Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (17599)	6/30/2001 12:47:26 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Well that would depend on what you mean by receptive to new ideas. If you mean by that, people should hold opposing and contradictory views in the area of truth, then you are throwing basic logic out the window. For instance I can't believe that Christ both rose physically from the dead and that he didn't rise physically from the dead, at the same and in the same relationship. Can you? I don't see anything inherently closed minded about believing that Christ rose from the dead. Being open minded merely means listening actively to other ideas with a willingness to change one's belief based on sufficient cause. How do we come to believe what we do? Sometimes it's an accumulation of experiences that leads us to form some conclusion. Sometimes it just "feels" right. Sometimes it's because someone told us the answer and we accepted it on their authority. Sometimes it's because everyone around us believes it and we just don't ever question it. Being open minded doesn't mean being chronically undecided or ambivalent or confused. It's simply acknowledging the possibility that one's belief could be erroneous and a willingness to re-examine. For example, I believe that it's safe for me to walk around my neighborhood alone at any time. I do so without the slightest hesitation. I'm basically a trusting person, I've lived here for 26 years without incident to me or anyone else, and so I believe that I'm safe. Now, if I got into a conversation with a neighbor who said he felt unsafe, I'd listen attentively to what that person had to say and bounce it up against my own thinking as appropriate. And if there were to be a couple of incidents in my neighborhood, I'd reconsider my belief right quick. If I just blow off my neighbor's thinking without a fair hearing, I'm closed minded. The Bible does indeed claim to be a revelation from God Himself, but those claims are rooted in historical space time events that can be examined and disproved, from many perspectives You find this evidence conclusive and choose to believe based on this. I don't find it conclusive or even likely. So what do we do with that? Well, if I acknowledge and accept you and your belief, and I do, that's tolerance. If I'm willing to revisit my conclusion if presented with new information, and I am, then I'm open minded. To be honest, I'm not all that open minded on the matter of the Resurrection and the Bible because I think I've probably already seen all the evidence so I'm not sitting around filtering the universe in breathless anticipation of some key new information on those topics. I'm more open minded on the existence of God, in general. I have acknowledged that you could be right about that and I occasionally rethink my position. I'm still rethinking Neo's point about free will. As long as I'm prepared to rethink, I'm open minded. Are you tolerant of other perspectives? You must be at least somewhat tolerant because you manage to hang around with us heathens and still stay civil most of the time. Are you open minded? It is my understanding that your religion requires you not to be, it requires faith and absolute moral values, so you won't be insulted if I observe that you are not. It's OK with me if you're closed minded about this. What's not OK is denying the label without opening the mind. What about the assumptions of moral relativism? Now that's whacked! It starts with the unwarranted assumption that God does not exist I'm not expert on this subject, but I think you are mistaken. You can believe in God and still be a moral relativist, you just can't be a fundamentalist and a moral relativist. That, or you must believe in spontaneous generation out of nothing, with no causal agent. A self existent, eternal something, or everything from nothing. Which seems more logical to you? I find it impossible to grasp the beginning of the world, somewhat less so, the end. But I don't see that it's any more logical that some entity external to the universe created it than that it was created spontaneously. Both require a tip of the hat to something before or beyond the universe. I can't comprehend either. Karen

To: Greg or e who wrote (17599)	6/30/2001 4:09:32 PM
From: 2MAR$	Respond to of 82486

The Bible says that at the culmination of history as we know it, Jerusalem, would become the focal point of all the world, and that Jesus Christ Himself will come and settle the matter Himself. ------> " that at the culmination of history as we know it ??" ...a fading kind of world view to be sure. You can ----->freeze time any way you like , it is only your own "movie" and " chant "<g> The fact is that ancient Jerusalem may be your focus but it is not 4+ billion other people's focus . It is a totally unconvincing statement , limited in scope , and gathering more and more moss as time goes by....you are living in a very narrow band of the universe, if you think your life has only been influenced by just one group of prophets or just one passing human comet... there have been many forms of human genius from out of the many corners of the world . The Lord's house may have many mansions , but you may only be choosing to live in the closet . Jesus was neither the Alpha or Omega , just one man in time who meditated , and discovered a compassionate vision somewhere in the middle ...he was not the first. You need "self-knowledge", more than you need to go to heaven ...but whatever works , right ? regards Mars PS: I would say , today more "eyes" are on New York , or San Francisco...or Los Angeles .... or Hong Kong ...or Berlin ...or Paris ...or Singapore...or Moscow...or Tokyo or Seoul...or Beijing...or even-----> Washington DC. than Jerusalem , modern or ancient. Welcome to the real world ....