can we all join hands together by the campfire, and sing "kum bi yah" together?

__________________
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

Uhh, How does one get cheese from a goat anyway--makes me think of that scene from http://movieclips.com/DRMa-kingpin-movie-milking-the-bull/

Hell, I'm still trying to figure out how we got from Maureen to biblical references.

Amen, brother.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

I've had grown up city folks ask me "how often do you milk him?"

__________________
You're a daisy if you do.
__________________________________
84 Euro 240D 4spd. 220.5k sold
04 Honda Element AWD
1985 F150 XLT 4x4, 351W with 270k miles, hay hauler
1997 Suzuki Sidekick 4x4
1993 Toyota 4wd Pickup 226K and counting

Embarrasingly, yesterday evening, Some gal in the Yuppie central market explained that sheep and goats are two different animals, and there are nanny goats and Rams, It was uncool to be one of the AGG kids in school when there was still agg taught here--then, my town was on the edge of the metroplex.

There are scholars that dispute that Al Qaeda took down the Twin Towers.

The act or action of disputation does not confer legitimacy to the argument.

What I wrote was orthodoxy and I chose my words carefully. It cannot be disputed by logic or evidence.

The same can be said of any miraculous event, like the resurrection of Jesus, who some call the Christ. That's why we call them "miracles". These are events that do not subject themselves to analysis. If one believes the miracle (as a matter of faith), then it is by definition, beyond dispute.

So Muhammad's recounting of the holy messenger is an article of faith, not of proof. Like Joseph Smith's tablets or the resurrection of Jesus.

In my opinion, we chose the mythology that agrees with our world view, not the reverse. But that's just me. I embrace, generally, the myths of science because I believe (generally and faithfully) in a rational universe, not a supernatural universe. But I cannot disprove a supernatural universe and since I cannot disprove it, I must hold the supernatural as a possibility.

Thus I consider myself a superstitious agnostic.

I'm a scientist/engineer/applied-mathematician by nature. Always have been.

Growing up during the space race and kids like me were pampered and encouraged to grow up and lead us into a brave, new world of technology

I was taught this at a very, very early age. I thought it was known by all.

Humans build models. They then interact with their models. Humans never experience (at least via rational faculties) truth, existence, the world.

Science/technology/engineering/applied-math (the most objective of man's endeavors) never can and never will know the truth.

We use whatever model that serves the need we have. We know it is a model, not reality.

The same is true of our belief systems (at least rationally).

The rational mind cannot find truth. In fact, what it does well is construct rationales, arguments for what one wants, not what is right or good or wise or possessing truth.

One of the first thing one learns to do with the rational mind is to debate, where the goal is to win an argument, not discover truth. Any attorneys in the audience will instantly understand.

Your 4 sentence statement that I have excised above is a very good summation of this idea. Well done.

This is where the door was opened...

He ended up here after justifying smearing someone he did not like with Hitler.

That wasn't enough absurdity so he continued flailing and uttered the above statement.

Now you know.

I understand your position as a post-modern. Most Muslims do not view their mythology that way. To them it is history not faith, on a par with what modern historians write. The historians who are reconstructing the first few hundred years of Islam on the basis of evidence and not mythology are historically wrong and also heretical. I have personally met one who is in hiding with his family for challenging the unity of the Qur'an and the mythology of Islam's rapid expansion.

I also think sjh's earlier argument, which I was disputing was an historical and not a faith argument. He was saying that people were alive who knew Jesus who could have disputed what was written in the NT had they disagreed with it. (I think?). That is a rational, historical, critical argument in support of the truth of the NT, not a faith based argument.,

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

I'm not a believer in rational truth. I don't have a strong theory of truth. Your argument above about belief systems implies that any belief system is acceptable. When it comes to beliefs, anything goes. Christianity in all its forms, Hinduism in its theistic forms, Islam, Judaism, Heaven's Gate, Children of God, Ramtha School of Enlightenment, all are equal belief systems incapable of being distinguished, accepted or rejected on rational grounds.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

Correct (as you know).

I am comfortable speaking of faith from a faith perspective.

But I was, instead speaking of an intellectual consideration of a few, specific documents that mainstream scholars agree on as Paul's epistles.

As intelligent, learned and ponderous as you are I am certain there is nothing I have said that you have not 'processed' in your life and come to some 'peace' with.

Regarding intellectual truth I am highly pragmatic.

Regarding belief systems, wow, I do not have sufficient wisdom, particularly having just awoke and only being drug-free and finally done being 'cut up' for 2 weeks to provide an all-inclusive answer.

I'll both ponder your comment and listen to your remarks.

At this point my goal was two-fold: to establish the limitations of 'rational' truth (while simultaneously embracing the potency of rational models) and to state my perspective that everyone, every culture, etc has components of non-rational (as distinct from irrational which I am sure are present as well) beliefs in their identity.

I find it disappointing and exhausting to constantly be barraged with claims that I am somehow a 'simpleton' because I acknowledge that I have a belief system with non-rational components. Everyone does.

Jan Goodall writes with greater consideration of the primates she observes than some of the posters on OD regarding Christians. It's both vile and imbecilic.

I do not have 'all-of-the-answers', not even close. But ending the reduction of those who differ to morons (I am not accusing you of this) sure seems to me to be a place to start.

In most of human history, supernatural religious beliefs were only available to individuals in one flavor. Just like Indians ate Indian food, Brits ate British food and Aztecs ate Aztec food. People were mostly unaware of alternative religious irrationalities that they could adopt. They were raised with a single choice for the most part. Today things are very different. Hindu temple down the street, synagogue uptown, Buddhist meditation around the corner and evangelical Christianity in the suburbs.
The philosophical and epistemological culture changes as a result of these historical circumstances. Supernatural irrationalities become a kind of cultural veneer. Modern life can exist with the much more limited and natural irrationalities associated with science and the supernatural irrationalities can be ignored.
If the religious believer adopts one of these multiple irrationalities while accepting the legitimacy and viability of the other religious irrationalities, it doesn't seem to be an issue. But lots of religious believers, even socially tolerant religious believers, don't seem to hold on to their religious irrationalities that way. They seem to think they are 'true' and in some way superior to the alternative irrationalities. Christ, Mohammed and Krishna are not equals. What's your take on that? Are they equals or not?

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

I have to break up my 'food' into small 'bite-size' pieces. My mind is a fraction of what it I'm use to and if I take to big a step I become frustrated.

First thing I have to do is find some comfort with your use of the term irrational instead of non-rational. I find it inflaming and discouraging discourse.

I say this to acknowledge who I am and my response, not to attack.

I am a fairly new believer (less than 10 years) and I am much more intellectual inclined and desirous of intellectual; clarity than most people, believers or not. So I struggle with questions that few of those in the pew next to me acknowledge.

To a great extent I accept that my non-rationalities cannot be objectively proven superior to other non-rationalities. And, to a great extent I accept that the choices others make must be accepted by society and that I wish to be courteous and civil in my interactions.

It troubles me that 'rational' people who do not subscribe to a 'belief-system' fail to recognize that they are, in many ways more dishonest than someone who acknowledges they have a non-rational belief system.

I find a life of faith very hard and very rewarding.

It will be easier for me to interact if you can express your self in 2 to 3 sentence statements. Just the limit of where I am right now.

PS - I did not respond to much of what you wrote because there is so much there that often each sentence you write requires half-a-page or so to adequate answer. I have to handle it one-step-at-a-time.