Big church halts support of ministries

Charlotte Observer ^ | 4/24/05 | Ken Garfield

[iconoclast]

Oops, sloppy reading ... Rev. Tony innocent, others not.

[iconoclast]

If the money goes to the same purpose but through another avenue, the church's attitude is not only correct but Biblical.

Biblical schmivlical ... folks like you sin grievously and then flip the the Bible's pages feverishly trying to find justification for it.

Which part of the Samaritan stories did you not understand?

[billbears]

Biblical schmivlical ... folks like you sin grievously and then flip the the Bible's pages feverishly trying to find justification for it.

Thanks for the judgement. Matter of fact I can't stand people that justify their actions that way. What part of II Corinthians 6:14 do you not understand?

[Old Mountain man]

Of course, you don't believe in baptism for the dead either, do you?

[Old Mountain man]

Which part?

[MineralMan]

Just for fun, I did a little searching for the donor of your screen name. What I found was fascinating, considering your posts in this thread. What on earth possessed to to choose Protagoras as your Freepname?

---

Protagoras' doctrines can be divided into three groups:

Orthoepeia: the study of the correct use of words
Man-measure statement: the notion that knowledge is relative to the knower
Agnosticism: the claim that we cannot know anything about the gods


Back to Table of Contents
Orthoepeia


Perhaps because the practical side of his teaching was concerned with helping students learn to speak well in the courtroom, Protagoras was interested in "orthoepeia" (the correct use of words). Later sources describe him as one of the first to write on grammar (in the modern sense of syntax) and he seems interested in the correct meaning of words, a specialty often associated with another sophist, Prodicus, as well. In the Protagoras, the Platonic dialogue named after the famous sophist which has both Protagoras and Prodicus as participants, Protagoras is shown interpreting a poem of Simonides, with special concern for the issue of the relationship between the writer's intent and the literal meanings of the words. This method of interpretation was one which would be especially useful in interpreting laws and other written witnesses (contracts, wills, etc.) in the courtroom. Unfortunately, we don't have any actual writings by Protagoras on the topic.


Back to Table of Contents
Man-Measure Statement


Of the book titles we have attributed to Protagoras, only two, "Truth" (or "Refutations") and "On the Gods" are probably accurate. Of Protagoras' works, only a few brief quotations embedded in the works of later authors have survived. (The quotations of and reports about Protagoras below are referred to by their 'Diels-Kranz,' or 'DK' number, the usual way of referring to such fragments and testimonia. The Diels-Kranz numbering system is explained here.) Of Protagoras' ipsissima verba (actual words, as opposed to paraphrases), the most famous is the homo-mensura (man-measure) statement (DK80b1): "Of all things the measure is man, of the things that are, that [or "how"] they are, and of things that are not, that [or "how"] they are not." This precise meaning of this statement, like that of any short extract taken out of context, is far from obvious, although the long discussion of it in Plato's Theaetetus gives us some sense of how ancient Greek audiences interpreted it. The test case normally used is temperature. If Ms. X. says "it is hot," then the statement (unless she is lying) is true for her. Another person, Ms. Y, may simultaneously claim "it is cold." This statement could also be true for her. If Ms. X normally lives in Alaska and Ms. Y in Florida, the same temperature (e. g. 25 Celsius) may seem hot to one and cool to the other. The measure of hotness or coldness is fairly obviously the individual person. One cannot legitimately tell Ms. X she does not feel hot -- she is the only person who can accurately report her own perceptions or sensations. In this case, it is indeed impossible to contradict as Protagoras is held to have said (DK80a19). But what if Ms. Y, in claiming it feels cold, suggests that unless the heat is turned on the pipes will freeze? One might suspect that she has a fever and her judgment is unreliable; the measure may still be the individual person, but it is an unreliable one, like a broken ruler or unbalanced scale. In a modern scientific culture, with a predilection for scientific solutions, we would think of consulting a thermometer to determine the objective truth. The Greek response was to look at the more profound philosophical implications.

Even if the case of whether the pipes will freeze can be solved trivially, the problem of it being simultaneously hot and cold to two women remains interesting. If this cannot be resolved by determining that one has a fever, we are presented with evidence that judgments about qualities are subjective. If this is the case though, it has alarming consequences. Abstractions like truth, beauty, justice, and virtue are also qualities and it would seem that Protagoras' dictum would lead us to conclude that they too are relative to the individual observer, a conclusion which many conservative Athenians found alarming because of its potential social consequences. If good and bad are merely what seem good and bad to the individual observer, then how can one claim that stealing or adultery or impiety or murder are somehow wrong? Moreover, if something can seem both hot and cold (or good and bad) then both claims, that the thing is hot and that the thing is cold, can be argued for equally well. If adultery is both good and bad (good for one person and bad for another), then one can construct equally valid arguments for and against adultery in general or an individual adulterer. What will make a case triumph in court is not some inherent worth of one side, but the persuasive artistry of the orator. And so, Protagoras claims he is able to "make the worse case the better" (DK80b6). The oratorical skills Protagoras taught thus had potential for promoting what most Athenians considered injustice or immorality.

[MineralMan]

And this:

---

Protagoras
(c.480-411BC)

Philosopher from Thrace who taught in Athens and was a friend of Pericles. He was the first Sophist, and taught grammar, rhetoric as well as the interpretation of poetry.

Protagoras believed nothing was exclusively good or bad, true or false and that man is his own authority, saying that "man is the measure of all things". This has in later times sometimes been misintrepeted. What the philosopher ment was that each man's opinions differ, and what is true for one person can be false for another. Therefore, he concluded, there is no general or objective truth.

According to Plato, Protagoras stated that the punishment for a crime is executed in order to prevent the same crime from happening again, and not for revenge. Although a celebrated teacher, Protagoras was finally charged with atheism and drowned fleeing to Sicily. Fragments of his works Truth and On the Gods have survived.

[iconoclast]

What part of II Corinthians 6:14 do you not understand?

It seems quite clear.

What isn't clear is your disdain for the people who have been worshiping in Peter's Church for centuries before whenever and wherever the Churches of God were established.

[frgoff]

Just as Adam could have chosen not to disobey God...

But, you see, I wasn't there yelling at Adam: Don't do it!. Yet, according to your theology, I'm punished anyway.

It is exactly the same as if the FBI suddenly came knocking on your door one day and arrested, tried and imprisoned you because your great grandfather killed someone.

You would be screaming mad at the gross injustice perpetrated on you.

As to your second point, by declaring that God can call fair whatever He wants to call fair, even when it is blatantly not, makes God capricious.

The only way you can claim God is fair when we think He isn't is if He knows something we don't. Are you saying that there is something about Adam's fall and it's imputation to us that God is not telling us about?

[Protagoras]

Just for fun, I did a little searching for the donor of your screen name.

You have too much time on your hands.

I did a little research on you. I found a person so devoid of meaning in his life that the most important thing he wants people to know about him is his disbelief.

[MineralMan]

More sophistry. Now I understand where the screen name came from. Bye, now...

[Protagoras]

Of course, you don't believe in baptism for the dead either, do you?

Do you have a secret handshake?

Did you ever find the post where you accused me of misrepresenting your post? You made the charge but couldn't back it up. Is that the normal Mormon way of doing things?

[frgoff]

Innocence of little children. The fact that we commit sin in the first place is directly attributable to Adam, and therefore unjust, since, according to Protestant theology, we didn't exist at that time and had no say whatsoever in what Adam did, and yet God created us at a later time with a sin nature precisely because of what Adam did. (Doctrine of original sin).

In other words, we have been punished for something we had no say in and no part of, yet escape from that punishment is conditional. IE we have to become Christian.

[Protagoras]

Now I understand where the screen name came from.

I'm glad you have found "understanding" of something.

Bye, now...

You keep saying goodby to me, will you ever mean it?

[Peanut Gallery]

sin grievously

Funny...This morning, Pastor's study was Genesis 18,19. When answering the question regarding the description of the sin of Sodom, apart from listing the sin itself, the Bible says it is wicked, abomination, and that it is grievious sin.

[Old Mountain man]

Do you always answer questions with a question?

[Old Mountain man]

Interesting doctrine. I don't believe it for a minute, but it is interesting. Little children belong to Jesus Christ. All of us are children of God. Salvation is something that is worked out between the individual and the Lord, preferably on ones knees.

[Protagoras]

Do you always answer questions with a question?

Do I?

[billbears]

I have no disdain for people worshipping in 'Peter's Church'. However one point, isn't it supposed to be Christ's Church?

[Old Mountain man]

Yes, and since failure to answer is logically viewed as affirmation, I am quite glad you have read your copy of the Bible and therefore believe in baptism for the dead.