[MD] Theism/epistemology

[Ham Priday]

Ron and Marsha (responding to Michael's theism) --

[Marsha asks several questions]:
> What is the relationship between theism and knowledge
> and how is it determined?

> Okay, you like the label G*d.  Is G*d like the color I pick
> to paint my bedroom?   Or does G*d have a function?

> Is G*d's function in any way to convey information?

[Ron posits an all-inclusive Qualityism]:
> The same questions may be asked of Quality.
> I think this is where the conversation is pointed towards.
> What ever we call this idea - god, Quality, larry - we still
> mean the predisposition towards certain types of experiences.
> Those patterns we call betterness.
> Humans, as all living patterns tend toward those patterns which
> promote existence. Biologically we feel a type of pleasure
> associated with them. Life is a turn on. The mystical experience
> is the ecstacy of being, I think, if one slows things down and
> focus on the experience of now we feel it.
> Existence is mysterious and wonder-full....

Three facts supported by logic:
1)  That questions can be asked about Quality does not make it God or the 
primary source.
2)  That we cannot directly experience or prove the existence of God or 
Essence does not           falsify a primary source.
3)  That one may choose to believe or not believe in a transcendent reality 
proves that man has free choice.

Ron's misuse of a biblical quotation in defense of nihilism is sure to win 
the hearts of believers like Michael:
> We just are, why can't people just bathe in it, and accept it?
> I am that I am.

For those who missed Sunday School, Jehovah is the Hebrew name equated with 
"I Am."  It comes from the same root as the verb "to be" and implies a 
personal relationship to the Creator.  In the book of Exodus, God (Jehovah) 
expresses his eternity to Moses by naming himself  "I am."  As Moses 
prepared to take his people out of Egypt, he asks of God:  "...when I come 
unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your 
fathers hath sent me unto you: and they shall say to me, what is His name? 
What shall I say unto them?  And God said to Moses I AM THAT I AM: and he 
said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me 
unto you."

As I've said before, neither Quality nor Man comes into being by its/his own 
power.  Only an uncreated source has the distinction of self-sufficiency. 
Therefore, whether you accept the primary source or not, it is illogical to 
apply the phrase "I am that I am" to a human being.

Thanks for allowing me this interruption.  As a "third party" here, I shall 
recuse myself from your debate other than to point out such inconsistencies 
as the above.

Essentially yours,
Ham