Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe
From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Evidences for Anthropocentricism
Message-ID: <942@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 22-Jul-85 00:59:06 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.942
Posted: Mon Jul 22 00:59:06 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 24-Jul-85 05:45:53 EDT
References: <855@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1226@pyuxd.UUCP>
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 73

In article <1226@pyuxd.UUCP> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) writes:

>> Why should anyone care about survival, or maximal freedom, or optimized
>> benefits? [WINGATE]

>Because we happen to like those things.  Don't you?  Don't survival,
>continuing to live, and acquiring benefits bring pleasure to living?

I don't think this is a universal principle, Rich; the mere existence of
suicide is sufficient counter-evidence.  Besides, practical application of
this often leads to conflicts in goals.  It's the principles that you use to
resolve these conflicts that count.

>> But that's only a problem if you are going to take that section of the
>> Bible in a very literal-minded fashion.  Besides, it don't prove A.C.. 
>> There is no solid evidence as to why that particular account was written;
>> Rich's claim is mere speculation without some independent evidence of
>> what the author was thinking.

>But so many do just that, take it in a very literal minded fashion, even
>though you may feel more enlightened than they.  Either the author was
>"inspired by god", or he/she was speculating on the nature of the creation
>of the universe from a subjective perspective.  Since so much of the story
>is clearly false, one can assume that the author wasn't getting the word
>straight from god's mouth, thus the latter is more likely true.

[flames ahead]

Rich, there is no logical connection that gets you from "Some christians
believe this" to "All christians believe this".  You are talking to me, not
some fundamentalist.  I do not believe in the literal truth of Genesis ch 1.
I do believe that it is inspired, and has some meaning.  I do not take
inspired to mean that the author took dictation from God.  Inspiration is a
stretchy word, and covers a lot more meaning then that.

Besides, you simply are not in any position to judge why the words were
written.  You are taking anthropocentricism in such a strong sense that by
your definition, anything written down is anthropocentric.  Who are you to
say that, because it mentions only humans, a God who sees all the rest of
the universe could not have been the source?  You have set up a standard
which no writing could ever possibly meet.

>>>In any case, the creation story also describes the earth as god's focal
>>>point of the universe, so I would have to say "yes, necessarily".

>> It does not.  Cite verses if you are going to make a claim like that.

>How about the passages in which it is claimed that the earth was created
>before the sun, the moon, and the other planets (let alone the stars).
>That would seem to make the earth the focal point of the universe, would it
>not?  I'll point out the specific passages if you like, but clearly we are
>not just talking about little individual passages, we are talking about the
>whole scope of the story!

Rich, on what basis do you make the claim that the Bible should refer to
alien races (or whatever)?  I've already stated that I do not take the story
literally (although on a metaphorical level it is quite close to man's
current conception of the creation of the earth).  Hanging your entire
argument on that one verse is rather weak, especially when you consider that
the Hebrew really doesn't say "In the beginning, God created the heavens and
the earth" but rather something more like

   "In the beginning when God *was beginning to create* the heavens and the
earth"

Finally, I think Rich's argument makes about as much sense as the argument
that God deliberately left out the part about the aliens and about evolution
because he knew Rich Rosen wasn't going to believe it if he did.  It's all
unbounded speculation uncontaminated by fact.

Charley Wingate   umcp-cs!mangoe

"For the mouse is a creature of great personal valour."   C. Swift