From: ml (mbtlehn@ix.netcom.com)
Date: Tue Aug 24 2004 - 23:29:18 BST
An interesting reference that traces
the evolution of the concept of God
is a book "The River of God" by Reilly
It is not an argument for or against, but
simply a good history of who believed
what, when, and where the qualities
attributed to a deity came from, culturally
and geographically.
It is a dynamic concept...who knows, this
may be where a DQ concept enters the
language of religious thought.
David, what happened to your arm?
thanks--mel
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Morey" <us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: MD MOQ and The Problem Of Evil
> Quality puts together being and becoming
> lets say giving be(com)ing or sq & dq
> q is what is common to sq and dq.
> For me, you just ain't getting it.
> Here's hoping you keep trying it could
> unlock your own ideas in new ways.
> little post, broken arm at moment.
>
> regards
> DM
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <hampday@earthlink.net>
> To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 5:28 AM
> Subject: Re: MD MOQ and The Problem Of Evil
>
>
> >
> > From Ham Priday to Mark Steven Heyman
> > Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 12:25 AM
> > Subject: Re: MD MOQ and The Problem Of Evil
> >
> >
> > Hello again, Mark
> > You'll be surprised, and undoubtedly pleased,.to learn that I agree with
> > everything stated in this posting.
> > >
> > > On 23 Aug 2004 at 11:05, Scott Roberts wrote:
> > > Chuck said:
> > > > Evil exists, which should be impossible if God exists, because:
> > > >
> > > > 1.If God is unaware of Evil in the world, he is not omniscient.
> > > > 2.If God is aware of Evil, but can do nothing to prevent it, he is
not
> > > > omnipotent.
> > > > 3.If God is aware of Evil, is able to prevent it and
> > > > chooses not to, he is not omni-benevolent.
> > > >
> > > > Where's the flaw?
> > >
> > > scott said:
> > > The flaw is to think that words like omniscient and omnibenevolent,
> > > and of course God and Evil, have clear meaning, and thus can be used
> > > in logical formulas. Whatever God might be, He is not a He, a being
> > > who does things the way people do but perfectly.
> > >
> > > ...The argument here should tell the theist that he or she is working
> > > with idols, not God. Idols are concepts (or percepts) that one
> > > worships as God in place of God, but God cannot be conceived (or
> > > perceived). As I said to Mark SH, most Christians are idolators or
> > > heretics of some sort or other. They think that they understand what
> > > is meant by "God is omniscient" and so fall into error, the most
> > > egregious of which is to think that God is the sort of being that can
> > > be thought to be on our side.
> > >
> > > msh says:
> > > Here's the quibble. Saying that people are wrong in their
> > > conceptions of God implies that you know what's right. If it's
> > > "egregious error" to think that God is omniscient, for example, or if
> > > it's true that "God cannot be conceived (or perceived)" then it's
> > > fair for us to ask you to elaborate. Why should anyone believe that
> > > something imperceptible AND inconceivable exists? I respectfully
> > > suggest that the answer can only be that they really, really WANT to
> > > believe it.
> >
> > You're absolutely right, Mark! And the intensity of their desire
> > demonstrates the Value of this inconceivable Essence to man.
> > With belief comes a meaning to existence to which the non-believer
> > is oblivious. But even atheists and agnostics can understand
> > that individual freedom would be impossible if man had access to
> > absolute knowledge. Logic alone tells you that if you knew what
> > must happen, you would have no choice in the matter. You'd
> > be a human robot running along a prescribed course, unable to
> > feel surprise or awe, set goals, achieve personal success, or learn
> > through experience. Since you would not desire what you knew
> > you couldn't have, your life would have no value and there would
> > be no reason to live. If there's a "scheme" to man's innocence,
> > this is it. Does that give you pause? Or is it mere platitudes and
> > dribble? Only you can make that choice. But at least you're
> > free to choose!
> >
> > By the way, on August 16, I closed with this question:
> > > Does Mr. Pirsig regard Quality as a form of beingness,
> > > as being itself, as a Being, or as
> > > something else entirely? If Quality is not "being", then why haven't
> you
> > > raised the same question about Quality that you ask about Essence?
> >
> > I'd still like an answer.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Ham
> >
> >
> > > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> > > Mail Archives:
> > > Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> > > Nov '02 Onward -
> > http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> > > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> > > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> > Mail Archives:
> > Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> > Nov '02 Onward -
> http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
> >
> > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
> >
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward -
http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Aug 24 2004 - 23:35:17 BST