<b/>You have refused to answer direct questions about the philosophical basis of your beliefs so my assumption is a reasonable inference. "(False: Alleged and responded to numerous times. See previous posts for more info)"
You can deny it all you want but when the discussion first turned from you refusing to forthrightly state your views on abortion to natural right you continued to be evasive. For instance:
Question <<That Document was written by Theists and was based on Theistic assumptions. Yours is built on...?”>>
"Whatever influences have been brought to bear on the person behind the keyboard known as less_ … I speak only for myself, as always."
That's a non answer.>>> Message 26114112
It was a non answer then and it continues to be now.
..............................
>>The question is whether the type of system you describe is cohesive and consistent.>>
"What ‘type of system’ greg? You have been wrestling with this since this strand of discussion began. To my recollection, I have not described a type of system."
Oh I think you have left some crumbs along the trail but you continue to be as evasive as you can. This is interesting:
"The quantumness of seeking is the realization that you are not seeking understanding of your self because you are already conscious of your self. You are seeking what is not your self. As you discover/reveal the truth, you realize it is indeed yourself because you can't know what is not within you to know. The knowledge that you/other (the not you) are not separate is the coming to oneness, the overcoming of ignorance, the transcendence to self-realization, and the abandonment of self imposed suffering." Message 26110688
That description of reality is generally referred to as Pantheistic Monism. This is probably as close as you have come to stating your worldview. Why are you so afraid of just saying that is your position?
.............................................
"I claim to be able to see corruption for what it is but not to have no eyes, as in world view."
As I read that you are saying that you do see corruption and you do it through your own worldview. So why do you continue to deny that you have a worldview?
...........................................
>>One thing is clear, you have a view of the world and you think it is true in opposition to other worldviews that you consider to be false.>>
"Where have I said or implied such a thing?"
So do you think everything is true, nothing is true, a mixture of both, What?
...................................
>>First you have not shown that all systems and worldviews necessarily lead to corruption.
"I made a declaration. I declared as my evidence the historical record which easily chronicles the claim. I don’t need to show anything beyond that but I explained to you how it is easily and absolutely testable and so obvious in and of itself, anyone would be silly to challenge it. Are you challenging it, if so prove it false."
>>Of course any system can be abused …
"In this case, not only can be but have been, without exception."
You are making a different claim than all systems have been abused you are claiming all systems necessarily lead to abuse. It's very easy to show instances where various systems have not failed. For instance the boiling point of water at sea level is 100 degrees C. Jesus was a Human: to error is human but to be human does not necessitate error.
"For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin." Heb 4:15
.........................................
>>How do you know that all distinctions are illusory unless you have the ability to rise above the illusion? This is where you are claiming to see reality and know THE TRUTH."
The truth of my statement does not rely on what I know or you know, it is a statement that is true because it is intrinsically true of this context of human endeavor, it can be observed across culture, time, and circumstance.
It's true because it's true and you know because you know. If everything is illusory then all observations are also illusory. You can't tell when you are stuck in the illusion.
...............................
>>The old saw about the five blind men describing an elephant comes to mind. Only one who can see the TRUTH, and KNOWS Reality can inform the blind men of their error.
"This is not applicable."
IT sure is!
"I didn’t claim the truth of that statement could not be known by others, quite to the contrary I am suggesting it to be an obvious truth to anyone who would consider it."
The blind men have nothing but themselves and their senses to rely on. There has to be some outside informant that knows the whole truth and can relay it to them. That's traditionally where the enlightened Guru comes in.
"It is ironic that the major world views stifle such endeavor for self serving purposes but they do. Further, they insist on the false divisions when studying science, faith based beliefs, philosophy, and mysteries of all sorts which all naturally exist as manifold and unified paths to the same end."
That's your Pantheistic Monism coming through rather clearly now.
For my part, I believe that God is the transcendent Creator of the universe and that He has communicated truth to us through the natural world,(general revelation) His word (the Bible) and through the incarnation of Jesus. Not, that all roads lead to Rome. Not, that there is ultimately no distinction between good and evil, but that we are all fallen sinners in need of redemption and that He has provided THE way for us to be reconciled through faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus for our sins.
Merry Christmas Less
Greg |
