RE: Damned Catholics
January 21, 2011 at 1:55 pm
(This post was last modified: January 21, 2011 at 10:52 pm by Captain Scarlet.)
(January 21, 2011 at 12:59 pm)dqualk Wrote: It is interesting that you lack the ability to concieve of God. I can understand a being of which no greater can be concieved. If that is not understandable to you then you lack something that I do not.I do not have the capacity to believe in a conceptual perfection as it is impossible to quantify, subjective to the observer and is an emergent and not necessary quality of any being. It cannot emerge in a god as they have to be perfect at t0.
(January 21, 2011 at 12:59 pm)dqualk Wrote: It is rational to conculde that if there is another realm not subject to change that it would be wholly different than are own and that are minds would not have access to it as we have nothing to compare it to. It would be irrational for their to be love, intrinisic value, etc. unless there was such a thing as God, but if there is such a thing then love etc can make sense. Once more I believe in love a priori.The other realm would need defining first. But if you go in for these arguments, without being able to provide evidence, then I could postualte that it is rational to conclude that there is a super-super natural realm (that a supernatural god is unaware of), where they make gods (without them knowing) and place them in the super-natural realm and make them think they are perfect, and that would be different again. And so on...we can all postualte around ontological arguments but they are frail and prove nothing.
Love etc are emotions triggered by bio-chemical reactions and are rooted in physicality and the natural world. God is notably absent in MRI images. Note here that the atheist will not concede that this makes love etc valueless nor less powerful and enriching, it just makes it real.
"I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence"...Doug McLeod.