Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ArGee
I would call that insanity.

Now I know what Paul felt like.

Acts 26:24 And as he thus spake for himself, Festus said with a loud voice, Paul, thou art beside thyself; much learning doth make thee mad.

I've been called worse, however. In any case, I've enjoyed disagreeing with you, but now I have to go make some preparations for tomorrow's dinner.

Happy New Year to you, too.

Thank you!

Hank

193 posted on 12/31/2003 7:56:27 AM PST by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies ]


To: Hank Kerchief
I've been called worse, however.

I did not call you names. If your only reality is in your mind, that is a form of insanity. If I understand correctly, when you can't distinguish between reality and what's in your mind, that's the definition of insanity, but I'm not a psychologist so I won't stand on that.

Since you probably won't be back today, let me clarify some things.

Even if your reasoning ability were perfect (you never have to admit you are wrong, which I doubt) you would still have a limited amount of information on which to base your reasoning. Life is incredibly complex. Perfect reasoning on any subject requires perfect knowledge which is absolutely beyond you or me.

Also, if your mind has bugs, it is likely that the first bug is the inability to know it has bugs. That's why people can't declare themselves sane. Your mind can't know whether it is functioning properly since it has to be functioning properly to know. You must rely on external information sources to know whether what you are seeing is true or not.

Another point, you have rejected the eyewitness testimony of Matthew, Mark, and John, and the carefully researched testimony of Luke. Your statement on this thread was that you reject them out-of-hand by saying, "anyone can write anything in a book." Objective reasoning weighs eyewitness testimony heavily unless the witness can be discredited with specific evidence. Do you reject these witnesses for objective or subjective reasons?

I know what it is like to be in a discussion that does not die. Even if you don't respond to these points, please ponder them.

Shalom b'Shem.

197 posted on 12/31/2003 8:36:37 AM PST by ArGee (Scientific reasoning makes it easier to support gross immorality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson