01 Aug '09 22:52>1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayYou're not addressing my main charge against your analogy. If one deliberates on whether or not to do this or that, that sounds like engagement in practical reasoning. But when one deliberates, say, on whether or not such or such is the case, that sounds more like an appointment with theoretical reasoning. The end result in engaging in pratical reason might be some active decision about what to do; but the end result of theoretical reasoning might be some passive belief about what is or is not the case. Doesn't your analogy confuse the two types of reasoning, in portraying believing in core Christian propositions as being like choosing to do this or that?
What kills the drowning man, the fact he drowned, correct?
The life preserver offered was choice to make, but it was his drowning
that killed him. If the choice was not there he still drowns, correct?
The fact he had a choice puts some responsibility about his death on
his own head, but that is all.
Now Hell and death are coming to man because of ...[text shortened]... leaves us where we are
and like the drowning man where we are isn’t a good place to be.
Kelly