[Vision2020] unequivocal words of God: response for you
Douglas Stambler
christ_reigns_moscow@yahoo.com
Tue, 26 Aug 2003 12:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
--0-348595941-1061927222=:41745
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
i have never agreed with you on anything that i have seen you post on the forum.
however, this post is starting to carve away at Christ church: who DID put them in charge, and how can others be sure?
all the best.
In Christ,
Douglas Stambler
***********************************************************************************************
Ted Moffett <ted_moffett@hotmail.com> wrote:
Visionaries:
Again, Doug Jones wants to have his cake and eat it to.
He wants to keep "reason" around for when it is convenient, but
marginalize its applications when it appears to threaten his
spiritual bias. In short, he advocates a complicated form of
obscurantism, veiled in sophisticated philosophical and theological
terminology, designed to facilitate his sleight of hand trick that
hides reason from view when needed to avoid the free application of
reason to the spiritual life.
He questions the scope and application of what he calls
"Enlightenment Reason" as though it is just another fundamentalist
secular faith.
Then he turns around and uses what methods of truth seeking, I would
like to him to clarify, to demonstrate that I should follow his
Trinitarianism, rather than Islam or Buddhism etc?
Do we seek the most booming voice coming out of the brightest cloud
to determine where our spiritual allegiance should be placed? Do we
follow a certain document revealed by God hat we place our faith in? But
there are
numerous such documents. Which one is the true one? Oh, wait a
second, the concept of "truth" might be too closely associated with the
project of Enlightenment Reason, which Doug Jones seeks to marginalize. Is
there some
special form of reason or logic that Doug Jones uses, different in kind from
"Enlightenment Reason?" Miracles no doubt might compel faith. Perhaps this
is Doug Jones basis for belief.
Doug Jones point below is a distortion:
>But doesn't this just prove my point? Both historic Christianity and the
>Enlightenment hold their ultimate standards to be irrefutable. Why
>pretend that only Christianity does this?
>
False. In fact a rather scathing attack against reason has been
launched from within the disciplines of reason itself. There are
many unresolved problems in the vast schematics of "reason" that
place reason and methods of reasoning, under question.
"Irrefutable" when applied to "Reason" is a word chosen by Doug Jones
to slant the argument towards placing the project of reason in some sort of
biased fundamentalist camp to suit Doug Jones assumptions.
There are many assumptions in the scientific method that are
difficult or impossible to prove by reason. They must be assumed.
They are not declared "irrefutable."
As a follower of reason I am fully admitting reason has limitations
that place doubt upon the certainty of knowledge obtained in this
manner.
But will Doug Jones admit limitations upon the certainty of his
spiritual biases? Here is where the rubber meets the road! I doubt there
will
be any admission by Doug Jones of limitations upon the
certainty of Doug Jones Trinitarianism.
His is the ideology that is irrefutable, that he expects others to
follow, while he bans the application of reason to his fundamental spiritual
assumptions,
unless reason plays nice and does not threaten his irrefutable
foundation.
Ted
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8: Get 6 months for $9.95/month http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup
_____________________________________________________
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
http://www.fsr.net
mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
--0-348595941-1061927222=:41745
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
<DIV>i have never agreed with you on anything that i have seen you post on the forum.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>however, this post is starting to carve away at Christ church: who DID put them in charge, and how can others be sure?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>all the best.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In Christ,</DIV>
<DIV>Douglas Stambler</DIV>
<DIV>***********************************************************************************************<BR><BR><B><I>Ted Moffett <ted_moffett@hotmail.com></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"><BR><BR>Visionaries:<BR><BR>Again, Doug Jones wants to have his cake and eat it to.<BR><BR>He wants to keep "reason" around for when it is convenient, but<BR>marginalize its applications when it appears to threaten his<BR>spiritual bias. In short, he advocates a complicated form of<BR>obscurantism, veiled in sophisticated philosophical and theological<BR>terminology, designed to facilitate his sleight of hand trick that<BR>hides reason from view when needed to avoid the free application of<BR>reason to the spiritual life.<BR><BR>He questions the scope and application of what he calls<BR>"Enlightenment Reason" as though it is just another fundamentalist<BR>secular faith.<BR><BR>Then he turns around and uses what methods of truth seeking, I would<BR>like to him to clarify, to demonstrate that I should follow his<BR>Trinitarianism, rather than Islam or Buddhism etc?<BR><BR>Do we!
seek the
most booming voice coming out of the brightest cloud<BR>to determine where our spiritual allegiance should be placed? Do we<BR>follow a certain document revealed by God hat we place our faith in? But <BR>there are<BR>numerous such documents. Which one is the true one? Oh, wait a<BR>second, the concept of "truth" might be too closely associated with the<BR>project of Enlightenment Reason, which Doug Jones seeks to marginalize. Is <BR>there some<BR>special form of reason or logic that Doug Jones uses, different in kind from<BR>"Enlightenment Reason?" Miracles no doubt might compel faith. Perhaps this<BR>is Doug Jones basis for belief.<BR><BR>Doug Jones point below is a distortion:<BR><BR>>But doesn't this just prove my point? Both historic Christianity and the <BR>>Enlightenment hold their ultimate standards to be irrefutable. Why<BR>>pretend that only Christianity does this?<BR>><BR><BR>False. In fact a rather scathing attack against reason has been<BR>launched f!
rom
within the disciplines of reason itself. There are<BR>many unresolved problems in the vast schematics of "reason" that<BR>place reason and methods of reasoning, under question.<BR>"Irrefutable" when applied to "Reason" is a word chosen by Doug Jones<BR>to slant the argument towards placing the project of reason in some sort of<BR>biased fundamentalist camp to suit Doug Jones assumptions.<BR><BR>There are many assumptions in the scientific method that are<BR>difficult or impossible to prove by reason. They must be assumed.<BR>They are not declared "irrefutable."<BR><BR>As a follower of reason I am fully admitting reason has limitations<BR>that place doubt upon the certainty of knowledge obtained in this<BR>manner.<BR><BR>But will Doug Jones admit limitations upon the certainty of his<BR>spiritual biases? Here is where the rubber meets the road! I doubt there <BR>will<BR>be any admission by Doug Jones of limitations upon the<BR>certainty of Doug Jones Trinitarianism.<BR><BR>H!
is is the
ideology that is irrefutable, that he expects others to<BR>follow, while he bans the application of reason to his fundamental spiritual <BR>assumptions,<BR>unless reason plays nice and does not threaten his irrefutable<BR>foundation.<BR><BR>Ted<BR><BR>_________________________________________________________________<BR>MSN 8: Get 6 months for $9.95/month http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup<BR><BR>_____________________________________________________<BR>List services made available by First Step Internet, <BR>serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <BR>http://www.fsr.net <BR>mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<BR>ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ</BLOCKQUOTE><p><hr SIZE=1>
Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=10469/*http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com">Yahoo! SiteBuilder</a> - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
--0-348595941-1061927222=:41745--