Talk:God/Archive 12

message: I've cut this last section back to what could be verified. The Catholic Church has a position on this, but the position should simply be reported, not endorsed by Wikipedia. Many people would argue that there are inconsistencies, or at least tensions, between the scientific viewpoint and/or current scientific paradigms (on the one hand) and traditional theological conceptions of God in the Abrahamic religions (on the other). This is probably a very common view among scientists, which was part of the reason Stephen Jay Gould wrote a whole book trying to refute it. It is also a popular view among secular philosophers. It may also be held by some religious folk of a more "fundamentalist" leaning, many of whom believe that much modern science is wrong, e.g. about the age of the Earth; however, perhaps they don't see a conflict with their conception of God as such but merely with accounts of His doings. More particularly, the view that certain ideas are matters of personal acceptance, if it does reflect some version of the scientific viewpoint, is not what the Vatican is saying and does not reflect the traditional theological position. That position is that God actually is objectively good, and that accepting this is not just a matter of personal choice. Metamagician3000 14:11, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "It is also a popular view among secular philosophers" is absolutely right. But this also indicates that the dispute is between different branches of philosophy (and by extension theology and religion) and not between "science" and religion". Science (by which I understand the natural sciences, Naturwissenschaften) restricts itself to a certain field and has nothing to say beyond that. Str1977 (smile back) 09:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's really only one view of the proper roles of science and religion, which is actually related to what I was about to write here... -- Beland 23:26, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Scientific perspective

message: I'm puzzled as to why this argument gets a (short) section of its own. I suggest that we either have a short section on arguments for the existence of God or delete this section entirely. The fact is that teleological arguments are much more in vogue at the moment, and very few philosophers are prepared to defend ontological arguments. It seems kind of arbitrary referring to this argument in particular. Metamagician3000 14:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps a brief overview of the major arguments, with a  link to Existence of God (which is where Arguments for God redirects) ? KillerChihuahua?!? 09:51, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. -- Beland 20:31, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ontological argument

message: Let us see what we have here, all who think the system set forth at the begining of THIS section say AYE and sign all oposed say NAY and sign...
Aye: It just looks god, er good. Emperors Harbinger 03:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  We have boged again. 

message: Well, I have managed to change the article to avoid using any pronouns or sounding terribly awkward, so I think it respects all the points of view that I listed and that people have raised.  I added a vary short note under "Names of God" about the pronoun dispute.
Certainly the issue of God's gender is a major theological question, and deserves treatment in the encyclopedia.  It turns out we already have an entire article devoted to this issue: God and gender.  That article looks like it needs a lot of work; it's currently tagged for cleanup due to a recent dump merge, and it needs to be expanded in coverage.  It might be a good idea for the people who were discussing this issue above to contribute over there, and once it's stabilized, we can put a summary of the result here (if the current brief reference is insufficient). -- Beland 22:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent work!  --ElKevbo 22:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

text: What do people think?  --Rednblu 22:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

text: That works out well. Emperors Harbinger 04:58, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Documentation of gender dispute