nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
→Legitimate views: Consistency; Augustine
Augustine very accurately describes the situation we are in, there is no misrepresentation. Of course you claim to be one of the "wiser brethren", but Augustine fairly clearly defined what he means by ''incorrect'' biblical views; he defines them with respect to what even "non-Christians" know about the universe, and not with respect to biblical scholarship. The individuals that Augustine criticizes are very clearly also convinced that they are right for the right reasons, just like you, but Augustine doesn't talk about that, but about the impression that this behavior makes on the non-believers, especially if it might appear as if they do not understand "the things about which they make assertion." While you can tell us that it perfectly reasonable to you, you are not in a situation to determine what non-believers think about your argument, and what impression they get from you argument. Augustine very clearly stated that when it comes to science they should make a considerate argument, but he uses much more forceful language than we are use to. [[User:Order|Order]] 08:55, 16 December 2007 (EST)
Augustine very accurately describes the situation we are in, there is no misrepresentation. Of course you claim to be one of the "wiser brethren", but Augustine fairly clearly defined what he means by ''incorrect'' biblical views; he defines them with respect to what even "non-Christians" know about the universe, and not with respect to biblical scholarship. The individuals that Augustine criticizes are very clearly also convinced that they are right for the right reasons, just like you, but Augustine doesn't talk about that, but about the impression that this behavior makes on the non-believers, especially if it might appear as if they do not understand "the things about which they make assertion." While you can tell us that it perfectly reasonable to you, you are not in a situation to determine what non-believers think about your argument, and what impression they get from you argument. Augustine very clearly stated that when it comes to science they should make a considerate argument, but he uses much more forceful language than we are use to. [[User:Order|Order]] 08:55, 16 December 2007 (EST)
: I'm talking about two different sorts of consistency. The first is consistency of language, such as what word is used for God. The second is the consistency of the message throughout the Bible. The message is consistent, although the language used to convey that message is not. Sorry I wasn't clear on that.
: I'm not sure of your point about eyewitnesses to the eyewitnesses.
: Selection is not random, but as I have now elaborated on, no designer means that you have randomness in the statistical sense. I have already pointed out that a designer can use (pseudo-)randomness, but no designer means that you cannot have design, only randomness.
: No, Augustine did ''not'' define "incorrect biblical views" as ones contrary to what non-Christians know about the universe. He was particularly having a go at the subset of Christians who have ''clearly'' incorrect views that they are trying to defend biblically. Yes, the ones that he criticises believe that they are correct, but how many people make claims that they believe are not correct? You believe that you are correct in your comments to me. That they believed they were correct is not the issue.
: Yes, Augustine is concerned about the impression that people will get in being told what they know to be correct is not correct, but he's not saying that people should not try to correct ''incorrect'' ideas.
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 05:40, 17 December 2007 (EST)
===Motivations===
===Motivations===