XPost: alt.books.cs-lewis, rec.arts.books.tolkien   
      
   Larry Swain  wrote:   
   > stephen@nomail.com wrote:   
   >> Larry Swain  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>Bill Baldwin wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>John W. Kennedy (jwkenne@attglobal.net) wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>stephen@nomail.com wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>John W. Kennedy  wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>stephen@nomail.com wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>John W. Kennedy  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>stephen@nomail.com wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>John W. Kennedy  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>darylgene@aol.com wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>I would simply say,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>again, that if the concept of God has any referent it must   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>have boundries. Unless you think everyone worships the same   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>God you have to make distinctions. If a person is a   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>Christian, no matter what they believe, just because they   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>say they are, the term is meaningless, no?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>I quite agree that I would be happy if such devil worshipers   
   >>>>>>>>>>>as Pat Robertson and George W. Bush would stop calling   
   >>>>>>>>>>>themselves "Christian", but it remains the case that if you   
   >>>>>>>>>>>deny that Jews worship the same God that Christians do, your   
   >>>>>>>>>>>/own/ Christianity is put into serious doubt, "for Salvation   
   >>>>>>>>>>>is of the Jews".   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>How exactly have you concluded that Pat Robertson and George   
   >>>>>>>>>>W. Bush are devil worshipers?  They seem to believe that they   
   >>>>>>>>>>are worshiping the God of the Bible.  Do you think that they   
   >>>>>>>>>>secretly address their prayers to Satan?  Or do you think   
   >>>>>>>>>>that despite their belief that they are worshiping the   
   >>>>>>>>>>Christian/Jewish/Muslim God that their actions indicate they   
   >>>>>>>>>>are mistaken, and are instead worshiping something else?   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>Tashlan. They have their reward.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>That does not really answer the question.  Do you think   
   >>>>>>>>Robertson and Bush think they are worshipping the   
   >>>>>>>>Christian/Jewish/Muslim God, or do you think they think they   
   >>>>>>>>are worshipping the Devil?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>I suppose that depends on what you mean by "think". There can be   
   >>>>>>>no serious doubt that Robertson believes that he is, in some   
   >>>>>>>sense of historic continuity, a Christian, but the   
   >>>>>>>evil-twin-of-Santa-Claus that he has in mind when he says "God"   
   >>>>>>>can hardly be reconciled with that.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>And some people cannot reconcile the God Muslim's apparently have   
   >>>>>>in mind with the Christian God they have in mind.  Why are you   
   >>>>>>right about Robertson and his "God", but those others are wrong   
   >>>>>>about Islam and the Christian God?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Because Moslems are a group of many, many diverse persons, some   
   >>>>>wicked, some good, and some indifferent, and God only knows what   
   >>>>>is in each one's heart, whereas Robertson and Bush are individuals   
   >>>>>who have made their servitude to Hell quite clear.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>  "Noi siam venuti al loco ov'i' t'ho detto   
   >>>>>     che tu vedrai le genti dolorose   
   >>>>>   c'hanno perduto il ben de l'intelletto."   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>That's fine, and it's a logically consistent answer. I'm not sure I   
   >>>>agree, but I understand. What puzzles me is this. Maybe I lost track,   
   >>>>but weren't you one of the ones who said my position was logically   
   >>>>impossible because Muslims claim to worship the God who appeared to   
   >>>>Abraham? But it seems you're willing to admit the validity of a   
   >>>>distinction between the God a man claims to worship and the God he   
   >>>>actually worships. Right?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>So our disagreement is over whether that distinction applies to   
   >>>>Muslims, not over whether my position is logically possible. Does   
   >>>>that make sense?   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>>Which gets us back to the point I keep making and you keep passing over:   
   >>>we aren't here discussing what a Muslim or a Christian or a Jew or any   
   >>>individual believes.  We're discussing RELIGIONS that have MILLIONS of   
   >>>adherents and MILLENIA of history.  You keep personalizing this   
   >>>discussion that in origin wasn't personalized.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> What difference does that make?   
      
   > A huge one, the difference of night and day.  As pointed out in a   
   > previous post, Bill et al are rejecting centuries of Christian thought   
   > on the issue.  It isn't about what an individual of any faith may or may   
   > not believe; we're more talking about "official" doctrines and beliefs   
   > in so far as something "official" can be said about Judaism,   
   > CHristianity, or Islam.   
      
   But I am not talking about "official" doctrines.  I am talking about   
   the logical consistency of the idea that Christians and Muslims worship   
   a different God.  Just because an idea is counter to the "official"   
   doctrine does not make it logically inconsistent.   
      
   >>   
   >> Look, if it is logically possible for Pat Robertson to be worshipping   
   >> an evil twin of Santa Claus and not the God who spoke to Abraham despite   
   >> his personal belief that he is worshipping the God who spoke to Abraham,   
   >> then it is logically possible for any number of people, even MILLIONS,   
   >> even entire RELIGIONS, to be worshiping some being other than the God   
   >> who spoke to Abraham despite their belief that they are worshiping the   
   >> God who spoke to Abraham.   
      
   > Well, I'll point out that it wasn't MY argument about Pat Robertson,   
   > that was John.   
      
   Yes, and that is who I was talking with, and that is what I was talking   
   about.  Look, according to "official" doctrines, Pat Robertson and   
   his followers, worship the same God Christians and Muslims worship.   
   So my unanswered question remains:  why is John apparently free to   
   decide whom one worships in a manner contrary to "official" doctrine   
   but Bill is not?   
      
   > More to your point though, again personalized, if you   
   > want to accept the logic of the Robertson argument, then it works in the   
   > inverse as well: it is logically possible that for any number of people,   
   > even MILLIONS, even entire RELIGIONS to be worshiping the same being who   
   >   appeared to Abraham IN SPITE of the beliefs of a few like Robertson or   
   > bin Laden.   
      
   Of course it is.  Why would you think I thought otherwise?   
      
   > The weight of Christian theology (much less Judaism and   
   > Islam) says that it is the same being, and I happen to be comfortable   
   > with that.  I think its up to you to prove that Christians for the last   
   > 2000 years have been wrong and that you and Bill are right.   
      
   The only question I am discussing is the logical consistency of the idea   
   that Muslims and Christians worship a different God.  Just because an idea   
   is counter to traditional belief it does not follow that it is logically   
   inconsistent.   
      
   Stephen   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)