[Vision2020] unequivocal words of God

[Ted Moffett]

Visionaries:

Again, Doug Jones wants to have his cake and eat it to.

He wants to keep "reason" around for when it is convenient, but
marginalize its applications when it appears to threaten his
spiritual bias.  In short, he advocates a complicated form of
obscurantism, veiled in sophisticated philosophical and theological
terminology, designed to facilitate his sleight of hand trick that
hides reason from view when needed to avoid the free application of
reason to the spiritual life.

He questions the scope and application of what he calls
"Enlightenment Reason" as though it is just another fundamentalist
secular faith.

Then he turns around and uses what methods of truth seeking, I would
like to him to clarify, to demonstrate that I should follow his
Trinitarianism, rather than Islam or Buddhism etc?

Do we seek the most booming voice coming out of the brightest cloud
to determine where our spiritual allegiance should be placed?  Do we
follow a certain document revealed by God hat we place our faith in?  But 
there are
numerous such documents.  Which one is the true one?  Oh, wait a
second, the concept of "truth" might be too closely associated with the
project of Enlightenment Reason, which Doug Jones seeks to marginalize.  Is 
there some
special form of reason or logic that Doug Jones uses, different in kind from
"Enlightenment Reason?"  Miracles no doubt might compel faith.  Perhaps this
is Doug Jones basis for belief.

Doug Jones point below is a distortion:

>But doesn't this just prove my point? Both historic Christianity and the 
>Enlightenment hold their ultimate standards to be irrefutable. Why
>pretend that only Christianity does this?
>

False.  In fact a rather scathing attack against reason has been
launched from within the disciplines of reason itself.  There are
many unresolved problems in the vast schematics of "reason" that
place reason and methods of reasoning, under question.
"Irrefutable" when applied to "Reason" is a word chosen by Doug Jones
to slant the argument towards placing the project of reason in some sort of
biased fundamentalist camp to suit Doug Jones assumptions.

There are many assumptions in the scientific method that are
difficult or impossible to prove by reason.  They must be assumed.
They are not declared "irrefutable."

As a follower of reason I am fully admitting reason has limitations
that place doubt upon the certainty of knowledge obtained in this
manner.

But will Doug Jones admit limitations upon the certainty of his
spiritual biases?  Here is where the rubber meets the road!  I doubt there 
will
be any admission by Doug Jones of limitations upon the
certainty of Doug Jones Trinitarianism.

His is the ideology that is irrefutable, that he expects others to
follow, while he bans the application of reason to his fundamental spiritual 
assumptions,
unless reason plays nice and does not threaten his irrefutable
foundation.

Ted

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8: Get 6 months for $9.95/month http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup