--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 160 PHILOSOPHY Ref: F4E00074 Date: 04/09/98 From: WILLIAM ELLIOT Time: 05:18am \/To: DAVID MARTORANA (Read 0 times) Subj: "Biological Morality" >>> David Martorana on "Biological Morality" @@> "THE BIOLOGICAL BASIS OF MORALITY" ? DM> "Modern human beings are unlikely to have erased the old DM> mammalian genetic programs and devised other means of distributing DM> power. All the evidence suggests that they have not. True to their DM> primate heritage, people are easily seduced by confident, charismatic DM> leaders, especially males. That predisposition is strong in religious DM> "Ethics and religion are still too complex for present-day science DM> to explain in depth. They are, however, far more a product of DM> autonomous evolution than has hitherto been conceded by most DM> theologians." Considering the genetic or evolutionary basis for behavior, behavior is as complex as DNA. Our attempts to codify human behavior will consequently be as competent as our ability to understand the human gene. What I dislike about all of this bio ethical or theo-ethical method is the abstraction that it presumes for it's keystone. Unlike the sciences, human endeavor is human centered. Assuming an abstract theoretical or theological, is to miss the central human concern to replace it with an inhuman construct. A significance ethical discussion demonstrating the need for a human centered view point is the hazards and utility of irrational convictions. --- * Origin: Sunken R'lyeh - Aloha, OR (503) 642-3548 (1:105/337) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 160 PHILOSOPHY Ref: F4E00075 Date: 04/09/98 From: CLARENCE HOGAN Time: 01:22pm \/To: BOB EYER (Read 0 times) Subj: MARK 16.18 -=> Quoting Bob Eyer to Clarence Hogan <=- BE> Hogan to Bloss, 4-06-98: BE> ------------------------ >And in regard to Mr 16:18, might we not consider Lu 10:19 and Ps >91:13 also? BE> Luke 10.19 NRSV says, putatively quoting Jesus, BE> "... See, I have given you the authority to tread on snakes BE> and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy; and BE> nothing will hurt you." BE> Psalms 91.13 NRSV says, BE> You will tread on the lion and the adder, the young lion and BE> the serpent you will trample under foot. BE> Mark 16.18 NRSV (Longer Ending) says, putatively quoting Jesus, BE> "... they will pick up snakes in their hands, and if they BE> drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay BE> their hands on the sick, and they will recover." BE> There is a general theme about snakes and whether a person is hurt BE> by them that runs through these passages; however, the second BE> clause of the Longer Ending passage, "they will lay their hands on BE> the sick, and they will recover", and the reference to drinking BE> "deadly things", are unique to the Longer Ending. BE> In all probability, therefore, Luke was looking at OT scripture BE> when he wrote his lines above, while the Longer Ending took BE> liberties with Psalms. All the above looks fine but I just don't have a NRSV in all the different versions in my humble library! The following is what I have been able to come up with in accordance with the KJV and Strongs, which when studied closely should confirm my previous findings on the subject as it would seem that many folks take the serpents, scorpions, etc., as literal animals and not as what they are shown to be by Strongs below, correct! Lu 10:19 Behold <2400>, I give <1325> unto you power <1849> to tread <3961> on <1883> serpents <3789> and scorpions <4651>, and over <1909> all <3956> the power <1411> of the enemy <2190>: and nothing <3762> shall by any <3364> means <3364> hurt <91> you. Eze 2:6 And thou, son <01121> of man <0120>, be not afraid <03372> of them, neither <0408> be afraid <03372> of their words <01697>, though <03588> briers <05621> and thorns <05544> [be] with thee, and thou dost dwell <03427> among <0413> scorpions <06137>: be not afraid <03372> of their words <01697>, nor <0408> be dismayed <02865> at their looks <06400>, though <03588> they [be] a rebellious <04805> house. Mr 16:18 They shall take <142> up serpents <3789>; and if <2579> they drink <4095> any <5100> deadly <2286> thing, it shall not hurt <984> them; they shall lay <2007> hands <5495> on <1909> the sick <732>, and they shall recover <2573>. 3961 pateo {pat-eh'-o} from a derivative probably of 3817 (meaning a "path"); TDNT - 5:940,804; v AV - tread 3, tread down 1, tread under feet 1; 5 1) to tread 1a) to trample, crush with the feet 1b) to advance by setting foot upon, tread upon: to encounter successfully the greatest perils from the machinations and persecutions with which Satan would fain thwart the preaching of the gospel 1c) to tread under foot, trample on, i.e. to treat with insult and contempt: to desecrate the holy city by devastation and outrage 3817 paio {pah'-yo} a primary verb; to hit (as if by a single blow and less violently than 5180);; v AV - smite 4, strike 1; 5 1) to strike, smite 2) to sting (to strike or wound with a sting) 5180 tupto {toop'-to} a primary verb (in a strengthened form); TDNT - 8:260,1195; v AV - smite 9, beat 3, strike 1, wound 1; 14 1) to strike, beat, smite 1a) with a staff, a whip, the fist, the hand 1b) of mourners, to smite their breast 2) to smite one on whom he inflicts punitive evil 3) to smite 3a) metaph. i.e. to wound, disquiet one's conscience 3789 ophis {of'-is} probably from 3700 (through the idea of sharpness of vision); TDNT - 5:566,748; n m AV - serpent 14; 14 1) snake, serpent 2) with the ancients, the serpent was an emblem of cunning and wisdom. The serpent who deceived Eve was regarded by the Jews as the devil. 4095 pino {pee'-no} a prolonged form of pio {pee'-o}; which (together with another form poo {po'-o}, occurs only as an alternate in certain tenses; TDNT - 6:135,840; v AV - drink 68, drink of 7; 75 1) to drink 2) figuratively, to receive into the soul what serves to refresh strengthen, nourish it unto life eternal 142 airo {ah'-ee-ro} a primary root; TDNT - 1:185,28; v AV - take up 32, take away 25, take 25, away with 5, lift up 4, bear 3, misc 8; 102 1) to raise up, elevate, lift up 1a) to raise from the ground, take up: stones 1b) to raise upwards, elevate, lift up: the hand 1c) to draw up: a fish 2) to take upon one's self and carry what has been raised up, to bear 3) to bear away what has been raised, carry off 3a) to move from its place 3b) to take off or away what is attached to anything 3c) to remove 3d) to carry off, carry away with one 3e) to appropriate what is taken 3f) to take away from another what is his or what is committed to him, to take by force 3g) to take and apply to any use 3h) to take from among the living, either by a natural death, or by violence 3i) cause to cease And of course these verses speak for them selves down to Ps 91:13, right? Ps 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. Ps 58:4 Their poison [is] like the poison of a serpent: [they are] like the deaf adder [that] stoppeth her ear; Ro 3:13 Their throat [is] an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps [is] under their lips: Ro 3:14 Whose mouth [is] full of cursing and bitterness: Ps 91:13 Thou shalt tread <01869> upon the lion <07826> and adder <06620>: the young <03715> lion <03715> and the dragon <08577> shalt thou trample <07429> under feet. 07826 shachal {shakh'-al} from an unused root probably meaning to roar; TWOT - 2363a; n m AV - lion 4, fierce lion 3; 7 1) lion 1a) of Jehovah, wicked men (fig) 01869 darak {daw-rak'} a primitive root; TWOT - 453; v AV - tread 23, bend 8, bent 7, lead 4, archer 2, tread down 2, come 1, go 2, treader 2, tread upon 2, walk 2, drew 1, lead forth 1, guide 1, tread out 1, go over 1, shoot 1, thresh 1; 62 1) to tread, bend, lead, march 1a) (Qal) 1a1) to tread, march, march forth 1a2) to tread on, tread upon 1a3) to tread (a press) 1a4) to tread (bend) a bow 1a5) archer, bow-benders (participle) 1b) (Hiphil) 1b1) to tread, tread down 1b2) to tread (bend with the foot) a bow 1b3) to cause to go, lead, march, tread 08577 tanniyn {tan-neen'} or tanniym (Ezek 29:3) {tan-neem'} intensive from the same as 08565; TWOT - 2528b; n m AV - dragon 21, serpent 3, whale 3, sea monster 1; 28 1) dragon, serpent, sea monster 1a) dragon or dinosaur 1b) sea or river monster 1c) serpent, venomous snake 03715 k@phiyr {kef-eer'} from 03722; TWOT - 1025a,1025d; n m AV - lion 30, villages 1, young 1; 32 1) young lion 2) village 03722 kaphar {kaw-far'} a primitive root; TWOT - 1023,1024,1025,1026; v AV - atonement 71, purge 7, reconciliation 4, reconcile 3, forgive 3, purge away 2, pacify 2, atonement...made 2, merciful 2, cleansed 1, disannulled 1, appease 1, put off 1, pardon 1, pitch 1; 102 1) to cover, purge, make an atonement, make reconciliation, cover over with pitch 1a) (Qal) to coat or cover with pitch 1b) (Piel) 1b1) to cover over, pacify, propitiate 1b2) to cover over, atone for sin, make atonement for 1b3) to cover over, atone for sin and persons by legal rites 1c) (Pual) 1c1) to be covered over 1c2) to make atonement for 1d) (Hithpael) to be covered >And was this not fulfilled in Acts 28 by Paul and >the viper? BE> This is not an independent witness, since Acts was written by BE> Luke. I do have an old penciled in notation on the first page of Acts "Written by Luke", however there is a question mark there also, so there must have been some question on that point, but I do not recall what it was at the moment but it had to be something that I read in my earlier research to cause me to put the question mark there some years back! BE> Luke thought the Psalms theme was pretty important. In addition, BE> we know that he had a copy of Mark to look at when he wrote his BE> own stuff. (Many passages in Luke are in fact copied straight out BE> of Mark, more or less word for word) Hummmm, that is some good info to have, I will have to do some research on that one! BE> Therefore, if Luke had seen the line "they will lay their hands on BE> the sick, and they will recover" and the reference to drinking BE> "deadly things" in Mark, he would almost certainly have reproduced BE> those ideas. Possibly so! BE> In fact, he did not. The passage, Mark 16.18, is therefore bogus. That could be a possibility! BE> The Longer Ending did not exist in Luke's time. Probably not! Thanks for the info Bob! Just another humble servant of The Kingdom.......clarence....... ... Why do we want Him to do for us what we are able to do for ourselves? --- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 * Origin: UltraTech - Nashville, TN (615)356-0453 {V.34/V.FC} (1:116/30) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 160 PHILOSOPHY Ref: F4F00000 Date: 04/10/98 From: ANDREW CUMMINS Time: 06:01pm \/To: BOB EYER (Read 0 times) Subj: HOLYSMOKE "ATHEISM" -=> Quoting Bob Eyer to Andrew Cummins <=- BE> Not those in Holysmoke. Earlier this year, there was a huge BE> debate in that Conference about what "atheism" amounted to. I BE> strenuously argued, on the basis of many dictionary definitions BE> taken from Canadian, English and American dictionaries, that it BE> meant the doctrine or belief that gods do not exist. The dictionary defines atheism to be the belief that God does not exist. The common man on the street understands atheism to be the belief that God does not exist. And, the word "agnostic" exists for those who confess not to have a belief one way or another. It seems there is no legitimate ground to say that atheism is simply the absence of belief in God. BE> Rice was one of those critics. Pop quiz for Rice: Does God exist? 1) no 2) yes 3) don't know BE> It is also the theory which causes them to assume that the theist, BE> not the atheist, has the burden of providing evidence: Since they BE> claim not to have any beliefs on the subject, they do not have any BE> burden of providing evidence. A dishonest definition as part of an act of cowardice. BE> Well I agree with you on the definition. What I'm pointing out, BE> however, is that you will experience GREAT DIFFICULTY convincing BE> Rice, or any of the other regulars in Holysmoke, on that point. Let them convince me that they are correctly using the word "atheist." ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 --- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0066 * Origin: FREEDOM SIGNODE Serving Him and You! (1:284/57) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 160 PHILOSOPHY Ref: F4F00001 Date: 04/10/98 From: ANDREW CUMMINS Time: 06:01pm \/To: FREDRIC RICE (Read 0 times) Subj: Creationist cult -=> Quoting Fredric Rice to Andrew Cummins <=- FR> Evolution is a directly observed phenomena not subject to belief or FR> disbelief. Deity constructs don't factor into scientific facts. Guess what?! I don't dispute any generally excepted observation. So, if that is what Evolution is, then there is no conflict between Evolution and fundamentalist Creationism. So, what's your problem? ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 --- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0066 * Origin: FREEDOM SIGNODE Serving Him and You! (1:284/57) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 160 PHILOSOPHY Ref: F4F00002 Date: 04/10/98 From: ANDREW CUMMINS Time: 06:01pm \/To: KEITH KNAPP (Read 0 times) Subj: "Existence Exists" -=> Quoting Keith Knapp to Andrew Cummins <=- AC> AC> BTW, the vast majority of well-known successful blacks have AC> AC> either benefited from Affirmative Action or their accomplishments AC> AC> so minor that they would be unknowns if white. AC> KS> Like you? AC>An intelligent and informed reply is always welcome. Get AC>lost. KK> Andrew, you don't seem to realize how funny this is. For weeks KK> you've been calling people fascists, nazis, and morons, but when KK> someone turns that around and points it at you, you get indignant. Like me? I haven't benefited from Affirmative Action. And, I would still be a relative unknown if black. So, my comment cannot be applied to me. His response was both stupid and irrelevant. And, when I call someone a name, I support it. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 --- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0066 * Origin: FREEDOM SIGNODE Serving Him and You! (1:284/57) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 160 PHILOSOPHY Ref: F4F00003 Date: 04/10/98 From: ANDREW CUMMINS Time: 06:01pm \/To: KARL SCHNEIDER (Read 0 times) Subj: Black Competence -=> Quoting Karl Schneider to Andrew Cummins <=- KS> On (08 Apr 98) Andrew Cummins wrote to Karl Schneider... AC> preferential treatment increased. Black immigrants from much AC> more disadvantaged backgrounds perform much better than native AC> American blacks. KS> What the hell are 'native American blacks'?? AC> Which word do you not understand? KS> Each of the three words is easily understood. The combined usage, KS> however, forms what is popularly known as an oxymoron. It must take a mush-brained PC zombie to see an oxymoron. This is the 2nd time that you have failed to explain what is unclear about that phrase. Moron. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 --- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0066 * Origin: FREEDOM SIGNODE Serving Him and You! (1:284/57) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 160 PHILOSOPHY Ref: F4F00004 Date: 04/10/98 From: ANDREW CUMMINS Time: 06:01pm \/To: MARK BLOSS (Read 0 times) Subj: "Existence Exists" -=> Quoting Mark Bloss to Fredric Rice <=- FR> Feel free to correct your own situation by jumping. }:-} In fact FR> prejudice isn't a problem; it's acting upon one's unfounded prejudices FR> which is where evil creeps into the equation. MB> There is no such thing as prejudice _with_ foundation. Wow, something that makes sense (it sure beats "gravity is honest" or "invisible unicorns are blue"). Wow, again! Something honest (well, it isn't a reference to the Bible). But, let's be honest. While your definition may be honest, the Liberal's use of the word is anything but honest. No doubt you commonly call things prejudice even when they do have a foundation. Consider a family that doesn't want to move to a black neighborhood or put their kids in a black school. Consider the cab drive who picks up the white guy over the black guy. Are such people prejudiced? ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 --- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0066 * Origin: FREEDOM SIGNODE Serving Him and You! (1:284/57) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 160 PHILOSOPHY Ref: F4F00005 Date: 04/08/98 From: BOB SEWELL Time: 10:31pm \/To: BOB EYER (Read 0 times) Subj: "Existence Exists" In a deposition submitted under oath, Bob Eyer said: BE> MB>> He exists because it would be impossible for my limited BE> MB>> imagination to understand a universe _without_ God. BE> >God's existence or non-existence does not hinge on the strength or BE> >weakness of your imagination. He is either there or he isn't, BE> >independent of you. BE> Isn't Bloss rather suggesting that God DOES exist independent of BE> him? BE> His formulation above reminds me of Bishop Berkeley, who argued BE> that God, as the all-perceiver, was necessary to maintain objects BE> in between human perceptions of them, by perceiving them when BE> humans didn't. Otherwise, they would cease to exist, since we are BE> directly aware only of human perceptions. This is how Berkeley BE> explained the continuity of material things in time. I don't see the correlation between what Bloss said and Berkley's philosophy, so I'd have to guess no. Maybe he'll clarify his position. Either notion--that God's existence depends on the strength of Mark's imagination, or Berkley's philosophy that God has to constantly expend energy and/or attention perceiving everything in the universe to keep it all in existence--is completely ludicrous to me. BE> Similarly, Bloss seems to be suggesting that the universe would BE> only be a sense-datum to his imagination, unless he could assume BE> that God's perceptions of the universe accounted for its BE> continuity. We're all a figment of God's imagination? Who knows, but that would, if true, also discount the idea that God exists because Bloss cannot imagine it otherwise. On the contrary, everything would then depend on God's imagination, not Mark's, unless Mark is God. ... Vertu to sewe and vices for to fle, were he mytre, coroune or dyademe. --- PPoint 2.05 * Origin: Seven Wells On-Line * Nashville, TN (1:116/30.3) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 160 PHILOSOPHY Ref: F4F00006 Date: 04/09/98 From: BOB SEWELL Time: 11:23pm \/To: ANDREW CUMMINS (Read 0 times) Subj: Black Competence In a deposition submitted under oath, Andrew Cummins said: BS> I'll note your complete failure to ask for any. AC> Actually, I believe I did ask in the original post. Actually, you didn't. I double checked before I posted that, just to make sure I wasn't falsely accusing you. BS> After the whining stopped, they would be forced to compete or sink BS> back even lower in status than they are now. Or they would revolt BS> and we'd have a civil war between blacks and whites. AC> Black culture doesn't give blacks the ability to organize AC> a revolt, so you must be referring to massive riots. You say that just after you mention the million man march. So, tell me again how black culture inhibits their ability to organize? AC> No doubt, there's plenty of white trash. But, by the criteria AC> that earns a white man the label of "trash" there's a much greater AC> proportion of blacks that meet that criteria. BS> Evidence? AC> More blacks are born out of wedlock. More blacks commit AC> crimes. More blacks use poor English. Evidence? AC> Just what "trash" criteria do you think more whites meet? Uneducated or educated below the high-school level (even if they were handed a diploma), unwilling to keep themselves, their children and property clean and in good health/working condition, lazy, prejudiced without cause or with fictional, stereotypical cause or because of class envy. For more examples or demonstration of some of the above, look in a mirror. BS> Of course I object to that. Martin Luther King Jr. and the whole BS> civil rights movement up to his death spoke of a colorblind society, BS> and that's the only solution that will result in true equality for BS> all men. AC> Right. But, most people do not want a color blind society. Evidence? BS> with anti-discrimination laws. These laws will not affect change in BS> our society as long as there are anti-black bigots like you in charge BS> of things. AC> I have never discriminated against someone on the base of race. AC> Indeed, I wouldn't hesitate for a moment to vote for a black AC> guy (or woman) who held the more conservative/libertarian view AC> over the other candidates. (guffaw) That is *so* obvious from your speech here. AC> The greater ignorance of your statement is your delusion that AC> there are anti-black bigots running things. Don't be naive. They are out there. I don't believe they exist in such numbers as the NAACP and J.J. want you to believe. AC> What few there exist AC> are swiftly and severely punished as soon as anyone notices. AC> Indeed, even the accusation of racism against blacks is extremely AC> damaging to any person or company, even those racist companies AC> which give massive preferential treatment to blacks (like AC> Texaco). Which is why we don't need affirmative action laws. You're preaching to the choir about this, Andy. AC> My own position is that the problem with blacks is black culture AC> not genetics nor "centuries of suppression." That isn't how you led off this discussion. Make up your mind. For what it's worth, I agree that the black culture typically found in the ghettos is counter productive to their success. But this is not a universal culture shared by all blacks born in America, it is a subculture. There are other black subcultures wherein blacks succeed, and they have many attributes in common with successful white/asian/what- ever subcultures. The black subculture of the ghettos share attributes with white/asian/whatever-trash subcultures, and it is these shared attributes which make them unsuccessful. So, while I agree with what you seem to be saying in that the culture one adopts is directly related to your ability to succeed, I disagree in that I see no evidence that race factors into the equation. AC> preferential treatment increased. Black immigrants from much AC> more disadvantaged backgrounds perform much better than native AC> American blacks. Which makes my last point above very well. ... Parturiunt montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. --- PPoint 2.05 * Origin: Seven Wells On-Line * Nashville, TN (1:116/30.3)