"The Greatest Conceivable Being"

[DogmaHunter]

Nope, because it's a conviction of something very hard (if not impossible) to (dis)prove.

Ow.... so it's just a meaningless unfalsifiable statement?

So much for "reason and logic".

 

[Hieronymus]

Ow.... so it's just a meaningless unfalsifiable statement?

That's just your oblivious eager conclusion.

So much for "reason and logic".

How would you know?

 

[DogmaHunter]

That's just your oblivious eager conclusion

No, that is literally what you stated. Something that is impossible to (dis)prove, is a statement that is unfalsifiable.

Unfalsifiable statements are meaningless, because they are infinite in number.

Some examples:
- the undetectable 7-headed dragon follows you everywhere you go
- reality isn't real and we are all just brains in vats
- reality isn't real and we all live in the matrix
- history isn't real and everything was created 5 seconds ago by magical unicorns, with all our memories implanted.
- ....

I can do this all day.

How would you know?

Ironically, through reason and logic...

 

[Breckmin]

So she is to blame if she is tortured for not acquiescing to his demands since she was warned (by him) of what he would do her if she refused to return his affection?

I saw a "still waiting" on this from the other Christian who didn't answer... so I will answer it for him/her.

What is missing in the analogy is her tainted and diseased/infectious condition that is the corruption which is brought
about by her wickedness. What is also misleading in the analogy is that He (God) is not punishing her somehow
"because she refused to return His affection." No. That is not how the schema of reality works. She doesn't get "what He would do to her" because she refused His affection or refused to return His affection... she gets "what He would do to her" because she has chosen for Him to be her judge rather than her Savior.... and by choosing justice rather than mercy...
she ends up with the punishment for her wickedness... where He becomes her perfect judge and where HE submits
to the truth of JUSTICE regardless of His desire for her to have chosen grace/mercy. If we miss the fact that she
is guilty and deserves justice...then we miss logic.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I saw a "still waiting" on this from the other Christian who didn't answer... so I will answer it for him/her.

What is missing in the analogy is her tainted and diseased/infectious condition that is the corruption which is brought
about by her wickedness. What is also misleading in the analogy is that He (God) is not punishing her somehow
"because she refused to return His affection." No. That is not how the schema of reality works. She doesn't get "what He would do to her" because she refused His affection or refused to return His affection... she gets "what He would do to her" because she has chosen for Him to be her judge rather than her Savior.... and by choosing justice rather than mercy...
she ends up with the punishment for her wickedness... where He becomes her perfect judge and where HE submits
to the truth of JUSTICE regardless of His desire for her to have chosen grace/mercy. If we miss the fact that she
is guilty and deserves justice...then we miss logic.

Then the analogy of the prospective lover doesn't work and it's wrong to cast the relationship in those terms. Yet that's how Jeremy decided to present it.

 

[anonymous person]

I saw a "still waiting" on this from the other Christian who didn't answer... so I will answer it for him/her.

What is missing in the analogy is her tainted and diseased/infectious condition that is the corruption which is brought
about by her wickedness. What is also misleading in the analogy is that He (God) is not punishing her somehow
"because she refused to return His affection." No. That is not how the schema of reality works. She doesn't get "what He would do to her" because she refused His affection or refused to return His affection... she gets "what He would do to her" because she has chosen for Him to be her judge rather than her Savior.... and by choosing justice rather than mercy...
she ends up with the punishment for her wickedness... where He becomes her perfect judge and where HE submits
to the truth of JUSTICE regardless of His desire for her to have chosen grace/mercy. If we miss the fact that she
is guilty and deserves justice...then we miss logic.

Spot on!

 

[anonymous person]

Then the analogy of the prospective lover doesn't work and it's wrong to cast the relationship in those terms. Yet that's how Jeremy decided to present it.

Yep. I sure did. And you're right, it's not the best analogy.

 

[anonymous person]

And all because she wanted to keep her "intellectual integrity". She did not want to lay down her pride, and humble herself and admit she was in need. She wanted to stand proudly, haughtily, and on her own two feet. If she could not earn her salvation by way of her intellect or her knowledge or her own "integrity" then she determined to remain stubborn and proud and that salvation just was not for her. Thus God gives her what she chooses and what she deserves.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

And all because she wanted to keep her "intellectual integrity". She did not want to lay down her pride, and humble herself and admit she was in need. She wanted to stand proudly, haughtily, and on her own two feet.

Conceited, and yet too oblivious to see it? Sounds like someone I know on here.

If she could not earn her salvation by way of her intellect or her knowledge or her own "integrity" then she determined to remain stubborn and proud and that salvation just was not for her. Thus God gives her what she chooses and what she deserves.

Again, we're back to ultimatums and threats: she needs to be "saved" from the very person who would harm her if she refuses to reciprocate his so-called "love." Her prospective lover is threatening her: "let me save you from what I will do to you if you don't 'let me in.'"

 

[Eudaimonist]

And all because she wanted to keep her "intellectual integrity".

That sounds like someone I would respect.

She did not want to lay down her pride, and humble herself and admit she was in need. She wanted to stand proudly, haughtily, and on her own two feet.

Sounds like someone admirable.

If she could not earn her salvation by way of her intellect or her knowledge or her own "integrity" then she determined to remain stubborn and proud and that salvation just was not for her.

She wants to earn her way in life? She has my vote for President.

Thus God gives her what she chooses and what she deserves.

Let's see... intellectual integrity, standing on her own two feet, and values intellect and knowledge. She must have been told that she passed the test and was offered a special place in heaven as a reward. Oh, but wait, that would be rational and ethical.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[anonymous person]

Conceited, and yet too oblivious to see it? Sounds like someone I know on here.

Again, we're back to ultimatums and threats: she needs to be "saved" from the very person who would harm her if she refuses to reciprocate his so-called "love." Her prospective lover is threatening her: "let me save you from what I will do to you if you don't 'let me in.'"

I see it as an invitation actually. An invitation to an abundant, holy life.

 

[anonymous person]

That sounds like someone I would respect.



Sounds like someone admirable.



She wants to earn her way in life? She has my vote for President.



Let's see... intellectual integrity, standing on her own two feet, and values intellect and knowledge. She must have been told that she passed the test and was offered a special place in heaven as a reward. Oh, but wait, that would be rational and ethical.


eudaimonia,

Mark

She does not believe God's verdict. That she is a sinner through and through.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I see it as an invitation actually. An invitation to an abundant, holy life.

Of course you see it like that. Your worldview has distorted your basic sense of decency.

 

[anonymous person]

Of course you see it like that. Your worldview has distorted your basic sense of decency.

Rather, you and Mark just reaffirm what God has said about all of us. Especially Mark. For one thing that can be said to his credit is that he at least is upfront about how he sees it all.

Them that are well have no need of a physician, only them that are sick. Jesus came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

 

[Ana the Ist]

And all because she wanted to keep her "intellectual integrity". She did not want to lay down her pride, and humble herself and admit she was in need. She wanted to stand proudly, haughtily, and on her own two feet. If she could not earn her salvation by way of her intellect or her knowledge or her own "integrity" then she determined to remain stubborn and proud and that salvation just was not for her. Thus God gives her what she chooses and what she deserves.

I don't think that works for the analogy...

Intellectual integrity has nothing to do with pride, humility, stubbornness etc. It's almost the opposite really...

It would be pride, not wanting to admit mistakes, etc that would stand as obstacles to intellectual integrity.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Of course you see it like that. Your worldview has distorted your basic sense of decency.

And some people wonder why I'm an anti-theist.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Rather, you and Mark just reaffirm what God has said about all of us. Especially Mark. For one thing that can be said to his credit is that he at least is upfront about how he sees it all.

Them that are well have no need of a physician, only them that are sick. Jesus came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Doctor, heal thyself before attempting to diagnose the unwell.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I don't think that works for the analogy...

Intellectual integrity has nothing to do with pride, humility, stubbornness etc. It's almost the opposite really...

It would be pride, not wanting to admit mistakes, etc that would stand as obstacles to intellectual integrity.

He (@anonymous person) really doesn't get it. He thinks it's about pride. Yet who in this thread isn't willing to admit even the possibility of error? It's him.

 

[anonymous person]

And some people wonder why I'm an anti-theist.

If you would have told me this at the start, it would have saved us both much time.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

If you would have told me this at the start, it would have saved us both much time.

If you had told us that you weren't willing to support your positions or answer questions, but that you had no qualms about deceit and plagiarism, then you would have indeed saved us some time.