So how long till Muslim arm patches ? --- (WTF)

[Quaker]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='566663' date='Oct 10 2007, 02:01 PM']Now, here is the trap into which some people fall. They observe this universal complexity with human perplexity, and falsely conclude that the universe is random. In this view, generally, nature is strictly physical. "Why did it happen? Who knows, it just happened."

Other people, not satisfied with that sort of explanation, fall into a different trap. Their human perplexity leads them to attribute supernatural explanations upon the marvels of the universe, because, after all, the universe cannot be a matter of chance. There must be some sort of explanation for why things hold together the way they do. "Why did it happen? Because the gods willed it so."

These two poles suggest the problem confronted by ancient societies. How does a culture account for the physical phenomena that surrounds them? It is part of human nature to seek explanations, even to the extent that a poor explanation serves better than no explanation at all.[/quote]
...Excuse the bump of this thread. I was reading the jesus/muhamad thread and saw Homer's comments about this thread and decided to take a look-see at this thread.

...Very well written and the 2nd paragraph is more accurate than anyone would like to admit. I myself have tried to convery that message a number of times.

...Where do you place yourself?

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Quaker' post='578358' date='Oct 25 2007, 08:46 PM']...Excuse the bump of this thread. I was reading the jesus/muhamad thread and saw Homer's comments about this thread and decided to take a look-see at this thread.

...Very well written and the 2nd paragraph is more accurate than anyone would like to admit. I myself have tried to convery that message a number of times.

...Where do you place yourself?[/quote]
Maybe I will pick this up again. Making the argument for ecumenicism is important.

Briefly, Quaker, I am a Rationalist in the continental philosophy/science meaning of the term. As such, I generally find Empiricism to be faulty epistemology. I consider myself to be a neo-platonist, too. Religiously, this means that while I find Spinoza's definition of God to be the most straightforward and non-controversal ("that which is the cause of itself") I greatly appreciate the Christian concept of the perfect consubstantiality of the trinity. There is no "supernatural" of any kind; what there is (by intent of the processes which elaborate the universe, attributable to a Creator/Creating agency), is an expression of that which is the cause of itself. Thus, what we do not know (or cannot perceive--see Spinoza on substance, attributes, and modes) is not the fault of the Creator, it rather is simply a pointer to relevant deficiencies in our current state of understanding. Or a reference to attributes which are natural to the Creator, but outside our purview as finite humans. I find no need to introduce bugaboos based on myths in order to justify my existence. I'm content with knowing that there will always be "unknowns" from the perspective of individual humans, as well as humanity as a whole.

This, btw, is no contradiction of the essential principle of consubstantiality--which is that, by virtue of Jesus' claim to be the actual son of God, it becomes possible for all people to participate in co-creation with God on that basis of our lawful (and natural) character--that which universally defines us as a species whose individuals can access/use the Logos, even though that access is limited by both time and space, as well as the cognitive abilities of the individual.

This is the crucial central basis for ecumenicism, imo. It's that which makes religions accessible to each other in a healthy way. ALL humans are infused with the Logos (Reason), thus ALL humans can co-participate with the Creator/Creating in ongoing Creation. Each religion is an expression of a cultural milieu and therefore has its own characteristics and dogma/liturgy. Some religions are better at approaching this central truth than others, too. BUT, to the extent that all religions, in their own way, internally express some form of convergence on the universal truths implied by the notion of what the Christians describe as consubstantiality, then not only is there a solid foundation for collaborative work by various faiths to do Good in the world, there is a generally more universal agreement on the nature of science, too.

For too long, Europe and the West have arrogated to themselves a singular imprimatur from their God. Islam saved the West at one moment in history (I mean this literally) and has often expressed, within its faith and within its culture, ideas which also define the relation between mortal and God as based on Reason. Certain Confucian ideas converge on the notion, too.*

Were heaven to exist, then God would welcome all within, whom embraced God's lawful principles which, in some respects, demands that we become co-participants in Creation.

The sin is in not being a co-participant.

*edited to note that I do not mean to leave any faith out, which might converge on those ideas. It's just my ignorance of any others that keeps me from citing them.

[Lawman]

[quote]Islam saved the West at one moment in history (I mean this literally) and has often expressed, within its faith and within its culture, ideas which also define the relation between mortal and God as based on Reason[/quote]

Homer,

I am requesting that you expound on this notion. I am not disagreeing, I am looking for the related correlation.

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Lawman' post='579137' date='Oct 27 2007, 04:13 PM']Homer,

I am requesting that you expound on this notion. I am not disagreeing, I am looking for the related correlation.[/quote]
Out of my entire spiel, THIS is what concerns you? Why am I not surprised?

I'm tempted to say that the answer to this is over your head because it does not jibe with your fundamentalist world outlook. Tell you what, come back with a reasonable hypothesis as to why I might make such an assertion and perhaps I'll offer a few leads to follow.