Guest MacGyver Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 There is something I don't understand: how can a pagan expect to convert a Christian by argument or vice versa? When two people are starting from different presuppositions, there is no way to arrive at the same place. There is so much that needs correction here and I know it is my duty to warn the evil people that are constantly blaspheming on this site that their words will condemn them. But that won't convince anybody. So let's start at the presuppositional level. Every time my view differs with an apostate/heretical message posted here, it is because I presuppose that there is an absolute truth and the apostate presupposes that truth is relative. So let's talk about absolute v. relative truth. Can there be absolute truth or is everything relative? And how does relative truth work: how does one imagine a universe where there is no absolute rule? Doesn't science tell us about laws of nature? How can there be no spiritual law governing the universe? Isn't it true that when someone claims something to be true to themselves they are in fact declaring their own truth to be absolute? I refuse to be wrong, so someone please correct me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celsus Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 MacGyver, Please posit one "truth" that is absolute, in that it is universal in any and all circumstances. To make this easy, let's just stick to physics. You have made the positive assertion that absolutes exist, now please substantiate this claim. Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MacGyver Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 MacGyver, Please posit one "truth" that is absolute, in that it is universal in any and all circumstances. To make this easy, let's just stick to physics. You have made the positive assertion that absolutes exist, now please substantiate this claim. Bruce <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Last semester, before I had taken modern physics, I probably would've looked to Newton for an absolute law for motion, but we know that at speeds close to c some funky stuff happens. The first absolute I can think of is the Third Law of Thermodynamics. I am majoring in physics at the Colorado School of Mines and am getting into the upper level classes where they tell you that everything you learned before wasn't true. No one has falsified the Laws of Thermodynamics, but I probably haven't taken that class yet. If that isn't an absolute please let me know. That is a good question, but I would really like to know about relative truth. I have no problem defending my belief in absolutes, but I would like to learn more about relative truth from people other than my parents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSpooky Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 Heck no. I'm a wiccan apostate who used to have Cartesian influences (how's THAT for relative truth?). But with more research into philosophy, I most certainly believe in an objective truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Slayer-2004 Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 The real problem with Mcgyver's approach is that using his very same reasoning there is no reason we should have to listen to him since our "pressupositions" are differant . The problem that I notice in most pressuparetarded arguments is that they ignore the fact that no one comes out of the womb a believer . They treat it as if they are living in some alternative matrix-esqe reality ... this is not the case . The only pressuposition we have that can actually be excusable is the one we all make in that this universe , this reality , this earth , and this time is real . If anyone wishes to dispute this then please explain how you are speaking to me in a reality that doesnt exist for either of us before you go anywhere . This is the crutch and problem with your beloved pressupamoronism and TAG . THe only person you hurt and dillude by using such underhanded and dishonorable BS is yourself . You also hurt how we percieve you on this site . How do you hurt that you ask ? Simple ... DO .... YOU ... HAVE .. Any fucking clue as to how many times we have heard and debunked this crap you actually have the nerve to call reason ? Their have been thousands of tards before you with the same crap . We debunked their crap , and they either left and went on a personal journey and honestly asked themselves who was dilluding themselves to later return as an ex christian ... or like most of them they declare victory despite the fact that they have been pummeled into the concrete . Sorry , but you are not original . But if you wish to stay I am happy to give you a proper logo that you can use as an avatar ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Slayer-2004 Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 I refuse to be wrong, so someone please correct me! For the sake of humanity I hope your a troll . If anyone out there is this stupid in real life I may have to shoot myself . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IAm_Lucifer Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 I refuse to be wrong <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I can see where this is going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSpooky Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 Whoawhoawhoa, where did we get to the part where MacGyver was a presuppositionalist??? All I see is that he's trying to get to a point where we understand our necessary presuppositions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
been borg again Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 "I refuse to be wrong?" lol man you got a hard life in front of you, sad to say youll probably die alone, unhappy and very bitter. unless you decide to take out a bunch of co workers with you in a final desperate blaze of self important glory LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSpooky Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 You know, I honestly took that statement to mean "I don't want to be mistaken and believe in falsehoods, so please correct me!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Slayer-2004 Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 All I see is that he's trying to get to a point where we understand our necessary presuppositions. Ever been to Tweb ? This is how almost all of them try to start out . Its like a formula for them . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onyx Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 You are a groanbark who yips at people having different beliefs.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
been borg again Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 You know, I honestly took that statement to mean "I don't want to be mistaken and believe in falsehoods, so please correct me!" <{POST_SNAPBACK}> your right, I reread it and I took it out of context. all apologies to Mcgyver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 MacGyver, There are different theories for truth, not "absolute vs. relative", but how do we define what truth is. I’ll see if I can write something tomorrow, I’m going nite-nite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bdp Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 DOES a pagan expect to convert a Christian, or even want to? That's what I'm wondering... bdp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSpooky Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 Ever been to Tweb ? This is how almost all of them try to start out . Its like a formula for them . <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Admittedly, that's true. I'm quite aware of the theological contortions that presupps will pull out of their asses. However, I'm willing to give Mac the benefit of a doubt. For now, at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eponymic Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 DOES a pagan expect to convert a Christian, or even want to? That's what I'm wondering... bdp Not normally. I think most non-believers are of the mindset that, if you are not hurting anyone, your beliefs are fine. I have plenty of Christian, pagan, Mormon, etc. friends. I have no problems with people who have other beliefs. Its only a matter of contention when people use their beliefs to infringe on others rights, cause harm to others, or aggressively push their beliefs where they are unwanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 DOES a pagan expect to convert a Christian, or even want to? That's what I'm wondering... bdp No. Don’t think so. A pagan is content and peaceful and believes in respect for others faith and the free will to choose. And it’s not conversion to pagan, but de-conversion from irrational faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NimbusBirdMgp Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 There is so much that needs correction here and I know it is my duty to warn the evil people that are constantly blaspheming on this site that their words will condemn them. But that won't convince anybody. So let's start at the presuppositional level. I refuse to be wrong, so someone please correct me! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ... This is my view. Christianity and other Religions come from ancient myths and have been Cultural Cults, to manage a bias Culture to Compete with other Cultures and Domenate the World. ... This is an Evil that Conspires against the fabric of Nature. Suppressing it and making life Repressing the things that are Natural. Eventually it is going to Backfire and Explode, when this realization comes about and can be expressed here, like myself. ... I have seen Evil working against me, so I am not some Evil person for looking at this life in a Rational Way. If being Rational is Evil and taking Myths as Good. That to me is the most Pathetic and Evil this world is doing to the world. This will destroy the world and I'm not sure what kind of Deity is out there that will just laught at such distruction, in which I've already noticed for our times. To me it's a Jerk for having such an attitude!!! ... Can this Prick do something Good in my Life? Like honor what I Find Good in my Life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 On been borg again's Calvinism=Nazism thread, MacGyver wrote this: I am a calvinist and i think the majority of time in the eternal state will be spent laughing at the people who have earned an eternity of suffering. There's no way my memory is going to be wiped, I am going to be laughing at you! He wrote other similar stuff there. I smell TAG - and a rotten piece of it at that - stinking all over the place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueGiant Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 There is something I don't understand: how can a pagan expect to convert a Christian by argument or vice versa? When two people are starting from different presuppositions, there is no way to arrive at the same place. That is a good question. Perhaps you should look into convergence? There is so much that needs correction here and I know it is my duty to warn the evil people that are constantly blaspheming on this site that their words will condemn them. But that won't convince anybody. So let's start at the presuppositional level. And what you stand for isn't blasphemous? Knowing what eachother's presupositons are allows everyone to at least know what everyone else is talking about. This is being said, of course, by one of the "evil" people on this site (actually I fight for Team Awesome). Every time my view differs with an apostate/heretical message posted here, it is because I presuppose that there is an absolute truth and the apostate presupposes that truth is relative. That is one hell of a presuppositon, kid. I think you've been confusing fantasy for reality again. Actually look around you, shut your mouth and listen and you may notice what the truth value of that statement actually is. So let's talk about absolute v. relative truth. Can there be absolute truth or is everything relative? And how does relative truth work: how does one imagine a universe where there is no absolute rule? Doesn't science tell us about laws of nature? How can there be no spiritual law governing the universe? Isn't it true that when someone claims something to be true to themselves they are in fact declaring their own truth to be absolute? Absolute truth? No, I don't think so. It could happen, but I doubt it, as it would all have to posess the same frame of reference. My take on relative truth is that truths are relative to one another. In a Newtonian kinematics and dynamics problem, the zero point is completely arbitrary as well as the orientation of axes. Some frames of reference make solving the problem easier (inclined plane problem). I think that truth works this way. Structure is the same, but the point of view is different. Now what would constitute a "truth space, " that could be a real head-bender. About the "Laws of Nature": rationality is a cool model system, but that is all it is, a model. It is not necessarially what is actually going on. May want to read some of Kurt Godel's work for some insight into that statement. Please define spiritual law. When someone claims that something is true for them, in the model outlined above, it is declaring a part of their frame of reference. It is possible, in this way, to be looking at the same system of truths, relative to one another, and get different results. You threw a lot of unrelated things in there, indicating a lack of general unserstanding. I think you should do some more research than listening to your average Sunday preacher, and "Christian" talk radio shows, and actually read for yourself. You're probably an intelligent guy, just need to learn a few things, kid. If you'd like help, feel free to ask. I refuse to be wrong, so someone please correct me! I think I understand what you are getting at here, that if you are wrong, you'd like to correct that. Good first step. Oh, and when you earn my respect, I'll stop calling you kid, kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chefranden Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 Can there be absolute truth or is everything relative? And how does relative truth work: how does one imagine a universe where there is no absolute rule? Doesn't science tell us about laws of nature? How can there be no spiritual law governing the universe? Isn't it true that when someone claims something to be true to themselves they are in fact declaring their own truth to be absolute? Mac, If you are asking this question honestly the answer is that all truth, absolute or otherwise, is relative to human understanding. There is no way for each unique individual to understand the samething the same way as another. For that reason it makes no difference to humans if there is an absolute or not. See Philosophy in the Flesh : The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought I'm no phyisics mavan, but it would seem to me that if motion is relative then non-motion would be relative as well. Thus the third law is not absolute. chef Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vanesa Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 I don't call it kid, I call Xtians: Xtians. Macgyver is just stonewalling. THe Bible is a can of hot air, Xtians are hot air, and so is Macgyver! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MacGyver Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 I guess I'll try to reply to the posts in order: Slayer-2004: No, I don't have any clue how many times you have heard this before. I would use that avatar, but you spelled MacGyver incorrectly and that just isn't my style. What is "TAG"? You don't have to listen to me, you chose to, just like you chose to post something as well. What is "presupparetarded" and "presuppamoronism"? That sounds like you just have to make me look stupid to prove your point. But then again, I am sure that what I am writing now will be taken the same way. I don't know any one on this site and have no real desire to build myself up in anyone's sight, so I don't mind hurting how you percieve me. I have not attacked any one personally, so don't take it that way. You aren't going to hurt my feelings and I am not going to try to hurt yours. And about the shoot yourself thing: that's probably not a good idea. MrSpooky: Thank you for coming to my defense. "All I see is that he's trying to get to a point where we understand our necessary presuppositions." - This is truth, believe it. been borg again: I am not foolish enough to want to be married, but I doubt that I will die alone, I will most likely die in a frozen bivouac or climbing some unknown peak in South America. But you did recant later and I accept your apology. SillyGeezer10: What is a "groanbark"? bdp: Yeah, I wasn't sure if that would get my point across, but HanSolo formulated it better for me: "And it’s not conversion to pagan, but de-conversion from irrational faith." Nimbusbirdmgp: You know, I have never really understood what a "prick" is. I call someone evil who desires to destroy what I desire to protect. I desire to protect the church, while you desire to destroy it. I see you as evil. That is no personal attack, that is a statement of fact. I don't know you and probably never will, I just call "it" like I see "it"--whatever "it" is. And because I don't know you I am going to have a hard time doing anything good in your life. ficino: Very good job. I was hoping no one would see that but....(insert more sarcastic remarks here) Blue Giant: How is what I stand for blasphemous? What is Team Awesome? I don't know how a presupposition can be "one hell". I have been looking around (shutting my mouth and listening won't really help me do anything on the internet) and I still don't understand what you, mean about me seeing the "truth value" of my statement. I see where you're going with the relativity argument but I too do not know what "truth space" would be. If I were to subscribe to your argument, I would say that God has a certain point of view, and that is the absolute. You can look from wherever you want, but there is one right reference frame. Spiritual law would be the correct reference frame: that you can see things in different ways, but there is a morally correct way to view things. I am not sure how general understanding effects the cohesiveness of my statement, but please help me to find this general understanding. I was just writing things off the top of my head. I don't know how you knew that all I spend my time "listening to your average Sunday preacher, and "Christian" talk radio shows" and not "actually read for yourself." but you're looking from the wrong frame of reference. I listen to my Pastor but formulate my own views and do my own reading and studying of the bible and works other than the Bible and I hate christian talk radio. I am pretty sure that I am not a kid, but I don't mind being called it either and I would really have to know you to want to earn your respect. Again, I am not attacking anyone, just stating fact as I see it. I would also like to apologize that my lack of general understanding has again caused my post to be incohesive but I am just answering your post as I read it. Vanesa: So I have earned the pronoun "it"? I think you too might be looking from the wrong reference frame: the Bible is a book, Christians are people, and MacGyver (the real MacGyver) is the greatest action hero of all time. I again warn against personal attacks, I will not be seeking revenge but you can guess who will. Thank you to the people who actually talked about relative v absolute truth and to the people who only had the time to slam me, I am sorry for being so stupid that you had to say something. I am sure your time could have been much better spent and it is my fault for wasting it. Please respond to anything I have said and continue to answer: can there be an absolute truth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caretaker Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 You know, I have never really understood what a "prick" is. I call someone evil who desires to destroy what I desire to protect. I desire to protect the church, while you desire to destroy it. I see you as evil. That is no personal attack, that is a statement of fact. I don't know you and probably never will, I just call "it" like I see "it"--whatever "it" is. And because I don't know you I am going to have a hard time doing anything good in your life. Wow.... This is the first time someone has well-defined Evil. Well, since that is what evil is, then I claim that Judge in Indiana is evil since he is attempting to destroy those parents' religous freedoms that they desire to protect. Jerry Falwell is evil because he wants to destroy my right to atheism. So is Pat Robertson. So is Fred Phelps. Heck, Fred Phelps wants to destroy MANY things that others desire to protect. Pretty much any Christian who feels they must destroy anything that isn't Christian (think: gay rights and freedom from religion, plus more) is then evil. Is that what evil really is? Something or someone that wishes to destroy what others wish to protect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts