Subject:

Comments:
: Well, I understand why you would agree with Mr. Hume. He was a brilliant philosopher. But, brilliant philosophers make mistakes. Again, Hume could not see that parts of his philosophy were self-refuting, while others were question begging (arguing in a circle). He committed errors of thinking just as anyone else does. Perhaps you should try reading some of the critical commentaries on his work... : This is something that I try to do often; to read the views of my opponents with an open, yet critical, frame of mind. It would be foolish of me to neglect them. I am sorry that I should be the one to encourage you to read a work by a reductionist who believes that "faith" is the product of chemicals. Such things are truly Damoclesian (don't go looking for it, I made that word up). What I mean to say is that such a theory is suspended above one's head with only a single thread to sustain its precarious position. The theory threatens to fall upon the adherent at any moment. If Christian belief is purely based upon a chemical impetus then atheism, the choice not to believe, would also be caused by chemicals, albeit a different combination of them. If I believe in Christ because of a certain combination of chemicals, you fail to believe in Him because of a different combination. This philosophy becomes self-defeating, for the scientist who is conducting it would surely have arrived at his conclusions about Christian belief through a combination of chemicals, making such a theory meaningless; based upon random natural factors beyond his control. The problem of which of us, if any, were correct would become impossible to answer. No, I believe that such things are a waste of time, but, perhaps you have a counter-argument... : At any rate, I keep forgetting to answer one of your charges and I think I should do so before I forget again. Faith is not irrational, as you have claimed. Such things were handed down to us from Kierkegaard and I think that you should do a bit more research on what the Christian refers to as "faith." There are, in fact, at least two different meanings of the word, "Faith." The ancient Greeks had a word for the Christian meaning of faith (pestuo) but English does not. We do not have a verb form of "faith," no one can begin "faithing." So, we have substituted "belief" for "faith," however this word does not do "pestuo" justice. If you would like, I can explain this further, but I would advise you to stop claiming that "faith is the opposite of reason." It is not. Although popular movies like the third in a series of Indiana Jones movies has Harrison Ford stepping out into an apparent gorge in "faith," this is not at all what the Christian means by it. I don't have much time left, I am working on borrowed time. I would like, at a later date (perhaps tonight), to speak with you about my motives for introducing the life of Christ as evidence for the existence of <b>GOD</B>. You may not understand right now, but I did not expect you to accept that as evidence and was instead introducing it for many other reasons. These things are best explained fully and so I will say no more. : I hope that we can, in a way, begin from the beginning and discuss our world views as equals. : Thank you for all of the time and effort that you have exerted in this debate... : : Eden of Mind

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[Nantucket Navy Live Chat][The Jolly Roger][Kill Devil Hill][Western Canon University]
[Starbuck.com Literary Pirates Cove][Shakespearean Greetings]
[The Crow's Nest] [The World's Largest Literary Cafe]
[Western Canon University Commons] [Western Canon University Lecture Halls] homer The Science of Damocles: Nantucket Campfire

homer Nantucket Campfire
homer & Other Nantucket Live Chats
If ye would like to moderate the homer Nantucket Campfire, please drop nantucket@nantuckets.com a line.