[MD] are theism and mysticism mutually exclusive notions?

[david buchanan]

David M said to DMB
Did you know reading books you disagree with is often more stimulating to 
thought than looking in the mirror and nodding your approval?

dmb says:
Umm, yes. Did you know that its illegal and immoral to beat your wife?

The problem is that their view is disagreeable, but that it is bogus, 
intellectually invalid. As I already said, "the authors began their 
investigation into the existence of God as believers already". Maybe I 
should have given them points for a certain level of honesty in confessing 
this just a few pages into the introduction, but I still think its entirely 
unacceptable for scholars to begin with the conclusion.

I also complained about their assumptions, saying "their ontological realism 
is pretty much the opposite of the MOQ's brand of humanism". See, the 
authors are explicitly telling us that they are operating on the assumption 
that there is an objective ontological reality and that we can, as subjects, 
know something about it. They are operating with subject/object metaphysics. 
But its not that I wish to avoid anything that might disagree with me or my 
understanding of the MOQ. I just don't think its possible for such a 
perspective to have any relevance to the issue of the MOQ's anti-theisim. 
Its like trying to settle an argument about Einstein's equation by telling 
me to read some Newton.

_________________________________________________________________
Get today's hot entertainment gossip  http://movies.msn.com/movies/hotgossip