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 : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (11330)	2/28/2002 9:05:19 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28931

If we are biologically determined, and are who we are religiously because of our brains (not which religion, but whether or not we are religious), than discussion won't work- it won't change our brain wiring and chemistry. Shall we discuss it? ;-)

To: Lane3 who wrote (11330)	2/28/2002 4:52:28 PM
From: Frederick Smart	Respond to of 28931

How bout.... >>Repeated and prolonged claims of THE truth invite ridicule. Conversely, we can all be happy for someone who shares with us that he has found HIS truth. He shares and we say "good for you." Upon the completion of that transaction, though, there is nothing more to discuss. Repetition on the part of the truth-knower is at best boorish and quickly comes across as purveying of THE truth and subsequent ridicule. So there's really nothing to discuss. We can discuss various beliefs, the philosophy or sociology or psychology of them. Discussion is different from testifying.>> ...just freely receiving and sharing ONE thing: ENERY!!! KIS.... 119293!!

To: Lane3 who wrote (11330)	2/28/2002 9:03:21 PM
From: J. C. Dithers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

Open-mindedness. What does that mean in the context of religious beliefs? I've been thinking about that, Karen. On this venue, every word we say is inscribed onto the tableau, always retrievable to anyone interested. Words and expressions of others remain before us, for as long as we choose, for contemplation. We thus gradually establish etched positions, as do those who correspond with us. We find ourselves defending not just positions, but each and every word or thought we have uttered. The result, I think, is that our interactions are based more on perceptions of who we are, rather than upon what exactly we say at a given time. I believe most of us are always in a defensive mode here, which defeats "open-mindedness." In that sense, I think we are always "testifying" rather than "discussing," or perhaps, even listening. Does that make any sense at all? Oh s..t, that's what I was afraid of. To tell you the honest truth, I have had much too much red wine tonight. Could you take another look? Isn' t there anything there? Let me take another tack. I know what you mean about insisting on the "Truth." Let's face it, that does kind of discourage discussion. Truthfully, I'm the last person to insist that I know the truth. In fact, as some of my recent posts here (the more lucid ones) suggest, it is the very fact that I admit I don't the truth that leads me to my faith. I'm probably not even going to get any credit for it when the time comes, seeing as how I arrived at it. Anyway, I like you a lot. As far as I am concerned, you and I have no problems, and I always enjoy repartee with you. I'm fine, honestly, with whatever you believe. I've got enough problems with my own beliefs. Hope that squares us. JC