[InfiniteNow]

[Tormod]

Originally Posted by nutronjon

Ideally democracy is rule by reason, rather than rule by the powerful over the subjects of those in power.

I disagree with this definition. "Democracy" means "rule by the people" and has nothing to do with reason. Rather, it means that the rulers are elected by (a large group of) the citizens.

Here at Hypography we have no democracy in this sense, because we neither have rulers nor citizens. This is not a country or a member's club, but an informal meeting place. We do have rules, which anyone is free to comment upon and suggest changes to. Those rules are based on two things: The desire to make sure this place is fairly friendly and social, and the desire to focus on *science* in it's various forms and applications. Thus this is not intended as a place to discuss things which have nothing to do with science.

The theology forum is an exception because a lot of our members expressed an interest in religion and it has become one of our busiest forums. I sometimes regret launching the theology forum because most of the discussions have little to do with theology (ie "the rational and systematic study of religion and its influences and of the nature of religious truth") and more to do with Christian thought and preaching.

As for democratic functions at Hypography - everyone can give positive and negative reputation to other members, and everyone can reply to other members' posts. Everyone can sign up and post. Everyone can send PMs to moderators and administrators. The moderators help us keep this place as tidy as possible, but we *very* rarely go in and edit a post. Giving negative reputation and perhaps an infraction is a result of someone violating our rules.

Since the topic implies that Hypography has a "thought police" I'd like to see some backup for that claim.

[nutronjon]

Originally Posted by Tormod

I disagree with this definition. "Democracy" means "rule by the people" and has nothing to do with reason. Rather, it means that the rulers are elected by (a large group of) the citizens.

Here at Hypography we have no democracy in this sense, because we neither have rulers nor citizens. This is not a country or a member's club, but an informal meeting place. We do have rules, which anyone is free to comment upon and suggest changes to. Those rules are based on two things: The desire to make sure this place is fairly friendly and social, and the desire to focus on *science* in it's various forms and applications. Thus this is not intended as a place to discuss things which have nothing to do with science.

The theology forum is an exception because a lot of our members expressed an interest in religion and it has become one of our busiest forums. I sometimes regret launching the theology forum because most of the discussions have little to do with theology (ie "the rational and systematic study of religion and its influences and of the nature of religious truth") and more to do with Christian thought and preaching.

As for democratic functions at Hypography - everyone can give positive and negative reputation to other members, and everyone can reply to other members' posts. Everyone can sign up and post. Everyone can send PMs to moderators and administrators. The moderators help us keep this place as tidy as possible, but we *very* rarely go in and edit a post. Giving negative reputation and perhaps an infraction is a result of someone violating our rules.

Since the topic implies that Hypography has a "thought police" I'd like to see some backup for that claim.

I in no way meant to imply Hypography has "thought police". However, some posters do behave as though they are "though police" in the Theology forum. I have noticed these people can be very rational and pleasant outside of the Theology forum, but when the word God is mentioned, they go nuts, and distort arguments with inflaming statements, and make insults, and bluntly state they are not interested in looking at the offered information. There are so many errors of logic in these discussions, some are completely useless for the purpose of advancing any kind of thought.

Your statement that democracy has nothing to do with reason, tells me you are not literate in Greek and Roman classics. Not only are people ignorant of this information and what it is has to do with democracy, but they freely argue without becoming informed. I don't know why this behavior is common for human beings, but it is. It is like the church holding Galileo under house arrest and refusing to look through the telescope Galileo offered them. Those who know nothing of the Greek and Roman classics are very sure democracy has nothing to do with reason, as the church was sure Galileo was wrong without looking through the telescope and observing the planets for themselves. It is really pointless to discuss the issue with these people, because they do not want to know what they do not know. This becomes a problem when discussing God and morality and what democracy is about. In the past we understood authority as based in knowledge. People assume they are authorities about something they know nothing about, because hey, in the area of theology, or science, they are an authority, and this makes them an authority about everything right? I don't think so, and when they are intolerant of what someone who has different information is saying, there is a problem.

[nutronjon]

Originally Posted by freeztar

How so?

So God = rule by reason?

Again, please give an example.

Okay this is from the rules for this forum, that were posted by Tormod.

Theology is reasoned discourse concerning God (Greek θεος, theos, "God", + λογος, logos, "word" or "reason"). It also refers to the study of other religious topics. A theologian is a person learned in theology.

Notice the words God, logos and reason are almost interchangable? In the bible it says Jesus is the logos, the word, that was from the beginning. This was written by a Greek and understanding what is being said, requires some knowledge of Greek concepts. Does this example work for you?

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by nutronjon

Okay this is from the rules for this forum, that were posted by Tormod.

Did you read Tormod's post above?

I sometimes regret launching the theology forum because most of the discussions have little to do with theology (ie "the rational and systematic study of religion and its influences and of the nature of religious truth") and more to do with Christian thought and preaching.

I'll echo his concerns. A discussion of God using ancient philosophy is fine, just watch your footing.

Notice the words God, logos and reason are almost interchangable? In the bible it says Jesus is the logos, the word, that was from the beginning. This was written by a Greek and understanding what is being said, requires some knowledge of Greek concepts. Does this example work for you?

No.
The Bible was written by humans (yes, like you and me). That the ancient Greeks held God as "reason" is not 'reason' to hold today. It's certainly interesting and entertaining to think about, but we've come a long ways since Cicero's days.

[modest]

Originally Posted by nutronjon

In the bible it says Jesus is the logos, the word, that was from the beginning. This was written by a Greek and understanding what is being said, requires some knowledge of Greek concepts. Does this example work for you?

John wasn't Greek.

-modest

[nutronjon]

Originally Posted by freeztar

Did you read Tormod's post above?



I'll echo his concerns. A discussion of God using ancient philosophy is fine, just watch your footing.



No.
The Bible was written by humans (yes, like you and me). That the ancient Greeks held God as "reason" is not 'reason' to hold today. It's certainly interesting and entertaining to think about, but we've come a long ways since Cicero's days.

Please, if you are informed enough to be an authority on ancient philosophy and Cicero, share your knowledge with us. Demonstrate your knowledge and contrast what was known with what is known.

Why do I need to watch my footing when discussing God as reason, basing my arguments on ancient philosophy and bringing this up to the establishment of democracy in the US, especially quoting Cicero and Thomas Jefferson. What could go wrong? What is the danger?

[nutronjon]

If people want to argue against the Greek influence on the bible, prehaps we should start a thread for this argument. Here is some information that can be used for such a thread........

Table of Contents - The Origins of Christianity and the Bible
IV. The Melting Pot that Brewed Christianity

18.The Cultural Background of Christianity

18.1 How the Greeks Promoted the Blending of Religions

18.2 How the Greek Culture Transformed Palestinian Judaism

How the Greeks Transformed the Beliefs of the Essenes

How the Greeks Transformed the Beliefs of the Pharisees

19. Alexandrian Judaism: the Precursor of Christianity

20. How the Intertestamental Books Influenced the New Testament Writers

20.1 First Enoch
20.2 Jubilees
20.3 Sirach (Ecclesiasticus)
20.4 Tobit
20.5 The Letter of Aristeas
20.6 Second Maccabees
20.7 Fourth Maccabees
20.8 Wisdom of Solomon
20.9 Genesis Apocryphon
20.10 The Old Testament Apocrypha: the First Books of Christianity

21. The Zoroastrian Influence on the New Testament Writers

22. The Essene Influence on the New Testament Writers

23. Plato's Influence on the New Testament Writers

24. The Greek Mystery Religions and Their Influence on Christianity

24.1 Similarities between the Greek Mystery Religions and Christianity

24.2 The Eleusinian Mysteries
The Origins of Baptism
24.3 The Mystery of Dionysus
The Origins of Communion
24.4 The Orphics
The Origins of Praying for the Salvation of the Dead
24.5 The Mystery of Isis and Osiris
24.6 The Mystery of Attis
24.7 The Mystery of Mithras
25. How Philo Laid the Foundations of Christianity

25. How Philo Laid the Foundations of Christianity

25.1 Philo the Platonist

25.2 How the Greeks Rejected the Anthropomorphic Gods

25.3 How Philo’s God Became the God of Christianity

Does the God of Christianity Have the Form of a Man?
23.4 How Philo Inspired the New Testament Writers

Quotations from Philo and Their Parallels in the Gospels

26. How Philo Fashioned the Word of God

26.1 The Origins of "the Word of God"

26.2 How Philo Inspired John

26.3 How Philo Inspired Paul

How Philo Inspired the Writer of Hebrews

26.4 Philo: the Word of God Procures Forgiveness of sins

26.5 "... And the word Was Made Flesh"

27. Pre-Christian Stories that Molded the Story of Jesus

27.1 Romulus
27.2 Asclepius

The Origins of Jesus’ Healing Techniques
27.3 Hercules

V. The Birth of Christianity

28. The Jewish Christians: the Original Followers of Jesus

29. Dissension between the Jewish and Hellenist Christians

The Origins of Paul’s Doctrine of “Spiritual Circumcision”
Philo’s Word: a Model for Interpreting Jesus
The Sacrificial Death of Eleazar: a Model for Interpreting Jesus’ Death
Sacrifice of the Firstborn: a Model for Interpreting Jesus’ Death

30. How the Hellenist Christians Separated from the Jewish Christians

Paul’s Teachings Compared to the Teachings of James

Paul’s Teachings Compared to the Teachings of Jesus

Paul’s Teachings Compared to the Old Testament

Does the Old Testament Say that the Law Will Be Abolished?

31. How the Hellenist Christians Misquoted the Old Testament

By Adopting the Septuagint as Their Old Testament
By Altering Old Testament Quotations and Disregarding Their Context
By Turning the Old Testament into a Book of Allegories
By Alienating the Old Testament from the Jews

32. How the Hellenist Christians Evolved into Gentile Christians

32.1 How Paul Drew Gentiles to Christianity

32.1 The Greek Influence on the Church after Paul

32.2 Gentile Relics in Christianity

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by nutronjon

Please, if you are informed enough to be an authority on ancient philosophy and Cicero, share your knowledge with us. Demonstrate your knowledge and contrast what was known with what is known.

I'm not an authority on philosophy. I've never claimed to be.

Why do I need to watch my footing when discussing God as reason, basing my arguments on ancient philosophy and bringing this up to the establishment of democracy in the US, especially quoting Cicero and Thomas Jefferson. What could go wrong? What is the danger?

Let's get to the heart of your argument. Why do you think there are 'thought police'? Please give an example.

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by nutronjon

If people want to argue against the Greek influence on the bible, prehaps we should start a thread for this argument. Here is some information that can be used for such a thread........

This doesn't make any sense. It's way off-topic as well. Would you care to explain how this relates to the topic at hand?