Re: THE METAPHYSICAL SCIENCE OF RELIGION - why this is relevant to sci.logic
- From: Marshall <marshall.spight@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 13:03:37 -0800 (PST)
On Dec 30, 12:11 pm, pjmutn...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
The following IS relevant to sci.logic because it treats religion as a
logical system of symbols such as the names of G-D. This material is
not proselytizing for one particular religion, nor is it focussed on
actual religious expience. Rather, it looks at the phenomenon of
religion and attempts to discern a logical system in the ideas that
have developed around the religious experience.
Nope. That's not logic. That's religion. Off topic here.
I suspect that the
rednecks who oppose me have not even read the material, but
are just reacting to it out of their own prejudices.
I read the first few paragraphs and scanned the rest. I saw nothing
to interest me, and nothing even remotely related to mathematical
logic.
The only thing that caught my eye was where you call Jesus by the
Kryptonian name for Superman, and the Father by the
Kryptonian name for Superman's father. What is up with that?
Say, you put a lot of stock in the whole Google Groups thing.
Have you checked to see what your rating is yet? You can
see it here:
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?enc_user=vFuPQhcAAAAyLSgjC-BWexjmWl0TbrH0hUEdIBtH1-9oWMCTqaiMrA
Marshall
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: THE METAPHYSICAL SCIENCE OF RELIGION - why this is relevant to sci.logic
- Next by Date: Re: The fallacy of strengthened liar's paradox.
- Previous by thread: Re: THE METAPHYSICAL SCIENCE OF RELIGION - why this is relevant to sci.logic
- Next by thread: Re: THE METAPHYSICAL SCIENCE OF RELIGION - why this is relevant to sci.logic
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|