> David Leeper wrote:
> [clip]
> > I have one question, though.
> >
> > Many religious doctrines are vauge and open to interpretion.
> > For example, Jesus's statement "I and my Father are One."
> > could be interpreted as being equivlent to Zero's "Man is God."
>
> I interpret it as you, (or Zero), have it. Actually, I might be
> inclined to think of it as Heinlein did: 'thou art god, the Happy
> Grasses are god, etc....' i.e. everything is god... Jesus also
> said somewhere that with 'faith', his followers could do everything
> he did and more: that is, they could be god-like. I mentioned this
> on a Religion board on TIME's Pathfinder, and was immediately warned
> off of 'making God into my own image'...
> But - this is getting rather vague and off-point, so, anyway....
You didn't put in enough punch to get immediate emotional overload. Add
in the quote from John 10:34. [Jesus directly states that all men are
gods!] It amazes me no end that most Protestants cannot tolerate their
own Book.
It seems that someone on that board doesn't believe that God made Man in
His image.
> > Could vauge statements be seen as meme generators, and
> > therefore have a utility not found in precise statements?
>
> 'Degree of vagueness' is a hard thing to measure.... I think
> most any statement could yield several 'competitive alleles',
> so to speak, although, as you indicate, a vague statement
> would likely yield more such alleles.
Measuring divergence of allele-content would be more useful.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/ Towards the conversion of data into information....
/
/ Kenneth Boyd
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////