XPost: alt.books.cs-lewis   
   From: no@no.com   
      
   On 29 Apr 2007 03:10:01 -0700, darylgene@aol.com wrote:   
      
   > On Apr 26, 11:34?am, Bree  wrote:   
   >> / snipping down to abcsl and abi /   
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >>> How much can the   
   >>> concept vary and yet remain essentially the same?   
   >>   
   >> So you're talking about concepts rather than the referent, which is Out   
   >> There somewhere? If so, yes, concepts do vary; even one's own concept   
   >> varies from moment to moment. So it seems to me almost a meaningless   
   >> question.   
      
   I'm glad I said "almost." "Meaningless" was much too strong, and still is.   
   Some concepts are so clear and definable that we really can talk sensibly   
   about which ones are the same as which: eg Euclidean stuff.   
      
      
   > Mary, that is sort of a quibble,   
      
   Was Aslan quibbling with Emeth?   
      
      
   > we worship God as we understand Him   
   > to be, so yes that is a concept and the concept does not equate with   
   > the reality. The concept of a table does not equate to the reality of   
   > the table, with all its quantum states and all, yet if we told someone   
   > to put the pen on the table and they put it on the bureau we would   
   > gather that "table" was not the same to the two of us.   
      
   First catch a bureau and table that we can see and point at and thump.   
      
      
   > God's existance   
   > has nothing to do with our concept of Him, but that concept is   
   > everything we have as thinking beings. Asking if concept A is the same   
   > as concept B is not meaningless,   
      
   Sorry, I was hasty and careless. I just meant such things would need a lot   
   of defining, and might only be possible with selected concepts.   
      
      
      
   > all the nouns we have are concepts,   
   > asking if the concept of God can include both the Christian God and   
   > the Muslim God at the same time is the same as asking if object X and   
   > object Y can both be considered tables. There has to be a line   
   > somewhere, if A then not not A. Unless you are a pantheist the concept   
   > of God has boundries.   
      
   So does a cube, but it still has several faces. How many limpets can fit on   
   the head of a man?   
      
   /snip/   
      
   >>> However, one of the things He leads me to do is to present   
   >>> Christ, sometimes even to Jewish people, I find it difficult to   
   >>> understand why that would be, if they were all the same.   
   >>   
   >> Hare Krishnas used to be led to present Krishna to us, so why not?   
   >   
   > I would imagine they would not have been led to do so if they   
   > considered Krishna and Christ to be identical. Or at least Christ as   
   > we percieve Him to be.   
      
      
   Mm. Then what about the Christians who are led to present their versions to   
   other Christians?   
      
      
   Bree   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)