RE: I am a Catholic, ask me a question!
August 6, 2009 at 9:20 pm
(This post was last modified: August 6, 2009 at 9:56 pm by Jon Paul.)
(August 6, 2009 at 6:40 pm)chatpilot Wrote: You cant reason about metaphysical things because to the subjective mind the metaphysical or supernatural world does not exist and can't be proven to exist.The fact that this god is outside of the realm of the natural world and exist on a transcendental plain put him or it outside the realm of scientific scrutiny.It's outside the limits of the scientific method, at least based on my knowledge of it's areas of inquiry - yes. Outside of the scrutiny of rational demonstration and understanding? No.
(August 6, 2009 at 6:40 pm)chatpilot Wrote: The bible for instance has been proven scientifically unsound on so many known scientific principles that in my mind that alone disproves its divine origin and authenticity.How has the bible "been proven scientifically unsound" and what does it even mean?
(August 6, 2009 at 5:09 pm)amw79 Wrote: This is all well and good, but we all know that philosophical and metaphysical reasoning can be a wasteful, semantic excerise. We've all heard the one about the philosophy student who goes in the pub after a lecture, and says to a bloke "Actually metaphysically speaking, that table isn't there", and the other bloke puts his head through it.....Apparently he has been reading too much into arealist sceptical theories, such as those in Copenhagist interpretations of quantum mechanics, of which Purple Rabbit was a vehement proponent.
(August 6, 2009 at 5:09 pm)amw79 Wrote: Even foregoing how you get to your "divine simplicity", the consequences of your conclusion are a creative, loving, intervening god, which is an extraordinary claim - which therefore requires extraordinary evidenceAn intervening God is inevitable from my argument, as any upholding of the existence of the universe is a sort of intervention, even if it is not direct, the "mechanism" is certainly there. Maximum perfection and goodness is also implicit in my argument as I define goodness and perfection in the Aristotelian sense of actuality, which happens to be what God is purely of. A loving God is also implicit, in the definition of love as pure unwarranted charity and giving to undeserving subjects, even of their very existence (actuality).
The people who are the most bigoted are the people who have no convictions at all.
-G. K. Chesterton
-G. K. Chesterton