:
Quixotic wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
I don't think intercourse with bulls was part of Minoan religious practice.

Religious theology depends on divinely revealed principles from which it uses reason to make demonstrations.

Science and philosophy depend on rationally (human) grounded principles from which they use reason to make demonstrations, the former exclusively relying on observation and experience, the latter on both experience and deductive reasoning.

So, Veritas, you are wrong that atheism is a religion if atheism does not rely on divinely inspired first principles.

You cannot test divinely revealed principles, either by reason or experimentation, and this is the source of the requirement of faith for religion.

Atheism requires that one be persuaded by reason, but persuasion is not the same as faith.


Atheism, at least if you take the word literally (no god), requires one to believe in the absence of something (god). To hold with any degree of conviction a worldview that hinges on the absence of a thing…in all of space and time…is to hold a worldview the basic premise of which cannot be proven by observation and experience. Atheists—at least as much as any world religion—hold an “I believe this because I believe this” position. One cannot have sufficient observation and experience to conclude that a thing does not exist, since observation and experience cannot account for the part(s) of the universe that exist outside of one’s scope of observation and experience. Agnosticism, leaning toward atheism, is much more credible.

Atheism says, “there is no God.” Agnosticism says, “I don’t know, but I don’t think there is a God.”

I believe there is a God. And I have mentioned Zach Miller to Him several times in the last day or so.


But I do not think belief and faith are the same thing. See the distinction I drew in my post. Revealed principles are not rational principles because they are not derived from reason. Embracing them is what faith is. If you like, faith belongs to the genus belief. The species difference is that faith is grounded in the revealed word of the divine. Not so science or philosophy which embraces principles derived from human reason. Such principles admit of demonstration. Not so with the revealed word of god.

It is not possible to hold a belief without having been persuaded to it and to be persuaded is an act of reason. Is faith an act of reason or...faith. I think there is real difference here.

My aim is not to belittle religion but point out what makes it special. I think Cody's comments are silly and I am hardly religious.

It's not only about what can and cannot be proved. It's about the nature of the principles.

You are right that the atheist is in no position to demonstrate that there is no god. But the atheist is someone who refuses to embrace principles that are not derived from human reason. The atheist has belief, not faith. Those who wish to reduce faith to belief do not do religion any favors.


Indeed. Hebrews 10 (and I paraphrase) says, “we hold fast the faith, because He is faithful who promised.” So, as you say, the faith rests not on the empirical evidence, but on the “faithfulness” of the “promiser.”


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], JackSplat58 and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
FORUM RULES --- PRIVACY POLICY




Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group