Three Powerful Books

[_mentalgymnast]

Seems like MG is having a bad day and can't be counted on for a reasonable conversation. Back to ignore, then.

I’m simply not willing to acquiesce to false innuendo or slander. You would do the same in order to protect your good name. There are angry folks here. I find myself having to deal with the results of that anger. And it’s not pretty.

Today is another day. But I’m fully retired now and need to figure out what else to do besides swimming, biking, running, walking, reading, and such. This whole Covid thing is a real bummer. Inside much of the time and nowhere to go unless going out to exercise or do a store run. We’re in a 55+ community so I don’t have any yard work to do. But we do have a private gym. Time to get down there. It’s HOT in these parts.

Gonna have to find an indoor hobby. This doesn’t really cut it and it gets old.

By the way, I’m always ‘up’ for a reasonable conversation, but not when it slides into finger pointing and intolerance. And when I find myself starting to fall into that trap too, I figure things are winding up.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

Lol! Thanks, Philo! Well done.

(Mental’s really on a tear this time picking on the few women who post here, isn’t he? (Although I noticed he backed off from attacking Jersey the other day. She CLEARLY wasn’t in the mood this time. Kind of like that look a Mama Bear on the Appalachian Trail gives you when she sees that you are, sadly, standing between her and her cubs. Doc knows what I mean! EVERYONE should just back away slowly. :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: )

Yeah. You know it's gotta be bad when even a Jersey Girl thinks you're beneath her.

Hey Jersey!

Regards,
MG

[_honorentheos]

I'm sorry this is where it ended, MG. I sincerely think a discussion of the evidence for God would have led to a productive discussion. I guess we can point fingers as to why that didn't happen. But in the end the outcome reflects the issues that were inherent to the problems in the subject of evidence and bias when one or more parties won't engage honestly with the implications for bias and how engaging with those whose views are different is essential to finding truth, as it were.

[_mentalgymnast]

I'm sorry this is where it ended, MG. I sincerely think a discussion of the evidence for God would have led to a productive discussion.

It’s difficult to script endings . Life is messy that way. I felt like the thread was worthwhile excepting the last bit where things sort of went downhill. Bit that’s par for the course.

What I think might be interesting is looking at a discussion with those that are agnostic/atheist dealing with the evidences that are highest on their own personal scale that would convince them of a personal God. Would you and other ‘players’ be up for that? I think it might be eye opening to see what some folks might come with after excluding scripture, fine tuning, revelation, spiritual promptings/witness, ultimate truth, etc.

I promise I would look in as an interested bystander without rocking the boat or upsetting the apple cart by using ‘unproven’ evidences.

Absent the traditional means of discerning ultimate truth in regards to God, what are some cutting edge ways of doing so?

Do it!

My bet is that it could be an interesting conversation. Taking a positivist view rather than negative, which, truth be told, tends to be the default around here.

Regards,
MG

[_Lemmie]

Lol! Thanks, Philo! Well done.

(Mental’s really on a tear this time picking on the few women who post here, isn’t he? (Although I noticed he backed off from attacking Jersey the other day. She CLEARLY wasn’t in the mood this time. Kind of like that look a Mama Bear on the Appalachian Trail gives you when she sees that you are, sadly, standing between her and her cubs. Doc knows what I mean! EVERYONE should just back away slowly. :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: )

Yeah. You know it's gotta be bad when even a Jersey Girl thinks you're beneath her.

[_honorentheos]

I'm sorry this is where it ended, MG. I sincerely think a discussion of the evidence for God would have led to a productive discussion.

It’s difficult to script endings . Life is messy that way. I felt like the thread was worthwhile excepting the last bit where things sort of went downhill. Bit that’s par for the course.

What I think might be interesting is looking at a discussion with those that are agnostic/atheist dealing with the evidences that are highest on their own personal scale that would convince them of a personal God. Would you and other ‘players’ be up for that? I think it might be eye opening to see what some folks might come with after excluding scripture, fine tuning, revelation, spiritual promptings/witness, ultimate truth, etc.

I promise I would look in as an interested bystander without rocking the boat or upsetting the apple cart by using ‘unproven’ evidences.

Absent the traditional means of discerning ultimate truth in regards to God, what are some cutting edge ways of doing so?

Do it!

My bet is that it could be an interesting conversation. Taking a positivist view rather than negative, which, truth be told, tends to be the default around here.

Regards,
MG

For me it would require consistency in the evidence and the claims. So I don't know how one would exclude scripture because how else does one establish there is some metaphysical force at work in the universe that has an active interest in humankind? I think it current works against the idea there is a god precisely because the gods described across cultures can be mapped onto the culture but not onto a consistent picture of God.

[_Lemmie]

Seems like MG is having a bad day and can't be counted on for a reasonable conversation. Back to ignore, then.

I’m simply not willing to acquiesce to false innuendo or slander. You would do the same in order to protect your good name.

:rolleyes: several hours ago:

...Blanket insults to the extent that this is an inherently biased place of one-sided bashers is a bit too reductionist, even for you, wouldn't you agree?

...this is an inherently biased place of one-sided bashers ...

Yeah, pretty much.

LOL And you don't think you are being dishonest with what he is saying.

No.

This is why I really think mentalgymnast is just here to troll. Is it really possible for a person to take affront at “false innuendo” when they literally trolled someone with “false innuendo” just an hour earlier? Is any adult really that bereft of self-awareness? Maybe I am giving mg too much credit here, but this just strains credulity.

[_mentalgymnast]

It’s difficult to script endings . Life is messy that way. I felt like the thread was worthwhile excepting the last bit where things sort of went downhill. Bit that’s par for the course.

What I think might be interesting is looking at a discussion with those that are agnostic/atheist dealing with the evidences that are highest on their own personal scale that would convince them of a personal God. Would you and other ‘players’ be up for that? I think it might be eye opening to see what some folks might come with after excluding scripture, fine tuning, revelation, spiritual promptings/witness, ultimate truth, etc.

I promise I would look in as an interested bystander without rocking the boat or upsetting the apple cart by using ‘unproven’ evidences.

Absent the traditional means of discerning ultimate truth in regards to God, what are some cutting edge ways of doing so?

Do it!

My bet is that it could be an interesting conversation. Taking a positivist view rather than negative, which, truth be told, tends to be the default around here.

Regards,
MG

For me it would require consistency in the evidence and the claims. So I don't know how one would exclude scripture because how else does one establish there is some metaphysical force at work in the universe that has an active interest in humankind? I think it current works against the idea there is a god precisely because the gods described across cultures can be mapped onto the culture but not onto a consistent picture of God.

You bring up a good point on scripture. Maybe someone else can come up with a work-a-round? I’d hate to see the conversation fail simply because scripture can’t be used as evidence.

A personal God would be kind of a big deal, right? Wouldn’t you think that there are other potential ‘witnesses’ or evidences besides scriptures, fine tuning, revelation, spiritual promptings/witness, ultimate truth, or what have you that could be brought in to the discussion?

You would, of course, need some volunteers. Lemmie has been rather active on this thread. Maybe she would give it a go. Obviously there would need to be others to make it interesting.

Regards,
MG

[_Lemmie]

I'm sorry this is where it ended, MG. I sincerely think a discussion of the evidence for God would have led to a productive discussion. I guess we can point fingers as to why that didn't happen. But in the end the outcome reflects the issues that were inherent to the problems in the subject of evidence and bias when one or more parties won't engage honestly with the implications for bias and how engaging with those whose views are different is essential to finding truth, as it were.

I think you made a valiant effort to set up situations where subjective bias could be looked at as objectively as possible, and I really did like your probability quiz. Distinguishing between 1) what one believes (an assessment based on objective probability and subjective conclusions), and 2) what one is willing to set as an accurate probability (attempting objectivity outside of one’s belief conclusions) was quite interesting. in my opinion it got closer to an objective consideration of beliefs than we have gotten to on this board in a very long time. Maybe you could start a new thread to look at that.

[_honorentheos]

For me it would require consistency in the evidence and the claims. So I don't know how one would exclude scripture because how else does one establish there is some metaphysical force at work in the universe that has an active interest in humankind? I think it current works against the idea there is a god precisely because the gods described across cultures can be mapped onto the culture but not onto a consistent picture of God.

You bring up a good point on scripture. Maybe someone else can come up with a work-a-round? I’d hate to see the conversation fail simply because scripture can’t be used as evidence.

A personal God would be kind of a big deal, right? Wouldn’t you think that there are other potential ‘witnesses’ or evidences besides scriptures, fine tuning, revelation, spiritual promptings/witness, ultimate truth, or what have you that could be brought in to the discussion?

You would, of course, need some volunteers. Lemmie has been rather active on this thread. Maybe she would give it a go. Obviously there would need to be others to make it interesting.

Regards,
MG

How do you reconcile YHVH with Shiva? The godless Tao with the Greek pantheon?