My case for why there is no conscious, seperate entity such as God (Bible-like God, that is)
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Sunday, March 19, 2006 08:14
VIEWED: 18146
PAGE 1 of 2
Look at a baby or a small child. Can you imagine for one moment letting that small person die or become crippled or painfully injured if you had the absolute power to prevent it? Standing by and letting such events occur without changing them given the ability to easily do so would be evil, right?
So either God doesn't exist as an all-powerful conscious and seperate entity (I mean, he can't be evil, right?), or he's off on some kind of 2,000 year errand, and just doesn't know what's been goin' down here on Earth...
I challenge anyone to debate me logically on this (and none of that "We can't understand the mysteries and the purpose blagh blagh blagh, what purpose can a suffering innocent that dies at one or two serve that couldn't be achieved in any other way?- remember if God is all-powerful, his methods can be unlimited)
Chrisisall, ready to burn in Hell 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I had an interesting discussion with a Muslim co-work about a similar topic. It's interesting because for the first few hundred years Muslim clerics collected Jewish and early Christian documents including stuff that never made it into Christain Canon. Consequently they have an interesting take on this question.
They believe that God set the world in motion but doesn't macromanage it. If he interviened too much then he negates free will, so the natural world runs itself with only occasional tweaks if things start going terribly wrong.
So if your child dies, that's just an effect of nature or of men's free choice not really God's doing at all. As a consequence they don't blame God for bad stuff happening or think he's asleep on the job if he doesn't stop it. Nature is nature and God is God.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
God does not make 'sick' or disabled children. God is not a master puppeteer. Sin causes many of the worlds problems due to mans disobedience to Gods will. And besides, why would God go where he was not asked too? No, hes a gentleman
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The universe is pretty efficient in its pattern of growth; energy becomes matter, returns to a state of energy, on and on, with nothing left out of balance for long, and no possibility of ‘waste’.
The idea of ‘a god’, who has ‘a plan’ doesn’t fit into my thinking, because that would mean that everything; every act, every motion on every level of existence would be scripted, and where would be the fun in that for anyone who would be god? 
I see the universe as being supportive of forward motion – call it life or evolution, but neutral in regard to the freedom to act as we choose (insofar as it is possible to think that we have real choice, affected by a myriad of influences from DNA to social programming, to the fact that we ourselves are host to our own universe of tiny creatures), because within that freedom to act as we choose is the balance that must eventually be achieved. To that end, I suspect that we are all bound to this creation, forever, and that ultimately we are one with everything. So, in the world according to me, you’re stuck with me guys, better get used to it because I am you.
Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:It would have to be a longer errand then 2000 years, since the kind of thing your talking about was more common over 2000 years ago then today, at least, per capita in the Western world. And I think that is part of the problem. God was never looked upon as a feel good character, as some people want to present him today. The concept of God in the Bible evolved in a world where the responsibility to act and think correctly was solely placed on the shoulders of men, not God, and in some ways this makes the Biblical brimstone and fire depiction of god more mature and more natural then the depiction held by some of the more “liberal” religions. We live in a world today where we have a standard of living that is unprecedented in all of human history, and we take that for granted, but the truth is that it is our lofty standard of living and our arrogant depiction of ourselves that is unnatural, not god.
Originally posted by chrisisall:
So either God doesn't exist as an all-powerful conscious and seperate entity (I mean, he can't be evil, right?), or he's off on some kind of 2,000 year errand, and just doesn't know what's been goin' down here on Earth...
But Cicero had a way of looking at it that I find very agreeable, which is that the absence of the interference of god in our life is the presents of freedom. Cicero had a very libertarian view of god. This is what he had to say in one of his many works, called The Nature of the Gods.
Quote:
“You Stoics are also fond of asking us, Balbus, what is the mode of life of the gods and how they pass their days. The answer is, their life is the happiest conceivable, and the one most bountifully furnished with all good things. God is entirely inactive and free from all ties of occupation; he toils not neither does he labor, but he takes delight in his own wisdom and virtue, and knows with absolute certainty that he will always enjoy pleasures at once consummate and everlasting.
“This is the god whom we should call happy in the proper sense of the term; your Stoic god seems to us to be grievously overworked. If the world itself is god, what can be less restful than to revolve at incredible speed round the axis of the heavens without a single moment of respite? But repose is an essential condition of happiness. If on the other hand some god resides within the world as its governor and pilot, maintaining the courses of the stars, the changes of the seasons, and all the ordered processes of creation, and keeping a watch on land and sea to guard the interests and lives of men, why, what a bondage of irksome and laborious business is his!
“We for our part deem happiness to consist in tranquillity of mind and entire exemption from all duties. For he who taught us all the rest has also taught us that the world was made by nature, without needing an artificer to construct it, and that the act of creation, which according to you cannot be performed without divine skill, is so easy, that nature will create, is creating, and has created worlds without number. You on the contrary cannot see how nature can achieve all this without the aid of some intelligence, and so, like the tragic poets, being unable to the plot of your drama to a dénouement, you have recourse to a god; whose intervention you assuredly would not require if you would but contemplate the measureless and boundless extent of space that stretches in every direction, into which when the mind projects and propels itself, it journeys onward far and wide without ever sighting any margin or ultimate point where it can stop. Well then, in this immensity of length and breadth and height there flits an infinite quantity of atoms innumerable, which though separated by void yet cohere together, and taking hold each of another form unions wherefrom are created those shapes and forms of things which you think cannot be created without the aid of bellows and anvils, and so have saddled us with an eternal master, whom day and night we are to fear; for who would not fear a prying busybody of a god, who fore
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm with you Chris. If the Christian God does exist, he's got one screwed up idea of compassion. A Christian friend of mine once asked me, "What would you do if God appeared before you and performed whatever miracles required to convince you he was real?" I replied that I'd punch him. My friend laughed, but I wasn't kidding.
SergeantX
"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well ill try and answer it logically, in a theological sense (is that an oxymoron?)
If you look at the concept of common Christian afterlife, then a child would likely most go to heaven as they do not have accountability for sin. Now under the assumption that heaven is a fantastic place, in a sense a child that dies without having to suffer a long earthly life could be considered blessed.
However, the main argument against your theory would be the meaning of faith in religion. Why does god let good people die? Why does god let hurricanes happen? etc are common questions of the existance of god.
Now religion would argue that true faith lies in absolute belief in something, despite the 'unfairness' of life. If the the concept of god would be common knowledge, then faith no longer exists. Without tribulations, faith is not required etc.
Theres also the simple minded argument that some religious leaders preach that because we do bad things, bad things happen. Even if I were religious I couldnt agree with that crap.
Anyway I hope that makes sense
"Shake your head boy, your eyes are stuck"
www.fireflyfans.net
http://www.browncoatsriseagain.com/
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Look at a baby or a small child. Can you imagine for one moment letting that small person die or become crippled or painfully injured if you had the absolute power to prevent it? Standing by and letting such events occur without changing them given the ability to easily do so would be evil, right?
The same argument says there are no abortion doctors (except the evil ones).
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yes, of course you're right.
Originally posted by Imaleafonthewind:
God does not make 'sick' or disabled children. God is not a master puppeteer. Sin causes many of the worlds problems due to mans disobedience to Gods will.
It's like when my son is disobedient; I usually let him walk into an open mineshaft while playing unsupervised as a consequence to his sin against me.
Stern father Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Liminosity, I see we ARE one, on this thread at least.
Originally posted by liminalosity:
To that end, I suspect that we are all bound to this creation, forever, and that ultimately we are one with everything. So, in the world according to me, you’re stuck with me guys, better get used to it because I am you.
The non-eloquent Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:That was cool, and I also like "The Ten Commandments", but for entertainment purposes only.
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
“I guess there's a plan for all of us. I had to die, twice, just to figure that out. Like the book says ‘The Lord works in mysterious ways.’ Some people like it; some people don't.”
--- John Constantine
That flick where Christopher Walken called us talking monkeys was a kick, too Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:This is going to my new response to all things god.
Originally posted by chrisisall:Quote:That was cool, and I also like "The Ten Commandments", but for entertainment purposes only.
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
“I guess there's a plan for all of us. I had to die, twice, just to figure that out. Like the book says ‘The Lord works in mysterious ways.’ Some people like it; some people don't.”
--- John Constantine
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Funny you say that. Growing up learning 'bout God in Sunday school and watching bodies get shipped back from Vietnam at an early age put me to challenging both God and Satan (at different times) to fistfights. Now, they're both badasses, so I'm certain my challenges went unanswered not because of that.
Originally posted by SergeantX:
"What would you do if God appeared before you and performed whatever miracles required to convince you he was real?" I replied that I'd punch him. My friend laughed, but I wasn't kidding.
Logically, they must not exist, or I'd have gotten a supernatural black eye (More like to be I'd have cleaned Biblical house on them, if they came in human form
).Contender Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I'd say that's probably the best argument that can be made 'for' God.
Originally posted by aussay:
Without tribulations, faith is not required etc.
But then, Like in the movie Constantine, it's all a game. And I'm not playing, 'cause the DM is a d**k.
Chrisisall's Bogus Journey
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Hey, the Cicero quote was good too, just rather philosophical for my purposes on this thread.
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
This is going to my new response to all things god.
<
-- Cicero
Literal Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
It's like when my son is disobedient; I usually let him walk into an open mineshaft while playing unsupervised as a consequence to his sin against me.
I guess our days of agreement are over, Mr. chrisisall...
But, hey, we're Browncoats, right? So, that's something.
Okay, now onto the disagreeable parts...
The thing people (myself included) seem to have a great deal of difficulty in grasping is that God is holy. We are not.
If God were not holy (like we are not holy) then He could overlook open rebellion against Him (like we occasionally do). But God wouldn't be holy or perfect if He allowed the things He created to go off on their own and do what they wanted to whenever they wanted to.
Death, disease, destruction and all sorts of hurt are a result of sin -- and we deserve far worse. Think about it -- we've willfully disobeyed our Creator. We can't quite grasp the scope of that, because we can create nothing independently. What we can form and fashion, we are able to do using materials already created. We, ourselves, are already created (we did not create ourselves). So, it's hard for us (as created, entirely dependent beings) to imagine ourselves creating a universe out of scratch, then having these tiny, insignificant microbes rebelling against us and attempting to toss us out of their lives.
I don't know if you're familiar with the story in the OT about David's bringing the ark of the covenant back to Jerusalem (after the Philistines had it for many years). Anyhow, they had the ark on a cart (which was a "no no" to begin with, but another story altogether, and for the sake of brevity, I'll skip over). As the cart was making its way up the road (they didn't have nice paved roads like we do to day), the cart tilted, and the ark started to slide out the back. Seeing that the ark was about to slide off the cart into the mud, a man called Uzza (not sure of spelling), reached out instinctively to grab the ark -- just to keep it from falling into the mud.
One would think that this would be an "okay" thing to do, right? I mean, he didn't want the ark to get dirty? It's instinct. You see something valuable falling, and reach to stop it, right?
Well, God struck him dead instantly. David wasn't too happy over it, either. It threw a dampener on David's party. I mean, here he is bring God's ark back to Jerusalem to set it up properly in the tabernacle as it should be, and God strikes this guy dead for just trying to stop it from falling into the mud and getting all dirty.
To David, you and I (and no doubt every single human being), this seems like a harsh thing -- unless, we factor in God's holiness. As R.C. Sproul has pointed out, God would rather have had His ark fall into the mud than for man to touch it? Why? Because man is sinful -- the mud isn't. Man has rebelled against God (the mud hasn't).
God is holy, and the ark was a sign of His holy presence with the Jews, and sin is not tolerated in the presence of God's holiness -- which is also why the High Priest (and only the High Priest) was allowed to enter into the Holy of Holies only once a year (after he sufficiently cleansed himself, according to God's law), to make atonement for the sin of the people.
Yes, God does not take His holiness lightly. And as we are not God, it seems a bit on the drastic side (understatement of all time). Fortunately for us, however, God is also merciful. And as I've explained multitudinously elsewhere, while He is holy (and cannot overlook willful rebellion), He is also gracious, and has made an atonement for any who would receive it. Naturally, we're all too busy being rebellious to notice that it's there (the offer of grace), or would rather not think about our rebellion (and therefore, the need for atonement), but it's there nonetheless.
We need to stop holding God accountable for our actions, and admit that we don't deserve anything good, instead of complaining about the bad that
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Hey Chris, I found this for a friend the other day. I think you'll like it too...
Originally posted by chrisisall: Liminosity, I see we ARE one, on this thread at least.
Where are eye, ear and skin? Are they not where the thing itself is because they interact with it? Do they not occupy the same world as the table that is seen and touched? This cannot be denied. But if that is so then they are a part of the external world themselves. Therefore, to argue that we know a thing is outside because our senses tell us so, is to argue that it must be outside because our senses themselves are outside. But this brings us back to the starting point. For if everything is outside then the term “external” loses all meaning. There is no “outside” at all. We may only say that the world is there and that the senses are there but we may not say that they are external to the mind.
~ Paul Brunton The Hidden Teaching Beyond Yoga
Quote:Very nice Finn, thanks for the Cicero
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Cicero The Nature of the Gods.
For he who taught us all the rest has also taught us that the world was made by nature, without needing an artificer to construct it, and that the act of creation, which according to you cannot be performed without divine skill, is so easy, that nature will create, is creating, and has created worlds without number....
Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
I'm with you Chris. If the Christian God does exist, he's got one screwed up idea of compassion. A Christian friend of mine once asked me, "What would you do if God appeared before you and performed whatever miracles required to convince you he was real?" I replied that I'd punch him. My friend laughed, but I wasn't kidding.
SergeantX
Have you ever read / heard of a comic series called Preacher? It concerns (amongst other things), a dissolusioned preacher (who obtains supernatural power) traveling the world, searching for God, whom has abandoned his duties in heaven, and left mankind to their own devices. When he does eventually face God, he punches him right in the face, and tells him to get back to work.
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
First off, if you are ready to burn in hell, you will...
Quote:
Look at a baby or a small child. Can you imagine for one moment letting that small person die or become crippled or painfully injured if you had the absolute power to prevent it? Standing by and letting such events occur without changing them given the ability to easily do so would be evil, right?
Will you be open to understanding? Or will this be in vain?
You see, God and Man do not operate on the same plane or boundaries. Nothing God can do is evil, for evil are deeds, thoughts, desires, etc etc etc that are meant to harm/abuse/destroy for the sake of one owns gain or for the sake of malice itself...
God gave us an amazing ability, to be totally free ,even if he were to come down to you and say I am God, the free will he gave you will be able to believe or not believe no matter what he does, he will not interfere with this gift.
When evil happens or suffering occurs you must know that it is not meant as something in and of itself it is meant as away to grow, understand, and come to terms with life...all the evil we know, is not became of God, it is IN SPITE of God. Due to our free will we are able to do as we wish... on top of that, Nature has it's own rules for we are (animal and divine) in one structure. So when nature manufactures diseases or the like to keep itself in balance why would we not be affected? Why if mutations occur that cause awful things to happen in life would we not be affected?
TO believe that God is going to just fix everything here so that things are perfect is to seriously misunderstand this very life...
Why do you only take the awful things and blame God for his malice? Why do you not say that I can believe in something as beautiful as God when I look at a sunset, or a bug waking around, or the smile on a baby's face, marriage, having children, having sex...
why must people always give sad or tragic examples as reasons not to believe?
Since, God gave us free will he wishes us to use it for the best purpose, he wishes us to be like him (able to create, sustain, destroy, and punish)
We can create life out of our own material (like he did) we can sustain it from out own bodies (like he does hence nature) and yet since we are NOT GOD we have a limit and that limit leads to ignorance and ultimately it is ignorance that leads to such harm, evil, mailice, suffering but...
Why do people suffer? A question that was on our mind since the first instance of suffering...and one ultimately that is not satisfactorily answer...but if you believe that GOd does not suffer with us, then I don't know if you understand God.
Taken from the Christian View: since i am sure that's what your getting at:
God came down and humbled himself to become ONE OF US, to surround His human body with the same filth and sin, sorrow and suffering, and YET the same happiness and joy, health and prosperity as all of us...
But, he came not to enjoy our life or necessarily fix our earthly lives he came to save our true and eternal lives, but in the process he knew that it would have to be reconciled with His own blood, because HE DID CREATE US and as such sin came from us, He took it upon Himself to fix it...
God suffered humiliation (emotionally, psychologically, and physically), suffered pain, suffered loss, suffered death....so that we could have a chance in this life to make some difference and have our good efforts in this life not be tainted by sin but enabled us to have sin wiped away...
But you think that our suffering is not Gods? Yes, I agree most of the time it does not feel so, for when one is suffering you just wish God will come down and fix it...and in my experience it has not been that way...but for me I have overcome mine...and one day I realize things are different, and realize that I learned much from my torment (does it seem like there could be another way to learn and to grow, YES! I WISH! but it isn't this way here)
Why would you cut off such a valuable resource and companion in this
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ok, you guys, this is the part I never quite get. God is everything, and yet evil is not of God....
Quote:and when God does something 'evil' right out in the open with everybody watching, we get the sleight of hand
Originally posted by OmegaDark:
Nothing God can do is evil, for evil are deeds, thoughts, desires, etc etc etc that are meant to harm/abuse/destroy for the sake of one owns gain or for the sake of malice itself...
God gave us an amazing ability, to be totally free ,even if he were to come down to you and say I am God, the free will he gave you will be able to believe or not believe no matter what he does, he will not interfere with this gift.
'we deserved it'
Quote:and doggone it, 'Toon, I've been silently agreeing with you quite a lot recently, but we all come upon these giant brick walls, don't we? Anyway, I'll continue to agree with you on other things, and an infinite universe should have some wiggle room for different ideas, yes?
originally posted by 'Toon: Yes, God does not take His holiness lightly.
I don't know, I would think that if God is everything, then God gets to be good and evil, which kind of cancels out in my book to 'neutral', or if I were an electrician, I might say God is 'ground'.
But I think I'll go get some popcorn to share and watch Constantine with Chris and Finn.
Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
God does not 'punish' us for our sins by causing disabled children. Sin is so powerful that it has a physical, mental, emotional and spiritual effect on us.
We are all sinners - even the chiristians who say they aren. The reason this world is the way it is - is due to the filth of sin, and the biggest one of them all is pride. Pride tells us there is not God or need for a God or a Saviour. Pride tells us that when we look at war, there can't be a loving God. That when we look at a handicapped child, why would God allow it. Pride says we can do it on our own, that we are the deciders of our fate. Pride forces us to be arrogant thinking that we are the all.
Its sin that does this, not God. But what I have in my relationship with Jesus is far greater than what the world can offer. I have freedom from my sin, and healing from my hurts, and understandings about the way this world works that I would never have had before.
I walk with Jesus, he came into this world and guess what? It was exactly the same then as it is now. Exactly that same.
Believe and be set free
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by liminalosity:
and doggone it, 'Toon, I've been silently agreeing with you quite a lot recently,
You sure you want to admit that here?
Quote:
Originally posted by liminalosity:
but we all come upon these giant brick walls, don't we? Anyway, I'll continue to agree with you on other things, and an infinite universe should have some wiggle room for different ideas, yes?
Okay. I'm curious, though. You haven't explained exactly which part is your giant, brick wall. If it's the God can do "evil" thing, He can't. The Bible is clear on that.
I think the problem with it is our perspective. As I tried (feebly, I admit) to illustrate previously, it's hard from our limited human, created, imperfect, fallen, sinful perspective to understand. God allowing us to reap what we've sown is not "evil".
R.C. Sproul told a story about his grading one of the university classes he teaches. His class was instructed to have their papers in by such and such a date (let's say Tuesday). If the student's didn't have the completed papers in by Tuesday, they'd fail the course.
When Tuesday came around, Professor Sproul called the roll, at which time the students were expected to turn in their completed papers. A few of the students sheepishly admited that they hadn't completed their papers, and begged for an extension.
Deciding to give the class some wiggle room, Sproul allowed them a few more days (let's say until Friday).
Friday came around. Sproul calls the roll. Several students blurt out (no longer sheepishly, but very matter-of-factly) that they haven't completed their papers. Sproul begins reading the names of the students who haven't completed their papers: "Smith, no paper - F. Summers, no paper - F. Thomas, no paper - F."
At which time, one of the students yells out, "That's not fair!"
Sproul retorts, "You want fair? I'll give you fair. Everyone who didn't have their paper completed on Tuesday - F."
Was Sproul being evil? When some of the students didn't have their papers on Tuesday (the original date they were required), he was gracious and allowed an extension. When Friday comes around, feeling that Sproul was a lenient pushover, the students decided to take advantage of him, and presumed upon his grace.
When they demanded he treat them "fairly", he did -- and went back to the original requirement.
Sproul says we never want to ask God to "be fair" with us. If God is fair, we all lose. What we want to ask God for is "grace".
God actually keeping us from the punishment we do deserve is certainly grace. His giving us the punishment we've earned is not "evil" -- it's not even "justice" (for "justice" would not have allowed us the extension He's allowed all of us throughout our dying day, at which time the offer of grace is closed.)
To us, because God has been gracious and allowed us an extension, we all take it for granted that He's going to overlook our sin indefinitely. He is not. God is gracious, but there's a limit to that grace, and we ignore it at our peril.
Getting anything short of the full justice we deserve, should not be construed as God being "evil" to us, but yet another example of His withholding the full wrath of His fury which we've all rightfully earned through our willful disobedience of His will.
I wish I could explain it better, but I'm only a stupid human with limited understanding, and this is the best I can do. I hope it helps.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:So why would god make an infant suffer horribly and inevitbaly die in order to teach an adult a lesson?
God does not make 'sick' or disabled children. God is not a master puppeteer. Sin causes many of the worlds problems due to mans disobedience to Gods will. And besides, why would God go where he was not asked too? No, hes a gentleman
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:My kind of fair would have been that the one student who yelled out 'that's not fair' would have been the only one for whom the judgement would revert to original demand (papers by Tuesday). In punishing everyone for the outburst of a single student, your allegorical hand of God is pulling another sleight of hand.
Originally posted by 'Toon: At which time, one of the students yells out, "That's not fair!"
Sproul retorts, "You want fair? I'll give you fair. Everyone who didn't have their paper completed on Tuesday - F."
Quote:I'd say, yeah. He reneged on his generous and graceful offer of extension for the other students by punishing everyone for the transgression of the one student who didn't appreciate his 'grace'.
Was Sproul being evil?
Quote:I'm just going to mentally exchange your word God for a word that works better for me... how about universe? and say, we all have things to be sorry for, and if we were punished immediately for every transgression against balance or taking another's choice, every - I think you would say 'sin', yeah, we'd be doomed at somewhere around the instant of birth. What I want to do is to try to act with compassion (and find a way to act with more of it every day) - as you say 'ask God for "grace." In my way of looking at this, the moment I make the decision to act with compassion, I start to move things forward for myself. The more I can act with compassion, the more compassion I receive from others. And... since I believe that all is one, the more compassion I find, the more I move things forward for everyone else too. 'Toon.
Sproul says we never want to ask God to "be fair" with us. If God is fair, we all lose. What we want to ask God for is "grace".
Quote:Ok, exchanging God for the word universe again here, because I don't believe there's a personality behind all of this... and since I like the idea that nothing is ever wasted (energy-matter-energy), I think I have until forever to balance the scales. The more obstinate I am about refusing to use compassion 100% of the time, the harder it gets for me (the harder I make it on myself next time around) to bring things into balance. Anytime I choose revenge, rejection, or doing a runner on my obligation to balance the scales, rather than acting with compassion, I make it harder on myself - this time, next time, all the time.
God actually keeping us from the punishment we do deserve is certainly grace. His giving us the punishment we've earned is not "evil" -- it's not even "justice" (for "justice" would not have allowed us the extension He's allowed all of us throughout our dying day, at which time the offer of grace is closed.)
I hope that made sense.
Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You haven't really skiived off to watch biblical epics on DVD with Finn, have you?
Originally posted by chrisisall: Standing by and letting such events occur without changing them given the ability to easily do so would be evil, right?
There's a book I've been wondering if you've read, because it has some entertaining, interesting and thought provoking things to say about reincarnation and a bunch of Chinese soldiers from long long ago.... The Years of Rice and Salt by Kim Stanley Robinson
Oh! I haven't had a chance to use my new favorite line from SG1, so I'll unload it on you, because I haven't actually seen you in weeks and it's always more fun than anything to mess with Chris.
Seek not wickedness amongst your neighbors lest it find purchase in your own house ~Daniel Jackson
And Chris, get your ass back on the line hee heee
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
My basic starting point is this:
Be suspect of anything that people believe which they have reason to desperately want to be true, and have arrived at before accumulating an abundance of evidence before personally deciding to back, and most importantly, that which does not *have* to be true.
Anything which fails all three tests is almost certainly false, and falls under the heading of self-delusion. Take another completely different example: Crossing Over with John Edward.
I'm sure you're all familiar with the show. Just in case you're not, this is a show about a guy who can talk to dead relatives of the shows guests.
1. People desperately want to talk to the dead, and they have things they want to hear: That the dead are in a good place, and that they regret nothing, and often that they don't blame them, the guests, for anything.
2. People who go onto the show, believers, typically do so without doing any research into Edward's methods, similar practicioners, or the idea of seances, and they don't seriously look into any skeptical counter-arguments. I can think of a couple exceptions, but they don't fall under the heading of "believers."
3. There is nothing that forces the assumed fact "John Edwards can talk to dead people." Many other possible conclusions can be drawn other that "the whole thing is staged" such as "John Edward does a lot of research on his guests before they come on" or "John Edward is extremely perceptive of people" or even "John Edwards can read the minds of the living." But nothing that you see forces the conclution "John Edwards talks to dead people."
I remember seeing an interview with someone else on SciFi who said "Nah, he's a fraud. If he could really talk to the dead, sometimes they would say 'you know, it sucks here' or 'God I wish you hadn't left me in the basement.' He always conveniently reports what the guests want to here."
All of which is a totally separate discussion from whether or not talking to dead people is posisble. But the above circumstantial evidence leads me to the conclusion "John Edwards does not talk to dead people."
Similarly, by the same method, I can arrive at "God, literal from the Christian Bible, does not exist."
Anyone could say "Yes, but are you sure?"
Who cares? I'm never sure of anything. If something's 75% that's good enough for me until more evidence presents itself. At the moment I have a good 90%+ feeling that John Edward does not talk to dead people to waste no more time on it, at least until more evidence presents itself. It's hard to credit the Christian God with much more than that.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by cartoon:
Death, disease, destruction and all sorts of hurt are a result of sin -- and we deserve far worse. Think about it -- we've willfully disobeyed our Creator. We can't quite grasp the scope of that, because we can create nothing independently. What we can form and fashion, we are able to do using materials already created. We, ourselves, are already created (we did not create ourselves). So, it's hard for us (as created, entirely dependent beings) to imagine ourselves creating a universe out of scratch, then having these tiny, insignificant microbes rebelling against us and attempting to toss us out of their lives.
Problems I find with this view -
Firstly, if the Holy Trinity is in existance, Christ died for our sins. If Christ died for the sins of the world, then why are we being punishied via catastrophes and death? If we are being punished for our sins like that then Christs death was pointless
Secondly, say god is punishing sin by hurt and pain to the world. People doing sins are not neccessarily getting punished and other who may not have sinned are getting punished. That is imperfect justice and if god is perfect how can he deliver imperfect justice?
Anyway just my opinion
"Shake your head boy, your eyes are stuck"
www.fireflyfans.net
http://www.browncoatsriseagain.com/
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
I had an interesting discussion with a Muslim co-work about a similar topic. It's interesting because for the first few hundred years Muslim clerics collected Jewish and early Christian documents including stuff that never made it into Christain Canon. Consequently they have an interesting take on this question.
They believe that God set the world in motion but doesn't macromanage it. If he interviened too much then he negates free will, so the natural world runs itself with only occasional tweaks if things start going terribly wrong.
So if your child dies, that's just an effect of nature or of men's free choice not really God's doing at all. As a consequence they don't blame God for bad stuff happening or think he's asleep on the job if he doesn't stop it. Nature is nature and God is God.
Well put, friend. Well put.
If people got help from God all the time we'd be spoiled. I do think it's cruel and unfair when something happens to a kid such as deformations and death. But the same things happens to every other life-form on Earth. Animals are born deformed or die horrible deaths. Don't tell me there's a difference between animals and humans dying cruel deaths. Nature, evil, and free will reigns. God will step in if things get too f'ed up. If you need God helping you all the time you're a pussy.
Edit: Also, our sins are forgiven so we know we aren't being punished. It's the bitch called Nature.
I'm a Jedi.
I'm a Ringer.
I'm a BROWNCOAT.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I was only being the instrument of the most high. - Herbal on Dark Angel
Originally posted by liminalosity:
The Years of Rice and Salt by Kim Stanley Robinson
Lim, you remember my reincarnation story, I'm touched. Now I HAVE to check out this book.
I guess it was dumb of me to start a thread like this and ask for 'logical' discussion, 'eh?
I give myself fourty lashes Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I'm gonna have to go with 'vain'.
Originally posted by OmegaDark:
First off, if you are ready to burn in hell, you will...
Will you be open to understanding? Or will this be in vain?
Let's see, if I were God, all lonely in my own existence, and wanting someone to play with...
Maybe I'll make a friend.
No, I can't make my own equal to play with, that would make me all-powerful times two, then I would not be all-powerful...so... I'll make me a world of lesser beings, all stupid and such, and I'll make a Devil to plague them with bad feelings and dis-information...and I'll demand they come to the truth that I'm here...'cept I'll hide, heh heh.
But I'll love them. Yessireee. Even when I flood them, I'll love them.
Tough-love.
Pillar-of-salt love.
*In his best imitation of Cyrus* That's crap, brothers!
Don't mean to dump on anyone's beliefs...*
*Well, a little, I guess.
Anyone truly believes in God, then I am just a worm, and ain't getting them upset in the least.
On the other hand, any I'm makin' angry with this better find a new religion. Just an opinion.
Anyone want to dump on Buddhism? It won't bug me if ya do...
Chrisisall, giving orders to the beloved ants in his ant farm (Ooops! Now they made me angry! Where's that glass of water??)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Please provide some examples with links to support them, if you would please.
Originally posted by Jonus:
God will step in if things get too f'ed up.
He's bad, he's bad, he's really really bad Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You got it wrong, Rue, God doesn't make an infant suffer, He lets an infant suffer with the ability to easily change the situation.
Originally posted by rue:
So why would god make an infant suffer horribly and inevitbaly die in order to teach an adult a lesson?
There's a WORLD of difference there (the fact that I can't actually SEE the difference doesn't automatically mean there isn't one...um...right?).
You get the lesson now?
Chrisisall, the laughing Buddha
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Okay, just gotta pop in and make a few points here, Chrisisall, even though I'm not Christian or anything.
1. It seems from your first post that you're making the case that a child's life is more valuable than any other life on the planet. Which is pretty shaky ground to start an argument on, logically and morally. That's just my opinion, of course.
2. God's big thing, from my understanding, is that he wants us to believe without knowing. So if he was to intervene and keep all babies from suffering, dying, or being deformed until they reach the age of 18 (or whatever age when their life becomes less valuable), then people are going to start to notice. They're going to go, hey, there is a God, and we know because of all this stuff. Therefore, they will know that there is a God, rather than believing in God, which defeats God's own purpose, right? So He's probably not going to go ahead and do that.
3. A lot of the death and suffering that happens to babies occurs as a result of what people do. You know, drunk drivers killing children in vehicles, parents beating their kids, etc. Is any of this God's doing? No, it's ours, our choice. And if He intervened, He'd be taking away our free will. Which is one of those big gifts that He granted us. So, if He were to take away our free will, He'd be defeating His own purpose again, which seems kind of dumb, doesn't it?
4. To the person who said that God might be punishing people who hadn't sinned, there's no such thing as a person who hasn't sinned. Just those who might have sinned less than others.
There. Those are my logical points to make. Finally, CIA, haven't you seen Futurama? God has to use a light touch, like a pickpocket, safecracker, or a guy who burns down his bar for the insurance money (if he makes it look like an electrical thing).
"I'm having one of those things - a headache with pictures."
"Of course I'm right. And if I'm not, may we all be horribly crushed from above somehow."
Like books? Go to this thread: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=14862
to find out how to buy mine!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by aussay:
If Christ died for the sins of the world, then why are we being punishied via catastrophes and death? If we are being punished for our sins like that then Christs death was pointless
When mankind rebelled in the garden, God cursed #1) the devil (whose downfall at the hand of the Messiah was also prophesied there)(Gen. 3:14-15), #2) mankind and the earth (including everything on it)(Genesis 3:16-19).
Jesus's work on the cross did several things. For one thing, it was the deathblow to the devil's plans to take all of mankind into hell with him -- in that Jesus lifted the curse of eternal separation from God from those who freely receive His grace.
The curse on the earth hasn't been lifted by Christ's work on the cross, nor have the earthly consequences of mankind's sins (even those who are redeemed). (eg. If you destroy your liver through a lifetime of drunkeness, then receive the Lord's salvation -- the Lord will have indeed saved your soul, but you're still going to have that diseased liver. There are consequences to living in a fallen, sinful world which will not be escaped in this lifetime.)
When the Lord returns, He will lift the curse from the world, but until then, sin (and the curse for sin) still has reign over creation.
Quote:
Originally posted by aussay:
Secondly, say god is punishing sin by hurt and pain to the world. People doing sins are not neccessarily getting punished and other who may not have sinned are getting punished. That is imperfect justice and if god is perfect how can he deliver imperfect justice?
That's just it -- it's not justice (imperfect or otherwise) -- or (as I said above) we'd all be in the toilet. Our tendancy is to look at it from a human perspective, where we compare ourselves to each other. As I said above, God isn't doing that -- He's comparing us to Him. And even one sin puts us under the curse. Therefore, if we sin once or a billion times, we are under God's curse, and therefore, have no right to complain about why the neighbors seem to be getting off easier than we are. In God's eyes, we both deserve the penalty of sin, and the fact that God may let Joe Smith off with a few decades more of the good life than us isn't going to matter a speck in the whole of eternity. A lifetime of 80 years (when compared to eternity) wouldn't even be comparable to the tiniest subatomic particle to the vastness of the entire universe.
The Lord doesn't balance His books every Friday at five. But they will be balanced. It's not for us to look at others and wonder why they have it better or worse than us. We are accountable for what we do -- not the neighbors.
P.S. (This next bit isn't referring to you at all, aussay, but I feel that this might be a good place for me to mention it for the sake of certain others in this forum. I hope you don't mind.)
As I've mentioned somewhere in one of these threads -- as a believer I am commanded (when asked) to present the gospel of the Lord as best I can. I am also commanded to move on when that gospel is blatantly rejected.
As such, for those who may've missed that point, I will not respond to (or even read) the posts of anyone who blasphemes the Lord or blatantly rejects the presentation of His gospel. People with honest questions, misunderstandings, etc. are fine, but I am under no obligation to beat against the wind with an unbeliever who has no desire to seek the Lord, and merely wants to be confrontational, blasphemous and crude.
I have never resorted to calling anyone in these forums by any derogatory terms (well, except for myself, where I clearly acknowledge many of my multitudinous faults), nor have I even resorted to labeling their comments as "stupid" or "foolish" (even though, as far as I can ascertain in my admittedly limited grasp of human understanding, many of them haven't even the least semblance of rational thought even remotely associated with them).
I've learned a lo
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:Quote:Please provide some examples with links to support them, if you would please.
Originally posted by Jonus:
God will step in if things get too f'ed up.
He's bad, he's bad, he's really really bad Chrisisall
Looks like we have an attention whore in our midst.
Well there's a couple examples in the Bible: Sodom and Gamora (sp?) where people were having orgies or something and God opened a can of whoopass and The Flood. The world became too evil so He stepped in and flooded it. Noah made God promise He wouldn't do some shit like that again. And then there's Revelations where at the end of the world when things are at their worst Jesus will come back and save the believers, make the nonbelievers believe and make the sinners repent. There's a site I like that makes sense of all the things that are confusing in the Bible
http://bible-truths.com/
I'm a Jedi.
I'm a Ringer.
I'm a BROWNCOAT.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by queenofthenorth:
4. To the person who said that God might be punishing people who hadn't sinned, there's no such thing as a person who hasn't sinned. Just those who might have sinned less than others.
Queen, you've said it far better (and in much fewer words) than I could've.
Didn't I warn you about avoiding this place, though? Nevermind. As long as you're here, "hi".
Don't stand too close, though, unless you have an uncanny ability to dodge quickly-moving projectiles.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by cartoon:
Didn't I warn you about avoiding this place, though? Nevermind. As long as you're here, "hi".
Don't stand too close, though, unless you have an uncanny ability to dodge quickly-moving projectiles.
Well, you know me. I couldn't resist the makings of a good argument. And few things are more fascinating than a philosophical argument about God.
As for the projectiles, well, I'd say I'm a fair hand at dodging.
"I'm having one of those things - a headache with pictures."
"Of course I'm right. And if I'm not, may we all be horribly crushed from above somehow."
Like books? Go to this thread: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=14862
to find out how to buy mine!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by liminalosity:
In punishing everyone for the outburst of a single student, your allegorical hand of God is pulling another sleight of hand.
Just noticed this, and I missed responding to it, previously. I'm fairly sure that Sproul wasn't making an allegory in which he (Sproul) was acting like God. I believe the point he was trying to make is that we often take grace for granted and demand it, when we don't deserve grace in the first place (that's the whole nature of grace -- it's wholly unmerited and unearned).
Sproul was saying that we also have a tendency to complain that God is treating us unfairly, and the last thing we want from God is "fair" -- as God said that the punishment for sin (one or a billion sins of any nature) is eternal separation from Him in a particularly unpleasant place. Our receiving anything short of that punishment is "grace", and certainly cannot be construed as unfair.
Quote:
Originally posted by liminalosity:Quote:I'd say, yeah. He reneged on his generous and graceful offer of extension for the other students by punishing everyone for the transgression of the one student who didn't appreciate his 'grace'.
Was Sproul being evil?
Well, I disagree here. And it wasn't just one student. All of the students who didn't have their papers on time were now "expecting" leniency yet again. (Perhaps I didn't relate that in my retelling of his story.) At any rate, all the students who initially had their papers done by Tuesday wouldn't have had to worry, as they had completed the task as instructed. The only ones punished were the ones who had not, then presumed upon the grace. Did a few of the students who didn't have their papers on Tuesday, but did have them for Friday, suffer as a result? I don't know. Sproul never said if that was applicable in this instance.
Quote:
Originally posted by liminalosity:
I think I have until forever to balance the scales.
According to the scriptures, we can't ever balance the scales. That's the thing. God says one sin forever puts us in His debt. Even if it were possible for us to be "perfect" (which it isn't) from now until eternity, and even if we had only sinned once (which none of us has), we are still objects of His wrath apart from receiving His grace. There are no scales.
Oops. Have to get back to work, or a bunch of students will have no way home.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Wow. You have GOT to get a clue!
God does not make 'sick' or disabled children.
Visit this website, roam around, read the stories, then come back and tell me about it:Quote:http://brain.hastypastry.net/forums/showthread.php?t=123726
I feel so sick to my stomach right now, I am SO afraid I'm going to lose her very soon! I KEEP Praying for God to help her, WHY won't he help her??! Okay, maybe he's helping her by keeping her with me still, but I have been Praying for 8 months for him to help her brain and make it grow, then he ALLOWS 5 months to go by with NO gorwth, that makes me sick! WHy won't he help her, just a little bit? Why wo't he wake her up??! If she has to be SOOO freakin severe, and have a short life, why is he making her SUFFER with these things the docs are calling autonomic storms.. where she is arching, breathing hard, sweating buckets, fever and heartrate-through the roof... WHY?! This is my precious baby girl, she is the most beautiful amazing, sweet baby love I have ever seen, I can't even think about her not staying with me.. WHY do I have to think about her not staying with me?!!
Quote:So... the child who has a random genetic mutation is born that way because of someone else's sin? That doesn't make sense. And please, none of that "We can't possibly fanthom blah blah blah..."
God is not a master puppeteer. Sin causes many of the worlds problems due to mans disobedience to Gods will.
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Cartoon- I "get" that stacked up against God's holiness we are less than microbes with a bad attitude and that we DESERVE eternal damnation. That everything bad that ever happens on this Earth- from deformed babies to animals preying on each other instead of living peaceably- is due to original sin. And yet I can't help thinking that this massive temper that God seems to have about our disobedience is, in itself, a rather hubristic (? Is there such a word?) view of our place in God's grand scheme of things.
You invited the comparison when you posed the question: How would YOU feel if these "less than nothings" rebelled and quite frankly, if I were God and I had invested these less than nothing with free will I prolly wouldn't care. It might be interesting to watch, but certainly nothing to be either disappointed, afraid, or angry about. Those kinds of emotions only come about in HUMANS- or, in very anthropormorphised gods.
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
You invited the comparison when you posed the question: How would YOU feel if these "less than nothings" rebelled and quite frankly, if I were God and I had invested these less than nothing with free will I prolly wouldn't care.
I know.
I didn't want to phrase it that way, but how else does one draw a comparison as to how far above us God is? Actually, He's even further above us than that. Actually, we can't even fathom a comparison as He is all-knowing, all-powerful, ever-was/ever-will-be, ever present, etc.And the microbe (or whatever I said) comparison also doesn't work in that God loves us. We don't love microbes. Even in the face of our unimaginable rebellion, He loves us. He could've just wiped the slate clean and started over, and none of the angels (or whoever else was around in the heavenly realms) would've blinked an eye (*see below).
He obviously cares for us beyond anything we can comprehend. Because of His holiness, He couldn't overlook what we did, but because of His love, He made a way out -- and not a "cheap" way out. The way out cost Him more than any of us can imagine.
It was a bad comparison on my part, and I apologize. I just couldn't think of anything else to show the scope of the difference.
If it left you with a wrongful impression, please forgive me. I knew it wasn't quite right when I posted it.
*SIDE NOTE: Speaking of Angels, according to the scripture, even they are somewhat confused by the fact that God cares so much about us, His sinful, rebellious creation.
Okay, well, perhaps "confusion" isn't the correct word, but they don't seem to understand it fully, and are (at the very least) curious about it. I Peter 1:12 speaks of Angels desiring to look into these "things" -- referring (in verses 10-12) to the saving work of Christ -- which had beforehand been spoken of by the prophets, then the preaching of the gospel, etc.
Being in the presence of a perfect, holy, all-powerful, all-knowing God all the time as they are, I'm sure they can't imagine why He would want to save any of us. Personally, I can't imagine it, either, and I don't think I will ever understand it.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
My case goes along the lines of:
God creates man in his own image, but sinful, lacking in understanding and without half of his abilities. To me that seems the equivalent of manking going out and intentionally creating a race of cripples. I can't believe in a guy who creates an entire universe just to be better than everyone else.
-------------------------------------------------
Read my fanfic!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/sunroomitem.asp?i=8267
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Heya Chris,
Thanks for the topic (finally, something pulls me out of Lurksville, back to chatting with my Firefly Friends).
First of all: what a mess! I'm not sure but from reading some of the responses you've gotten here, it seems that in order to be a devout christian a person needs to harbor a profound self-hatred, a deeply ingrained sense of personal shame. Low self-esteem can really ruin a logical discussion because low self-esteem and depression can make some of the most distorted nonsense seem like the plain facts. God loves us, but we are nothing without Him. So God loves nothing, or he loves only Himself--what kinda love is that? How does one love nothing, exactly? Sounds like your "pillar-of-salt" kind of love.
Another major impediment to clarity in this thread is the obsession with pain. As a student of martial arts, you gotta know that pain is a perfectly natural and very necessary part of life. Without pain there can be no healing and no growth. So the fact that innocent children and blameless animals experience all kinds of pain is really not a moral issue at all. Welcome to life in three dimensions.
Jumping Jimminy, grow up people! Contrary to popular belief, it's not loving to take pain away, I'm not at all sure it's even possible (the closest thing we got to genuinely taking pain away is the empathic trick of taking another's pain into one's self, but half the people reading this don't even believe that kind of empathy exists).
We can mask pain, that's for sure. Deny pain, tell our children not to cry. And I believe the individual can, with patience, transform it into meaning. Loved ones can hold it, help us to bear it by taking on some of the pain themselves, but take it away? Presto change-o, no fuss/no muss?
Naw. Bear it is what we gotta do with pain, Chris. Get to know it. Learn what we can. But people can be very childish. Our parents can spend their whole lives trying--and failing--to take our pain away, and we can hate them for their failure. We can go through life looking for something to "take the pain away," but that only leads us into addiction. People even take this addictive impulse and apply it to the divine, demanding that God take their pain away--and the religion addicts actually think they succeed!
Yeah, what a mess.
I got a story for you that a friend of mine told me. He was not a religious man (he was culturally Jewish). He was a stand-up comedian I was working on a movie with at the time. He told me the story about the one time in his life that he saw an angel.
He was visiting his niece in the hospital. She was a newborn. She was born without the bottom half of her face. He told me of how he held that baby for hours, looking into her beautiful, beautiful eyes over her half-made face with tubes running into her body and he wept and asked God, "Why God? Why bring this beautiful little girl into the world like this?"
And he told me an angel appeared in the room and said to him, in the kindest most beautiful voice he'd ever heard, "You have not been called here to understand, you have been called here to feel."
You're quite right, Chris, if God's plan could be described in the crude language people fling about--speaking confidently (even a little pridefully) about sinfulness and disobeying God and justice and punishment, etc.--don't you think God's plan could have been completed by now? If God's plan were reducible to this tired, infinitely reframed debate, couldn't the will of God be accomplished in a few weeks, like some high-powered management seminar?
Obviously, God's got big plans, bigger fish to fry than spanking our insignificantly naughty butts.
So there's a project, a plan to create something that heretofore has never existed. In order to create this "something" God created three dimensions, matter and linear time.
I've had three dimensions explained to me as a laboratory. Matter and linear time and, therefore, free will are all conditions of the experiment. You get rid of any of them a
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So He loves us but He's mad at us. Sounds quite human!
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hi. I actually liked your bit about "pain".
Uh, I know that sounds kind of weird. And, no, I'm not a masochist or anything (although, I can understand how some people might think that I am -- actually coming into a sci-fi chat room to discuss the Bible and things)...
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
First of all: what a mess! I'm not sure but from reading some of the responses you've gotten here, it seems that in order to be a devout christian a person needs to harbor a profound self-hatred, a deeply ingrained sense of personal shame. Low self-esteem can really ruin a logical discussion because low self-esteem and depression can make some of the most distorted nonsense seem like the plain facts.
Actually, if you were referring to my previous posts, knowing that God loves us should do just the opposite than cause us to harbor "profound self-hatred", etc. I mean, who wouldn't feel "great" that the eternal, creator God personally loves them?
And we don't have to have low self-esteem or hate ourselves to approach God. We do need to realize that (as He said) we have wronged Him, admit it to Him, and gratefully hold our hand out to accept the free gift. How does that invoke depression?
I feel I've either somehow inadequately represented the Christian view, or you've misinterpreted my efforts at expressing it. Either way, I hope you won't think that those who believe the Bible are a bunch of self-hating party-poopers (well, except maybe for the prophet Jeremiah -- but then we should cut him some slack because he had a really bad time).
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
HK- Rue and I were just communicating (off-board) how much we missed your deep intuition, your essential grasp of the meaning of things.
I have often mulled over our daughter and of all the kids I've come to know who were born with various intractable, painful, debilitating, or terminal problems. Not being religious, I'm not "mad at God" as so many parents are. But if there is any meaning to the pain and suffering of children, I think it's not to "punish" us, or to "test our faith" but to make us see what we are about as human beings and as a society.
And what I see are parents of "normal" children resenting resources being "wasted" on children who will "never be productive". I see a society that wants everyone to be a positive mark on the ledger; a society so consumed by fear and uncertainty that it can no longer "afford" compassion.
If this is a test by God, then we are failing miserably. If this is an indication of our intelligence- one that might create and take responsibility for our creations- then we're stupider than a dog's hind leg.
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:bingo!
Let's see, if I were God, all lonely in my own existence, and wanting someone to play with...
Maybe I'll make a friend.
No, I can't make my own equal to play with, that would make me all-powerful times two, then I would not be all-powerful...so... I'll make me a world of lesser beings, all stupid and such, and I'll make a Devil to plague them with bad feelings and dis-information...and I'll demand they come to the truth that I'm here...'cept I'll hide, heh heh.
But I'll love them. Yessireee. Even when I flood them, I'll love them.
Tough-love.
Pillar-of-salt love.
I attended at Our Lady of Perpetual Bingo.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Herbal is the only one who thinks Herbal is mos' high, everybody else knows he's just the man.
Originally posted by Chris: I was only being the instrument of the most high. - Herbal on Dark Angel
Lim, you remember my reincarnation story, I'm touched. Now I HAVE to check out this book.
I guess it was dumb of me to start a thread like this and ask for 'logical' discussion, 'eh?
I always remember reincarnation stories, they usually say something about the relative age of the person doing the remembering, imo, and yours had some detail to it, as did Signy's. Costumes give big clues to when and where, specifically, this might have been, especially footwear, which will give clues to social standing etc. Try turning your vision of the Chinese soldier into a movie, you can sometimes learn a lot if you can get the image to move.Years of Rice and Salt I think you will enjoy very much.
Everybody has their logic for why their way is the right way, yeah? Who was it said 'there is no one way, this is my way, what is yours?'
and BTW
Quote:
originally posted by a stand up comic: Pillar-of-Salt LoveQuote:
ROFLMAO, you made my night with that one. Now on to pester 'Toon some more...
Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:This is the bit in your original argument I was objecting to - one student blurts out 'that's not fair, and Sproul punishes all students who didn't have their papers in on Tuesday. It seems to me that the students who had their papers in on Friday might well have been very thankful for the grace of Sproul, but when he flunked them for the transgression of the single student who is unappreciative of the extension (says "it's not fair" to be flunked for not having finished the paper in time to make the Friday extended deadline), Sproul has acted cruelly, and I would say evilly. Better for Sproul not to have offered the extension than to have punished those who were grateful for the grace of the extension, and had there papers completed in time for the Friday extension. I hope that's clearer. Unless I missed something, and none of the ungrateful wretches managed to make the Friday extension. In that case, they got what they deserved. I think teachers should stick to their guns on deadlines; giving post deadline extensions to those who can't manage to get the assignment done on time, punishes those who have made the effort to do the thing as expected. But that's just my personal scales.
Originally posted by cartoon:At any rate, all the students who initially had their papers done by Tuesday wouldn't have had to worry, as they had completed the task as instructed. The only ones punished were the ones who had not, then presumed upon the grace. Did a few of the students who didn't have their papers on Tuesday, but did have them for Friday, suffer as a result? I don't know. Sproul never said if that was applicable in this instance.
'Toon said: ....Friday came around. Sproul calls the roll. Several students blurt out (no longer sheepishly, but very matter-of-factly) that they haven't completed their papers. Sproul begins reading the names of the students who haven't completed their papers: "Smith, no paper - F. Summers, no paper - F. Thomas, no paper - F."
At which time, one of the students yells out, "That's not fair!"
Sproul retorts, "You want fair? I'll give you fair. Everyone who didn't have their paper completed on Tuesday - F."
Someone needing an extension should make arrangements in advance for the extension, or it's disrespectful to the teacher, the other students and ultimately themselves. Allegorically speaking, I see the golden rule as having two sides, I think the other side goes something like 'don't do to others what you wouldn't want them to do for you. Compassion includes a keen but kind honesty in your dealings with others.Quote:
Originally posted by liminalosity:
I think I have until forever to balance the scales.
According to the scriptures, we can't ever balance the scales. That's the thing. God says one sin forever puts us in His debt. Even if it were possible for us to be "perfect" (which it isn't) from now until eternity, and even if we had only sinned once (which none of us has), we are still objects of His wrath apart from receiving His grace. There are no scales.
Yikes, 'Toon, this sounds to me more like an abusive parent who makes everything the fault of the child than a reasonable deity. Where is it that this God shows the agape for his folk that he expects to see from them? I do think one 'sin' (one act out of balance) does keep me in debt to the universe, but comitting one transgression, which I subsequently make reparations for should not keep me in infinite debt, or what's the point. I may just as well let the beast out if nothing I do can get me out of debt, and I'll burn no matter how good I am. (Don't worry, I won't really let the beast out... permanently.)
Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:HEY! HK! Welcome back, I've missed your insight also. I would say that without emotion there can be no growth. Moving through pain and transforming it into wisdom is maybe the most common of the ways we grow. It's also possible to learn from joy and ecstacy, but maybe less likely, because we forget to let go of those things, forget to let them lie on our open palm, and in the grasping it's easy to lose the lesson.
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
...pain is a perfectly natural and very necessary part of life. Without pain there can be no healing and no growth.
Contrary to popular belief, it's not loving to take pain away, I'm not at all sure it's even possible (the closest thing we got to genuinely taking pain away is the empathic trick of taking another's pain into one's self, but half the people reading this don't even believe that kind of empathy exists).
Naw. Bear it is what we gotta do with pain, Chris. Get to know it. Learn what we can.
The trick with empathic healing is to move the other's pain through oneself, not just take it into oneself.
Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You’re welcome, but I think you’ve missed the point.
Originally posted by liminalosity:
Very nice Finn, thanks for the Cicero.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Did I? I did quite like several of his points regarding the futility of the concept hee hee
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
contemplate the measureless and boundless extent of space that stretches in every direction, into which when the mind projects and propels itself, it journeys onward far and wide without ever sighting any margin or ultimate point where it can stop.
Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Cicero wasn’t an atheist. He was actually a stoic on the matter, though he tended to stray from time to time. What I found interesting about that is that notion of an interfering god. If god exists, do we really want a god who grants our wishes? What strings come attached to those wishes? Will god raise taxes on us to pay for miracles?
Originally posted by liminalosity:
Did I? I did quite like several of his points regarding the futility of the concept hee hee.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Thanks for the reply, and the story, HK.
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
"You have not been called here to understand, you have been called here to feel."
About pain; life is pain. It's part of the whole life experience, as essential as sunlight or vitamin-C. I wasn't lookin' to get God to fix our pain as much as to say that Heaven and Hell are right here, right now on this planet and everywhere else. And God's here and everywhere too.
Not a mean old man with a beard judging our souls worthy or unworthy to enter His House, but the living essence of what the universe is made of.
Many like to seperate things; God is outside of me, those people are not like me, there is only the 'right' way, and the 'wrong' way.
The world makes sense if you can simplify it into blacks and whites, or say it's God's will and not mine. (BTW, this thread was my finger's will, and not mine
.) Putting a singular 'face', or personality on God, seperate from ourselves, our planet or the universe was probably the dumbest, most destructive thing ever done by man, IMHO.
But, in my own Quasi-Buddhist way I must say...I could be wrong.
But I don't think so at this moment Chrisisall
P.S., missed you HK
.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by liminalosity:
Unless I missed something, and none of the ungrateful wretches managed to make the Friday extension. In that case, they got what they deserved.
Well, that's the thing.
I'm paraphrasing the story (which I haven't heard in years) from memory. I don't know if any had them done by Friday, or not. My impression was that all of those who'd missed Tuesday, had also missed Friday, and were arrogantly expecting even more time. I can't say for certain.Anyhow, as I said before, you're picking out one thing (which I can't reply to, as I don't know the specifics) which really hasn't anything at all to do with the analogy -- that anything given beyond the initial requirement is grace, and not entitlement.
Quote:
Originally posted by liminalosity:
I do think one 'sin' (one act out of balance) does keep me in debt to the universe, but comitting one transgression, which I subsequently make reparations for should not keep me in infinite debt, or what's the point.
The one sin keeps us forever in debt to God because what is the penalty for any sin? Eternal death/separation from God. We can't repay what's not ours to give.
I hate analogies, because none of them are perfect, and there are always holes one can find in them (as you like to) --
but, let me try this...Let's say there's a rule that if you blink your eye, you owe me a billion to the billionth power dollars, which you have to pay before you die. Whether you blink your eye once or a billion times, you still owe that completely unpayable sum.
I don't like that analogy, but I'm trying to express that we can't pay the debt. But, why anyone should worry or fret that we can't pay the debt is beyond my understanding, as God has already paid the debt for us. All we have to do is accept the gift.
I mean, why get our buns twisted up in a knot over the fact that we can't pay off our mortgage, when someone has come and already paid it for us -- all we have to do is accept it and cash the check.
I mean -- it's free. We can't ever pay it, but someone else has. For heaven sakes, stop complaining that we can't pay it and take the stinking check and cash it, already!!
On a side note (if I might be indulged to comment on something said previously by someone else)...
Yesterday, someone mentioned about how low one's self esteem would have to be to be a Christian. I initially replied to that, but something dawned on me just this morning, which I think is also applicable.
Which of the following two belief systems would provoke a better feeling about oneself? And which is more likely to spiral its adherents into deep depression?
#1) That a sovereign, loving, all-powerful, creator God has made us each with a distinct purpose, and in spite of the fact that we continually rebel against His perfect will for us, has paid an enormous price to forgive our debt so that we could spend eternity in His presence without any pain, sorrow and trouble?
or
#2) That we are all accidents of chance that just happened to evolve here, and when we die, that's it. Whether it's five seconds or five millennia, once we're dead, we're going to be forgotten, and even if we aren't forgotten, what difference does it make, because we're all cosmic accidents existing in an accidental universe where there can be no absolutes, because everything is an accident of chance?
Personally, I think the former belief system is far more encouraging than the latter. If anything should make a person feel good about themselves it's that they have a purpose, and that God wants to be with them forever. Seriously, you can't ask (or even imagine) more than that. At least, I can't.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Since you're in such a serious mood, Signy, I must tell you about a movie idea I've been working on: These scientists come upon an actual hair from Christ, and attempt to complete the missing genetic material with that of frogs, inadvertantly creating a new Super-Hero!
Originally posted by SignyM:
I attended at Our Lady of Perpetual Bingo.
Jurrasic Jesus!!
Sam Neil Bruce Willis Jessica Alba Jeff Goldblum
in
A Steven Speilberg Movie
Music by Basil Poledouris
Screenplay by Lawrence Kasdan and Chrisisall
Directed by Steven Speilberg
Read the Bantam book
Chrisisall*wakes up...*
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:lol, yeah, doesn't it?
Originally posted by liminalosity:
Yikes, 'Toon, this sounds to me more like an abusive parent who makes everything the fault of the child than a reasonable deity.
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
God is here,
God is real and He created the whole shebang universe, including us (made in His likeness no less.) But of all creation (including angels) we are the only ones with free will. He will come into our lives, but only at our invitaion. I too struggle with the suffering that goes on around me... but I don't lay the blame of it at God's door, but our own; man's. It would be nice if we had a perfect world where there would be no hunger, no injustice, no greed and brutality but... wait. That would be heaven, and Jesus ain't come again. Yet.
tamfaniam
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You know what's funny? the pseudo intellectual cases against God.
God's existence has nothing to do with whether you believe or not, the problem here is that most of you talking about how Christians are self-deprecating A-holes and all that hoo ha are so miss informed that the information they do have is exactly as they say it.
You are the people that read a few passages here or there, maybe your were baptized and confirmed, maybe nothing it all, probably have been to church once or twice, had a bad experience (like you wont have one again) and gave it up because it expected something of you...now you resort to attacking something you have a very minor understanding about and it doesn't matter how much history or background you know because none of what Christianity professes is about history, its about faith and living now...
But, obviously those Christians among us are fools for believing in something like God, we are all depressed ignorant knaves...
While those who want to be controversial bring up subjects that need to be understood while looking at the whole picture, not the individual case... you be believe your life is so important that it should consist of no suffering not realizing the context in which our life is lived.... in a world that contains suffering! Look at God's own Son...(but of course here comes the argument that he didn't come just to live...well then ask yourself, are you? maybe all the suffering you experience is part of what you are here to learn/do)
But, of course the next question is some bitchy complaint about 'WHy, why is there suffering! I pray to God! Therefore he should ease my pain..."(No one said it was going to be easy, especially when you are watching your own child suffer...no one said that wasnt' part of life...times like that require more faith and still might not be your desired outcome...time to buckle down and do everything you can)
Read the lives of some of the saints, you will see that things did not work that way, in fact you will see that suffering is not something viewed the way all of you who complain about suffering think it is....ie. as an evil bad bad thing....
Read some St. John of the Cross or St. Teresa of Avila and educate yourself, you can act like ignorant people the rest of your life and it will still not help...
Just maybe...MAYBE...if you could conjure up some faith and practice the faith and truly try to understand it, you just may discover some peace and truth...
Remember that Jesus said "Blessed is he who believes but as not seen"-- a pill to hard to swallow...but of course I can't USE the bible as a reference...shame I must give you some real world experience...OH! The shame!...
Remember the desire for damnation is based on desire....(oh here comes the bitching next about 'OH, who really wants to go to hell! Wah wah wah..." think about it before you go mouthing off about yet another subject of which you have no understanding about....
Read some Marcus Aurelius (yes he persecuted the Christians but ain't it funny how close his philosophy is to Christian ethics) but of course your going to get caught up in the fact that he persecuted Christians so much so that it will taint anything you might learn...ultimately because you don't want to learn...
You have the naive view that your logic alone is good enough to give you the answers you desire, you're logic will only go so far until it reaches the cliff that requires faith...faith is the bridge that will lead you to the answers you desire...but expecting those here who would rather bitch then search for the answer to get some faith..(and asking questions or spurring on a debate is not a search for answers)...miraculous
Quote:
#1) That a sovereign, loving, all-powerful, creator God has made us each with a distinct purpose, and in spite of the fact that we continually rebel against His perfect will for us, has paid an enormous price to forgive our debt so that we could spend eternity in His presence without any pain, sorrow and trouble?
No! We can't believe
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
OmegaDark-
Quote:You seem to create your opinions out of whole cloth. I was raised Catholic. I went to Catholic school and had catechism as part of the curriculum, attended Mass every day, even sang in the choir (badly). I didn't give up my religion because I had "bad experience" or expected God to take away all pain. I read the stories of the saints, at one time I would have been happy to be part of the clergy. I gave up my religion (which was actually quite comfortable, all things considered) because I started asking questions like What is real and what is a dream? Since all religions claim to have 'the truth' how can I rell which one is right? It was a very unsettling year, but once you realize that you can't even 'prove' reality the whole notion of believing in something that isn't manifest kind of goes down the drain.
You are the people that read a few passages here or there, maybe your were baptized and confirmed, maybe nothing it all, probably have been to church once or twice, had a bad experience (like you wont have one again) and gave it up because it expected something of you...now you resort to attacking something you have a very minor understanding about and it doesn't matter how much history or background you know because none of what Christianity professes is about history, its about faith and living now...you be believe your life is so important that it should consist of no suffering not realizing the context in which our life is lived.... in a world that contains suffering!
You should know that you can't berate someone into faith.
So, tell me- other than not 'burning in hell', why should I believe? I have a philosophy that says the Universe is as it is, and suffering and grief is part of it. Despite my lack of faith, I still expect quite a bit of myself, since I have an ethic that says we should love one another and understand ourselves. When I'm disappointed, I'm disapointed in people. I don't need to rationalize to myself (and others) why this God who loves us all seems to want to rather capriciously plunk us into eternal damantion or eternal gratitude for being as we were created to be.
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
So, tell me- other than not 'burning in hell', why should I believe?
As shortly and as honestly as I can put it -- the best reason I can give is because we were made to believe, and we won't ever fulfill the reason for which we were created if we don't.
But, as you said, no one can be forced to believe.
No one else can cash the check in my name. I have to take it and cash it, myself.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Say that the case against God is Pseudo intellectual...
Fine. But its a harsh generalization to suggest that everybody is trying to hack away at your faith if they are discussing it from a sceptical standpoint. I'm a little dismayed by the whole "just do," or "just don't" door slam on conversation that you advocate. That's not even pseudo intellectual...that's a lack of curiosity, a vanity even, that you cannot learn more about your own religion by talking to a doubter.
And I know too many people who "just do." What I mean by that is that they have no honest understanding of what it is they believe. They believe in the bible. They know that truth is inside..but they've never read it.
I think its important to understand your own beliefs or your own doubts. There's a whole crap load of inconsistency out there on the bible...One can turn it into a tool for whatever he wants. As Jon Stewart said about it, "it's like an atom. Split it one way you get nuclear power, split it another, you get a bomb."
People who don't know their own faith often allow somebody else to interperet it for them. That allows for a vast degree of inconsistency even in their own living. The cohesiveness gets lost.
In my opinion, True Christians are those who have asked questions, have had discourses, have doubted, despaired, and have yet, come out of it all with a stronger faith than ever. They are not told by their religious leaders where they stand on an issue...that Michael Schaivo is in cahoots with the devil, or that God is killing our people in Iraq because of our tolerance for Homosexuality.
There's a lot to reconcile in the bible. The journey, I would guess, is a rewarding one, but its one that must be taken, and that means suffer some slings and arrows for your own good.
I'm out of my depth, I freely admit, but one of those deadly sins that are apparently the reason for all of our suffering here on Earth(according to those readers of the bible who have conveniently ignored Job)is Sloth. Laziness, when it comes to invoking God's name, has got to be a particularly heinous sin then.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SignyM:
I appreciate your background and understanding and you personal philosophy. (Nice run on sentence? )
I hope you didn't think I was talking directly to you, I wasn't.... I was talking about what people say....
Quote:
I don't need to rationalize to myself (and others) why this God who loves us all seems to want to rather capriciously plunk us into eternal damnation or eternal gratitude for being as we were created to be.
See, it's comments like that, that make me realize that the knowledge of what you claim has major errors.
If someone at least brought up an argument with understanding that was correct about Religious philosophy and catechetical understading that didn't contain absurd ideas (like God just damns people for the hell of it), then both you and I would be much better off for it.
I truly respect 90% of the people who have had the dissenting opinion about religion. Some people have been willing to know and wanted to understand it from both sides...as I truly want to understand it from those who have left or don't believe...but when people tell me why they don't based on certain ideas that are NOT Christian but claim 'this is the case, and it doesn't make sense' I have to reply, your right it doesn't make sense because that ISN'T THE CASE!
I just find it rare when someone presents the right information and the CORRECT understanding of it and simply says I don't believe... then that person is much farther ahead that those who give false reasons to false ideas that are misconstrued and falsely placed inside the structure of 'Christianity'. The person who knows yet doesn't believe is much more respected...and is much more liable to believe
Quote:
You seem to create your opinions out of whole cloth. I was raised Catholic. I went to Catholic school and had catechism as part of the curriculum, attended Mass every day, even sang in the choir (badly)
What makes you a follower of Christ is in your Mind, on your tongue, and in your heart....being baptized, etc etc etc is only the start...and you can learn until the cows come home, but until you have FAITH, all your actions are just that....action
Tat Tvam Asi
you just have to believe it
- OD
Prov 26:4
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by cartoon:
Actually, if you were referring to my previous posts, knowing that God loves us should do just the opposite than cause us to harbor "profound self-hatred", etc. I mean, who wouldn't feel "great" that the eternal, creator God personally loves them?
Heya Cartoon,
Y'know...we're talkin' turkey here, right? See, what you say here, right here about God's love and the self tells me you really (I mean really) don't know what I'm talking about. Trouble is, this stuff, this emotionally perceived stuff, is experiential: very hard to explain to someone who hasn't experienced it themselves--y'know, like mystical experience.
See, self-esteem is about your self, about you and your accomplishments and your potentiality. It's not about an external source of validation, whether it be a paternal God, or a loved one. Getting personal validation from how someone else loves you, is the opposite of self-esteem. That kind of self worth makes you helpless, it makes you a slave. You can be perfectly happy being helpless or being a slave (as long as you can ignore a few facts), but if that goes on too long it isn't healthy.
You know about the baby elephant that get's tied to the post? The baby elephant tries and tries to free himself from the post, but he's not strong enough and eventually gives up. And then when the elephant's grown up, and can pull whole trees out of the ground with its trunk, it never tries to escape when it gets tied to the little post, because it "learned" that it was "helpless" against the post ("learned helplessnes" we call it).
Without self-esteem we don't test our personal limits, without self-esteem we may find contentment with our apparent "lot in life" but the longer we stagnate in that way, our spirit atrophies.
People find a lot of contentment in the illusion of control. The Christian God, popularly conceived, creates a comforting perfection to sooth our restless awareness. But the God Captain Kirk and I talk to made our spirits restless for a reason. It's something in the nature of being human to test limits and so surpass ourselves.
Quote:
And we don't have to have low self-esteem or hate ourselves to approach God. We do need to realize that (as He said) we have wronged Him, admit it to Him, and gratefully hold our hand out to accept the free gift. How does that invoke depression?
Okay, good question. To give you an adequate answer, I'm gonna have to go a little in depth here, be merciful: whether you are very conscious of it or not, original sin is a central underpinning of mainstream Christian thought. The inherent evil of Man after the Fall is hard to get around. A lot of Christians, like a lot of the folks posting on this thread, tend to conveniently blank it out when it suits them. But because of Eve we are all inherently evil, even little babies straight out the womb--that's why they need baptizin'. Evil. You, Cartoon, are evil. I am evil. Everyone you have ever known and ever loved has been evil. And you come along, "But I'm happy about it! Praise the Lord!" I think you may be happy 'cause you've mastered the art of cognitive dissonance.
And no one's gonna choose Christianity unless the Crucifixion appeals to them in some way. You gotta admit, the Crucifixion is a pretty dire symbol, not reflective of a happy-go-lucky experience of life. Conversion stories are fraught with darkness and despair that could only be cleared by the Savior's love. Belly-button Christians may not have such dramatic stories, but they're told often enough where they'd be without Christ.
Here's the thing: all dualistic religions (the ones that believe in good vs. evil) amount to spiritual crisis management. The crisis resides in the fact that nothing in a dualistic world view can "just be." Everything is either/or. The central question becomes, "Am I doing the right thing?" And uncertainty is generally assumed to imply a negative; sor
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SignyM:
I appreciate your background and understanding and you personal philosophy. (Nice run on sentence? )
I hope you didn't think I was talking directly to you, I wasn't.... I was talking about what people say....
Quote:
I don't need to rationalize to myself (and others) why this God who loves us all seems to want to rather capriciously plunk us into eternal damnation or eternal gratitude for being as we were created to be.
See, it's comments like that, that make me realize that the knowledge of what you claim has major errors.
If someone at least brought up an argument with understanding that was correct about Religious philosophy and catechetical understanding that didn't contain absurd ideas (like God just damns people for the hell of it), then both you and I would be much better off for it.
I truly respect 90% of the people who have had the dissenting opinion about religion. Some people have been willing to know and wanted to understand it from both sides...as I truly want to understand it from those who have left or don't believe...but when people tell me why they don't based on certain ideas that are NOT Christian but claim 'this is the case, and it doesn't make sense' I have to reply, your right it doesn't make sense because that ISN'T THE CASE!
I just find it rare when someone presents the right information and the CORRECT understanding of it and simply says I don't believe... then that person is much farther ahead that those who give false reasons to false ideas that are misconstrued and falsely placed inside the structure of 'Christianity'. The person who knows yet doesn't believe is much more respected...and is much more liable to believe
Quote:
You seem to create your opinions out of whole cloth. I was raised Catholic. I went to Catholic school and had catechism as part of the curriculum, attended Mass every day, even sang in the choir (badly)
What makes you a follower of Christ is in your Mind, on your tongue, and in your heart....being baptized, etc etc etc is only the start...and you can learn until the cows come home, but until you have FAITH, all your actions are just that....action
Tat Tvam Asi
you just have to believe it
- OD
Prov 26:4
Quote:
People who don't know their own faith often allow somebody else to interpret it for them. That allows for a vast degree of inconsistency even in their own living. The cohesiveness gets lost.
boy you said it!!!
Quote:
In my opinion, True Christians are those who have asked questions, have had discourses, have doubted, despaired, and have yet, come out of it all with a stronger faith than ever.
THANK YOU!!!
Quote:
There's a lot to reconcile in the bible. The journey, I would guess, is a rewarding one, but its one that must be taken, and that means suffer some slings and arrows for your own good.
You said it....
Quote:
But its a harsh generalization to suggest that everybody is trying to hack away at your faith if they are discussing it from a sceptical standpoint. I'm a little dismayed by the whole "just do," or "just don't" door slam on conversation that you advocate.
I NEVER said everyone, just those who don't care to learn or truly want to have a discussion, but those who are just hacking for it's own sake...
You're preaching to someone who agrees with you...if you take time to read my past posts and then to read this one, you will see what I am getting at, to read just this one, is an awfully out of context view of what I say....
Quote:
And I know too many people who "just do." What I mean by that is that they have no honest understanding of what it is they believe. They believe in the bible. They know that truth is inside..but they've never read it.
Well, that's a tough line to draw, some people don't have the capacity to break things down and understand it, I have met some people who have no intellectual ability in the case you discuss and yet are very very very very good people...amazingly s
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Okay- let me reiterate/ expand part of my post and rephrase part of it.
To reiterate/ expand: If it's impossible to even prove "reality", then the whole notion of believing in something that isn't manifest kind of goes down the drain. I have three a priori assumption that underpin my view: The universe exists, we are a part of it, and we come to know it through our senses. That pretty much does away with subjectivism, idealism and religion right off the bat. Given those assumptions, everything else is subject to enquiry. Open-ended enquiry is, in my view, a healthy thing. Enquiry in which one simply seeks to prove an already agreed-on concept is a dead end.
So, to rephrase the other part: I don't need to rationalize to myself the workings of ANY god, whether s/he/they be warm and fuzzy, capricious, consistent, just, or satanic. IMHO following Harvey might get you locked in the looney bin, following Moloch should land you in jail, and following the Xtian God is socially acceptable but in terms of "proof" they are all on the same plane: can't be done.
In other words: I don't believe.
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
See, Cartoon, I told you, my posts are invisible. You are the only one with the miraculous ability to read and reply to them. But, I'll post all over again, just because I can.
My question to Chrisisall (and anyone who uses this argument) is what makes the suffering of a small child so much more important than the suffering of anyone or anything else? Because they haven't lived their full life yet? But who has? Is the suffering of the 45-year-old woman dying of breast cancer deserved more than that of the small child? Why? Who says so? At what age does that suffering become more acceptable? 10? 15? 20?
It is my understanding that God loves us all equally. So, therefore, he wouldn't feel obliged to ease the suffering of a baby over that of an adult. It's us humans that are saying he should, essentially telling him what to do. Supreme arrogance, that. So then, should he ease all suffering? That would give us heaven on earth, wouldn't it? We've already dropped the ball on that one, so we aren't getting a second chance at it. Our second (and last) chance is heaven after death. I don't think the bible-like God is going to give us a free ride until then. But that's just my invisible opinion.
"I'm having one of those things - a headache with pictures."
"Of course I'm right. And if I'm not, may we all be horribly crushed from above somehow."
Like books? Go to this thread: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=14862
to find out how to buy mine!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think it's because children are deemed more innocent, or less culpable, than adults and don't "deserve" to suffer.
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
See, self-esteem is about your self, about you and your accomplishments and your potentiality.
Okay. I agree with that. But, it didn't sound like that's what you were trying to say. I apologize if I misinterpreted your previous statement.
As a Christian, though, I'm also a bit concerned about what you said above, because there's a fine line between "self-esteem" and "pride" (the latter which is a sin). While I agree we should not be unduly down on ourselves, neither should we think of ourselves more highly than we should. Where to draw that distinction (at least to me) is a fuzzy one.
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Evil. You, Cartoon, are evil. I am evil. Everyone you have ever known and ever loved has been evil. And you come along, "But I'm happy about it! Praise the Lord!" I think you may be happy 'cause you've mastered the art of cognitive dissonance.
I entirely agree with your first three statements above -- but, by your 4th statement, I'm lead to believe that you misunderstood (or I didn't adequately explain) my position as a believer.
No, I'm not the least bit "happy" about being evil. The Lord never wanted us to be "happy" about evil. He wants those who have accepted His free gift of salvation to be happy and gracious (unlike Sproul's entitlement-minded, arrogant students who presumed upon grace) that He's rescued them from that "evil" state into which we were born. Believe me, I never even meant to imply otherwise.
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
And no one's gonna choose Christianity unless the Crucifixion appeals to them in some way. You gotta admit, the Crucifixion is a pretty dire symbol, not reflective of a happy-go-lucky experience of life.
The only thing appealing about the cross is that God loved us enough to go through that horrible, humiliating death to pay the price for those who would freely receive it. If anything, the horror of the cross should show us how bad our sin must be in God's eyes that this was the price it cost Jesus to pay for it.
I have to say I disagree with much of your final paragraphs, and we'll have to let it go at that -- because space and time won't allow me to cover where I disagree on the inerrancy of the scriptures, and my at-hand knowledge won't allow me to go into where the early church (which was adhering to the scriptures) got turned aside (shortly thereafter -- but not during Paul's time on earth, as I believe you were implying.) (I'd say the church was fine for the whole first century. It was after those who had actually walked with the Lord had gone, that those coming after them had a tendency to add and subtract things.)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I didn't respond to your question, Queen, because (aside from the fact that I like to pretend that I don't like you) I don't have any qualms with your statement.
Regarding why everyone else ignores you, I can only assume that they genuinely don't like you.
You know, it would go a long way towards endearing others to you if you lost that "I can kill you with my brain" thing next to your name. Believe it or not, that does tend to frighten some folks off.
You know how it initially scared me.
(I'm still not fully recovered.)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by cartoon:
As a Christian, though, I'm also a bit concerned about what you said above, because there's a fine line between "self-esteem" and "pride" (the latter which is a sin). While I agree we should not be unduly down on ourselves, neither should we think of ourselves more highly than we should. Where to draw that distinction (at least to me) is a fuzzy one.
Heya, Cartoon, thanks for your very civil reply.
Yes, it was the pride thing in the first place that set me off. The whole pride=sin concept is sooooo 13th century, dude--been there, done that! Seriously, the doctrine of the seven deadly sins is not in the Bible, Jesus had nothing to say on the matter, the whole thing was a medieval improvization on a theme of wickedness.
Quote:
The only thing appealing about the cross is that God loved us enough to go through that horrible, humiliating death to pay the price for those who would freely receive it. If anything, the horror of the cross should show us how bad our sin must be in God's eyes that this was the price it cost Jesus to pay for it.
"...how bad our sin must be..." I have to disagree here. To my mind, the crucifixion is a genuine mystery. The doctine of God coming to free us from sin is only hinted at in only one of the four gospels--and the last one to boot, written over a hundred years after the facts--and the writer of John's gospel absolutely had an axe to grind on the subject. He was promoting a whole way of interpreting the life and works of Jesus that the power brokers within the early church liked a good deal better than, oh say, the version of divinity presented in the gospel of Thomas.
Furthermore, I perceive that procelytism (i.e.: coercion, manipulation and scare tactics) is evil. No real good comes from convertion--whatever good there is in a Christian life (and there can be much) happens inspite of having one's mind attacked and weakened in this way. Jesus instructed his deciples to go out and tell the world his story, he didn't say anything about telling people they would burn in hell if they didn't go to mass every Sunday. What happened to the church from the get go was human power-hunger, plain and simple; the will of men like Paul to dominate others.
Organized religion doesn't work. Theocracies, across the board, have been at the root of the vast majority of atrocities throughout history. And as far as I can glean from Jesus' few words, he advised his followers to stay out of politics and the religion business, period. Oh well.
Thanks again, Cartoon, for reading my post without prejudice. That means a lot to me.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sayings from the Gospel of Thomas:
2) [Jesus said]: "Let him who seeks not cease until he finds, and when he finds he shall wonder; wondering he shall reign, and reigning shall rest."
3) Jesus said, "If those who attract you say, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is under the earth,' then the fish of the sea will precede you. Rather, the Kingdom of God is inside of you, and it is outside of you. [Those who] become acquainted with [themselves] will find it; [and when you] become acquainted with yourselves, [you will understand that] it is you who are the sons of the living Father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."
4) Jesus said: "Let the old man who is full of days not hesitate to ask the child of seven days about the place of life; then he will live. For many that are first will be last, and last, first, and they will become a single one."
5) Jesus said: "Recognize what is before your face and that which is hidden from the you will be revealed to you. For there is nothing hidden which shall not be made manifest, nor buried which shall not be raised."
6) His disciples asked him and said to him, "How do you want us to fast? And how shall we pray? And how [shall we] give alms? And what kind of diet shall we follow?" Jesus said, "Do not lie, and do not do what you hate, for all things are disclosed before truth. For there is nothing hidden which shall not be shown forth."
27) Jesus said: "Unless you fast to the world, you shall in no way find the Kingdom of God; and unless you sabbatize the Sabbath, you shall not see the Father."
28) Jesus said: "I stood in the midst of the world, and in the flesh I was seen by them, and I found all drunken, and I found none among them thirsty. And my soul grieved over the souls of men, because they are blind in their heart and see not. [...]
Just FYI
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Heya, Cartoon, thanks for your very civil reply.
You're welcomed.
People can disagree without becoming disagreeable -- and I have to say I've found more to disagree with in your last response than in your initial post. It's difficult without going into great detail (which I could -- but which would likely just result in us going back and forth, ad naseum), but just a few brief comments if I may...
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Yes, it was the pride thing in the first place that set me off. The whole pride=sin concept is sooooo 13th century, dude--been there, done that!
Actually, just to site a single example, Jesus specifically mentions "pride" as a sin in Mark 7 (along with a whole lot of other sins which "defile a man from within").
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
The doctine of God coming to free us from sin is only hinted at in only one of the four gospels--and the last one to boot, written over a hundred years after the facts--and the writer of John's gospel absolutely had an axe to grind on the subject.
Just to site a few in the other gospels, in the very first chapter of Matthew, the angel announcing Jesus's birth to Mary: "He will save His people from their sins." In Mark 2, Jesus says to the crowd that He came "to call sinners to repentence". In Luke 1, Zacharias prophesies that Jesus would give knowledge of salvation by the remission of their sins, etc. That's one example from each of the other gospels just in the first few chapters of each book. There are many many more throughout.
Regarding John's gospel, it was written by the apostle John during his lifetime, several decades after the events portrayed therein -- as was the entire NT (most likely between 45 and 95 AD), and all were circulated throughout the church and acknowledged as being written by the persons with which they were associated in that time period --which is why they were accepted (a few centuries later) into the canon of scripture as authenic, and others were not.
You can obviously site liberal theologians who dispute this, but they are in the minority, and the evidence supports otherwise. I have studied the origins and compilation of both the Old and New Testaments at some length, and am quite satisfied with the Hebrew & Greek manuscripts from which our English translations are derived. Obviously, many others -- mostly non-believing detractors, are not. I acknowledge that we will, unfortunately, not find agreement on this, however.
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Furthermore, I perceive that procelytism (i.e.: coercion, manipulation and scare tactics) is evil.
I agree. The gospel cannot be coerced. I've said as much for as long as I can remember. You cannot force someone to believe, and you shouldn't try. Present the gospel plainly, in a non-confrontational manner. If someone is interested, pursue the matter. If not, move on. Jesus said as much, Himself.
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Jesus instructed his deciples to go out and tell the world his story, he didn't say anything about telling people they would burn in hell if they didn't go to mass every Sunday.
Yes, Jesus gave no instructions regarding time and place of worship, nor that failure to adhere to a certain schedule would result in damnation. In that respect, you are entirely correct.
However, Jesus did, indeed, preach about hell -- in all four of the gospels. As others (who have spent more time than I have searching such things) have pointed out, Jesus speaks about "hell" more than everyone else in the Bible (both Old and New Testaments) combined. Jesus frequently warned His listeners about hell, and Jesus's descriptions of such are quite frightening -- the Lord did not pull His punches on the subject in the least.
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
What happened to the church from the get go
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Chris--
Sorry if this has been covered (I just don't have time to read 70 other posts).
So your argument (if I understand it) is:
A) God, as commonly conceived, is all-powerful (P), and all-good(G).
B) If God is, indeed, all-powerful and all-good, then He would not permit the presence of suffering (S) or evil (E) (P&G)->~(SvE)
C) But suffering and evil exist (SvE)
D) Therefore, God (G) does exist (~G)
So your argument looks like this, symbolically:
1 (1) P&G A
2 (2) (P&G)->~(SvE) A
1,2 (3) ~(SvE) 1,2->E
4 (4) Sve A
But your concluding move (at line D above) doesn't follow from your premises (lines A-C). Logically speaking, you are entitled to make the following move as an alternative to D: "Therefore, it is not the case that God is all-powerful and all-good", which would look like this:
.:2,4 (5) ~(P&G) 3,4RAA(1)
This argument does not (and cannot) disprove God's existence. What it can do is call into question His power or goodness, or our conception of suffering or evil, or the assumption that He would not permit them given unlimited power and goodness. But your premises don't treat the subject of God's existence-as-such, so that existence can't be disproven unless you revise your arguments in some way (for instance, start with "If God exists, then He is all-powerful and all-good"). Then you would at least be able to claim formal logical validity for your argument. (for a definition of formal validity go here: http://www.iep.utm.edu/v/val-snd.htm)
To be intelletually responsible, I must hasten to add that the rules of predicate logic disallow the predication of existence. A number of philosophers, Aristotle and Kant among them, agreed in some form with the maxim that existence cannot be predicated of thing. This would jeopardize any argument which predicated existence to some particular.)
But even if existence can be predicated (in which case you would have a formally valid argument) I would dispute the soundness of your argument (see the link above for the definition of logical soundness). I would assert that your understanding of God's goodness and power is flawed, or that you mistake the import of suffering and evil vis-a-vis that power and goodness. Those are, of course, more theological than philosophical, and in light of your desire for logical debate, I shall simply say that I disagree with your conceptions.
________________________________________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Cartoon
Thank You...
Thank You..
Thank You...
- OD 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This has been a truly thought provoking thread to read and I appreciate the effort and ideas that you all have put forth. I'm not looking to bash or make anyone doubt their own beliefs, in fact I'm just looking for answers (although why I'm looking on a message board for a TV show, however great that show may be, is not entirely clear).
I guess my question has to do with "Why?" If God created humankind, why did he create us with the capability to do such harm to one another?
If he loves us so, and wants us to follow him, why do we kill each other over the manner in which he should be worshipped? And if he is seeing this, why does he allow it to continue?
Why create us with carnal desires that we need to repress in order to live more "holy" lives?
Does God just enjoy watching us struggle? Does he think in order to follow him and understand him that the journey must be difficult or it isn't worth travelling?
I was told once that if I believe in God I must also believe in Satan. I don't know why, but believing in a red man with horns and a tail and carrying a pitchfork, is beyond me. It's like believing in leprechauns or the tooth fairy to me. I guess it's the same deal with Adam and Eve for me. Talking snakes? Huh? I didn't think I was supposed to take these things literally. But apparently I was wrong.
God gave humans a chance by placing them in Eden and then said "Don't eat of the tree of knowledge." Then he gave them free will. Now God is all knowing, surely he knew what man would do. So why even bother with the whole set up? It seems like the reason we are born into the world as sinners, is because that's the way God wanted it.
I seem to have wandered off and forgotten what it was I wanted to talk about.
Cartoon has written some really nice things that have helped me in this thread but I have a problem with the following:
#1) That a sovereign, loving, all-powerful, creator God has made us each with a distinct purpose, and in spite of the fact that we continually rebel against His perfect will for us, has paid an enormous price to forgive our debt so that we could spend eternity in His presence without any pain, sorrow and trouble?
or #2) That it's all up to chance, etc...
The problem with #1 is that I was raised Catholic, and at one point in time thought that I had faith. But now I no longer have that absolute belief, and infact may not believe at all. So if #1 is true, then I know that my questioning God's existence means I get to toil away here on Earth, and although I at least try to be a decent human being and caring to those around me, I don't get to spend eternity in His presence without pain, sorrow, or trouble. So I beat myself up over the issue, and try as I might, can't seem to make myself believe. So my family who are believers will go to Heaven when they die but I will not. Now my family loves me, will it not make them sad that they must spend eternity without me? But there's no sorrow in Heaven. So now I'm angry and confused by living in a universe that follows premise #1.
With premise #2, I live my life in a morally "good" manner simply because it makes life a bit better here in the only existence that I know of. And I don't worry about the cosmic ramifications. And I'm a little bit happier which makes life for those around me a little bit better.
Anyway... I've rambled way too much. I didn't mean to offend or antagonize anyone, and I'm sorry for using "he" instead of "she", or "it", or "He" as the case may be... thanks for any response, I really do want to hear back.
"Mercy is the mark of a great man"
"Guess I'm just a good man"
"Well, I'm alright"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Your posts are not invisible, and seeing them is always a good thing, Q.
Originally posted by queenofthenorth:
My question to Chrisisall (and anyone who uses this argument) is what makes the suffering of a small child so much more important than the suffering of anyone or anything else?
My answer (I would have sooner, but very rushed these days) is simple; We are all on the same level, I just used babies and children on the original post for those that would take that state as relativly 'sin-free'. In truth I sometimes look at elderly folk and get a 'flash' of what they looked like as babies or children- and I sometimes see babies and get that same 'flash' of them as adults and senior citizens. It's a kind of time-travel, I guess, sort of seein' sideways across the time-line for a moment (or just a vivid visual imagination
). Sometimes it brings a tear to my eye, the whole 'invisible' timeless reality we're in....And since I don't believe that this is our ONLY shot here, it's hard for me to discuss the whole 'last' concept.
The 'Verse, without beginning and without end...
To God, there is no zero Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hey everyone. I personally have been extremely impressed with the level of discussion and intercourse in the recent set of religion threads, and this one in particular. I fancy myself a hobbyist of religious history, and you guys have given a lot of interesting perspectives to study - and stayed mostly civil at that. Cool =p
Anyway...my input. I consider myself as a Christian, and I can go into the whats and whys about that if anyone cares to hear it, but I've just made the decision to accept that path in the last two years. It took me over twenty years to get to the point that I could be comfortable saying that (I'm 33, btw). At least for the first contribution to this thread, I'd like to ask a few questions rather than defend a point of view =)
First, is there any way (in your esteemed opinions), that we can ever *know* what the truth to believe is or which path is the right one? Obviously, there is a decision to believe or not believe, and that evidence is on the table. If you choose to believe, however, how do you know which version is right?
Second, do you believe that the creator (under the assumption that there is one) is ominscient and omnipotent? How does that belief work in the construct of the battle between good and evil?
Third, would you be angry if someone who you considered deeply evil, Hitler for example, was in Heaven (or the positive afterlife of your choosing)?
Thanks for all of the awesome discussion, again!
Amiton.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Look at the mythology of Tolkien, one man with a limited number of years, and he came up with a whole world, and it's history.
Originally posted by BurnTheLand:
I was told once that if I believe in God I must also believe in Satan. I don't know why, but believing in a red man with horns and a tail and carrying a pitchfork, is beyond me. It's like believing in leprechauns or the tooth fairy to me.
Jesus- a very cool guy- said some good things about how we should treat eachother as we, ourselves would like to be treated. Then some other guys, fresh off of studying the whole Zeus-Hercules thing, get the idea to expand on Jesus' predilections, but in a more realistic way... no son of God thrashing Hydras; this one just does miracles.
Just find the seeds of truth buryied in the comic-book adventures.
(I fully expect that in a thousand years Bruce Lee will be thought of as some kind of Martial-God, who left Earth at age 32 to find a better challenger in the Heavens than he could here on this world. Stories grow like that.)
Chrisisall, with belief (Why do you always assume...?)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Try not to think of it in terms of 'right' and 'wrong', we're fluid beings, and so our thoughts will inevitably change and evolve. The path you choose now will lead to the one in your future, and like Herbal says, "It's all good" (Unless you kill in the name of your god...
Originally posted by Amiton:
First, is there any way (in your esteemed opinions), that we can ever *know* what the truth to believe is or which path is the right one?
)Quote:
Second, do you believe that the creator (under the assumption that there is one) is ominscient and omnipotent? How does that belief work in the construct of the battle between good and evil?
You mean, can he create an object so heavy, he can't lift it?
Good, evil, hot, cold, all degrees of the same thing. Everything is a reflection of everything else. If we were created by a 'creator', then in my view, he popped us out and went on about his other buisness.
Quote:
Third, would you be angry if someone who you considered deeply evil, Hitler for example, was in Heaven (or the positive afterlife of your choosing)?
I cried when Vader saved Luke from the Emperor.
No, I would be happy to see all brought into the light. Drop away the Earthly/corporeal psychosis, and we're all the same- children of and through God.
Make any sense?
Wacky spiritual fun Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Wow.
Originally posted by Causal:
To be intelletually responsible, I must hasten to add that the rules of predicate logic disallow the predication of existence. A number of philosophers, Aristotle and Kant among them, agreed in some form with the maxim that existence cannot be predicated of thing. This would jeopardize any argument which predicated existence to some particular.)
I asked for it, I guess
My main argument really is this:
a) People feel the need to fully understand everything.
b) People cannot fully understand everything.
c) God is part of everything.
Therefore:
d) People cannot fully understand God.
Those that say they 'know', simply cannot. They are formulating their answers from their own understanding, or the imparted understanding of others.
So be at peace with not fully understanding.
But anyone saying "I know..." smacks of pride...
Chrisisall, who knows this...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Cartoon, you're a very agreeable sort, and your belief seems true. The only time you sound crazy to me is when you wax political, but we'll save that for another thread...
Originally posted by cartoon:
I'm sure I sound fairly crazy to others at times , myself -- well, maybe more than just "at times".
Chrisisall, always startin' some felgercarb
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by BurnTheLand:
(although why I'm looking on a message board for a TV show, however great that show may be, is not entirely clear).
It is kind of ironic, isn't it?
Doesn't make any sense to me, either. Quote:
Originally posted by BurnTheLand:
I guess my question has to do with "Why?" If God created humankind, why did he create us with the capability to do such harm to one another?
I don't know the answer to that, Burn, and there's no reason my speculation would be any better than anyone else's. Nonetheless, going by what I've seen in the scriptures as a whole leaves me to believe that God is truly sorrowed by our sin and pain.
Jesus sorrowed over the city of Jerusalem just days before His crucifixion because He knew that the city would be destroyed in a few short decades (as He said, because it didn't recognize the time of His visitation). He was sorrowful because He wanted to see His people saved, but they persistently refused (as we all have throughout time).
Unfortunately, the thing we (as created beings) can't seem to grasp (or don't want to accept) is the fact that there are consequences to our actions -- temporal consequences as well as eternal consequences. Why God didn't simply just wipe out the earth entirely after the garden and start over, I have no clue. None of it makes any sense to me (and as I stated previously, apparantly the angels of heaven don't quite get it, either). But, He is God, and we are not. And I do trust Him even though none of it (including the abject hardship of my own life) makes the least bit of sense to me.
Quote:
Originally posted by BurnTheLand:
If he loves us so, and wants us to follow him, why do we kill each other over the manner in which he should be worshipped? And if he is seeing this, why does he allow it to continue?
Well, because God's enemy (and ours) doesn't want to see people coming to the Lord to be saved. And once they're saved, the devil doesn't want them to be effective -- he wants to destroy their witness so others will look on them in derision (and thereby refuse their witness of the gospel, themselves).
The devil has been around longer than any human, and he's seen it all. He knows all our weaknesses, and strikes us each individually at our weakest places.
He also knows that mankind (in general) has a God-shaped emptiness in their hearts which can only be filled by God, and mankind, even when they don't realize it, are trying to jam other things (counterfeit things) into that emptiness (riches, possessions, entertainment, friends, sex, etc.) -- not that any of these things are wrong in themselves, but they were never meant to replace God.
The devil realizes that because of that emptiness, some people might actually stumble upon God, and he doesn't want that. So, because the devil is a liar (Jesus said so on several occasions), he throws counterfeit means of salvation at them -- and most people (either because they were "raised" to believe a certain way, or because they're too lazy to look into the scriptures for themselves and find where it may contradict what they've been hearing elsewhere), fall for the lie.
I did, myself, for more years than I'd like to admit. And it's very difficult to break away from a lifetime of thinking things go one way, when in actualility (according to the scriptures) they go another.
Quote:
Originally posted by BurnTheLand:
Why create us with carnal desires that we need to repress in order to live more "holy" lives?
Because most carnal desires (food, friendship, sex, etc.) in and of themselves are not evil. But our sin nature has twisted them, and we desire them in a manner apart from the way in which God intended for us to enjoy them. And naturally (as I said above), the devil uses those desires to bait us. You can't bait a fish with something the fish doesn't want -- so the devil uses what we want to lure us deeper into the pit of sin. He tells us, "God won't care
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
The only time you sound crazy to me is when you wax political, but we'll save that for another thread...
Political?
Me?!?!?
You can't make a really good fruit salad without throwing in a few nuts.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Somehow, based off of what you have said in the past, Chris, I was able to fairly accurately know what you were going to have for answers =p So in that light, yeah, that all made sense to me =p I'm actually worried that explaining my reasoning behind asking the questions will kill some of the discourse, but maybe it'll inspire even more =p
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Try not to think of it in terms of 'right' and 'wrong', we're fluid beings, and so our thoughts will inevitably change and evolve. The path you choose now will lead to the one in your future, and like Herbal says, "It's all good" (Unless you kill in the name of your god...
You might have picked up on this, Chris, but the reason I was asking is because of the fracturing of the Judeo-Christian factions. The question is almost entirely academic. Most of the organized western religous factions have the "do my thing or burn in hell" thing going, rather than the be groovy to one another and be uplifted thing. You being a buddhist, you're working from a serious advantage =p
There have been a lot of twentieth and twenty-first century discoveries of ancient documents and digs. All we can really do is hypothesize and interpret and cross-reference. I'm sure the truth is somewhere, but do we have any way to decisively figure out which truth (given certain assumptions, e.g. after I've picked the right direction, now we can say with certainty that this interpretation of this philosophy is the right one). Does that make any sense at all?
Quote:
Good, evil, hot, cold, all degrees of the same thing. Everything is a reflection of everything else. If we were created by a 'creator', then in my view, he popped us out and went on about his other buisness.
That is definitely a possibility. One that I consider from time to time academically, but I don't want to really believe deep down.
This question is actually a problem that I struggle with intellectually as a believer, though. I want to believe that the creator is all-knowing and all-powerful, like I was taught as a kid. That's most likely the focal point of my problem, but it's what I believe, admittedly because I want to. The problem arises that I can't understand how there is a battle between good and evil, or a battle of any sort for that matter, between an all-knowing, all powerful force and, well, anything at all. The battle would be over before it began.
Furthermore, this battle would be between an all-knowing, all-powerful creator and one of his creations. Erm...well. If the creator is all-knowing, then that includes the future (another possible source of idiocy in my perspective and another point that I hold onto in spite of the problems it causes). If the creator knew evil was going to arise from this or that being, the devil or otherwise, then why go down that path?? And if he did go down that path, he's all powerful... if the evil makes him unhappy and goes against his will, then it should be eradicated, shouldn't it? He's all-powerful, he doesn't like it, and it's in his creation. *Poof* it's done, right?
Those issues led me into a lot of reflection on free-will versus pre-destination. I think that could end up being a thread by itself with so much to say about it, but it led to the third question, which you answered thus:
Quote:
I cried when Vader saved Luke from the Emperor.
No, I would be happy to see all brought into the light. Drop away the Earthly/corporeal psychosis, and we're all the same- children of and through God.
Make any sense?
Wacky spiritual fun Chrisisall
I pretty much agree as far as I can here. If we're all children of the light and we all seek to be groovy with each other, then it should make us happy to see everyone make the journey. Hitler did some pretty messed up things for some pretty messed up reason, though. I'd venture to think that there are a *lot* of people would be pretty upset if someone like that can find grace for any reason.
The interesting point that
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Mighty strong words, pardner.
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
If Christianity is not going to destroy us with war and intolerance it will have to be cleansed of the Earthly Church, which means it will have to be cleansed of the Bible.
I happen to agree.
Two score and ten years ago, I threw a circular punch at my opponent in Karate class, and nailed him (we were padded), the teacher stopped us and informed me that "We don't use 'circular' strikes in this style." In that moment I understood what Bruce Lee was trying to say; organization corrupts, limits and controls the initial idea.
Independant Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
I think it's because children are deemed more innocent, or less culpable, than adults and don't "deserve" to suffer.
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
Yes, but that's exactly my point. Is the adult who led a really good life (as in, they were as decent a human being as you could ever see) but is still suffering and dying, deserve their suffering more than a child, just because they're older? In fact, couldn't you make the case that a person like this deserves their suffering less because they've struggled with their inherently evil nature all their life and still come out as a good person? Whereas the only reason the child is a good, innocent person is simply because they haven't been alive long enough to do something bad yet. That's the point I'm trying to make.
So, Chrisisall, my posts aren't invisible. Good to know. Anyway, I'm a little confused as to your reply. Are you saying that you don't think children deserve suffering less than others, but you simply brought up that point because you thought it would stir everybody up the most? If so, good call.
What is it, eighty replies now? Well, anyway, I'm of the opinion that without suffering, there is no joy. So I'll take the suffering as it comes and enjoy life in between.Oh, and Cartoon, I can still kill you with my brain.
"I'm having one of those things - a headache with pictures."
"Of course I'm right. And if I'm not, may we all be horribly crushed from above somehow."
Like books? Go to this thread: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=14862
to find out how to buy mine!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Amiton:
First, is there any way (in your esteemed opinions), that we can ever *know* what the truth to believe is or which path is the right one? Obviously, there is a decision to believe or not believe, and that evidence is on the table. If you choose to believe, however, how do you know which version is right?
Hi. Welcome to the discussion.
If you've seen my previous post to Burn, I recommend studying the Bible first and foremost. Naturally, I'd recommend a good translation (not a paraphrase -- which isn't a literal translation). None of us instinctively know how to study the Bible, so I recommend a brief study in hermeneutics, too.
Naturally, if you know Hebrew & Greek, all the better (I don't, and have to rely on very expensive interlinears, lexicons, and the like). The reason being -- we have good manuscript evidence that most of the Hebrew and Greek translations we have today (with only a few minor, non-critical variances) are accurate. Unfortunately, the scriptures were't written in English -- so no English translation will be as good (or relay as exactly) what the original language does.
I'd also recommend Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ" (which is very affordable in soft-cover), which goes into some keen arguments about Christianity. I found it very interesting (although, I admit I was already a believer when I read it).
If you want solid evidence, though, I don't think it exists in a subjective form that will satisfy everyone. As I said previously (in the last response), God wants us to believe by faith, but of course, our faith doesn't have to be (or shouldn't be) without some factual basis.
Quote:
Originally posted by Amiton:
Second, do you believe that the creator (under the assumption that there is one) is ominscient and omnipotent? How does that belief work in the construct of the battle between good and evil?
Yes (the Bible supports that assertion).
Well, we have it (on God's authority) that He is those things and will (in His perfect time) eventually set things right. (If I misunderstood your question, or you want more detail, please request it privately. I already feel like I'm hogging this thread, and it's taking forever to load with my decrepid dial-up).
Quote:
Originally posted by Amiton:
Third, would you be angry if someone who you considered deeply evil, Hitler for example, was in Heaven (or the positive afterlife of your choosing)?
Our first instinct is to be quite angry. I admit it, myself, that the thought of some child molester/serial killer getting in at the last minute (as Ted Bundy allegedly did) is quite disturbing. But, that's because we're seeing it from the eyes of someone who (quite frankly) is closer in nature to Hitler than we are to God.
I tried to explain this previously (our distance from God's holiness), but let me try another analogy (and I hate analogies)...
Let's say that we consider our own "moral" geographical location to be in Central Park, NYC.
Someone else we know may be located in Battery Park (about 5 miles south of us). Still others may be way down in Florida. We might argue that possibly Hitler would be somewhere around Buenos Aires (some conspiratorial nuts used to actually believe that)...
Anyhow, compared to the guy in Battery Park, Hitler's quite a ways away from us in our "moral" geographical positioning, right?
But then you throw God into the equation -- and where is God? Well, He's way off in another universe (not just another galaxy in our universe, but in a whole other universe altogether).
So, from our perspective, Hitler seems much worse than us (in Central Park). But, from God's perspective, Hitler and we are two peas of the same pod.
Hitler's punishment may be worse in hell than a more moralistic unbeliever, but either way, why go to hell in the first place, when there's already a ticket with your name on it waiting to be redeemed and take you to be with the Lord?
:smi
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by queenofthenorth:
Oh, and Cartoon, I can still kill you with my brain.
Oh -- thanks.
I'll sleep a whole lot more comfortably tonight, knowing that!
(And she wonders why people ignore her posts...)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by cartoon:
Oh -- thanks.
I'll sleep a whole lot more comfortably tonight, knowing that!
(And she wonders why people ignore her posts...)
Haha. My plan is coming to fruition.
"I'm having one of those things - a headache with pictures."
"Of course I'm right. And if I'm not, may we all be horribly crushed from above somehow."
Like books? Go to this thread: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=14862
to find out how to buy mine!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yep.
Originally posted by queenofthenorth:
Are you saying that you don't think children deserve suffering less than others, but you simply brought up that point because you thought it would stir everybody up the most?
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:Quote:Wow.
Originally posted by Causal:
To be intelletually responsible, I must hasten to add that the rules of predicate logic disallow the predication of existence. A number of philosophers, Aristotle and Kant among them, agreed in some form with the maxim that existence cannot be predicated of thing. This would jeopardize any argument which predicated existence to some particular.)
I asked for it, I guess
My main argument really is this:
a) People feel the need to fully understand everything.
b) People cannot fully understand everything.
c) God is part of everything.
Therefore:
d) People cannot fully understand God.
Those that say they 'know', simply cannot. They are formulating their answers from their own understanding, or the imparted understanding of others.
So be at peace with not fully understanding.
But anyone saying "I know..." smacks of pride...
Chrisisall, who knows this...
Excellent point; given our limited human intellects, we are not capable of anything approaching comprehensive knowledge, even of the most basic of subjects. But if this argument is going to have maximal force, you're going to have to apply it as broadly as possible. For instance, say, to physics. If it is the case, as you asserted in premise "b" above, that people cannot fully understand everything, then your argument could be applied thusly:
a) People feel the need to fully understand everything.
b) People cannot fully understand everything.
c) Physics is part of everything.
Therefore:
d) People cannot fully understand physics.
Yet people continue to believe that although they do not fully understand physics, they can understand enough to use in everyday life (automobiles, can openers and electrical lights, for instance). Furthermore, the reality that physics isn't fully known doesn't throw doubt on the truth of the physics that is[/is] known. And further, while asserting full knowledge would certainly "smack of pride", asserting confidence in the veracity of what is, in fact, known (even if it is incomplete, as science will always be) certainly does not indicate pridefulness, but rather proper confidence it what is known, even if full knowledge has not been attained.
Your argument (if taken to apply to "everything") suggests that we can never understand anything fully (which I would agree to). But to advance from there to the conclusion that nothing can ever be said to be known seems unwarranted. If that were, in fact, the case, then we would be forced into the most radical kind of skepticism, even doubting the existence of persistent objects (after all, in this system, I con't "know" that there are persistent objects). I'd wake up in the morning and look in the mirror and be astonished that I looked the same as I did the previous day (if that is, I could get over the shock that the mirror was still in the bathroom, or that I still had a bathroom at all). Such skepticism flies in the face of common experience, and philosophers from Plato to Adler have rejected it as absurd. Surely you're not advocating that nothing at all can ever be known with certitude? You seem to be presupposing some distinction between God and other subjects (such that God cannot be known, while other things can) and I'm curious what that presupposition is.
My second objection to your argument has to do with the concept of "fully known". Your conclusion that God cannot be fully known does not entail that God cannot be known at all, which you seem to suggest in saying,
Quote:
Those that say they 'know', simply cannot.
This statement doesn't follow from your argument. What does follow is something like this: "Those that say they 'fully know', simply cannot", which, of course, I would agree with. But again, the admission that a subject isn't comprehensively known does not mean that cannot be known at all. For instance, I know that the brain plays some role in consciousness and cognition (because whe
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I have to go to work now, so I must be brief.
Originally posted by Causal:
I have my own ideas on spirituality. I cannot prove them. They might be wrong. I may change them at some point. I'm okay with that.
You can't see, touch or coverse with a guy named God.
Therefore you can't prove or disprove his existence, period.(He said, as if it were important or final
)Later, Causal.
Wage-slave Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:Quote:I have to go to work now, so I must be brief.
Originally posted by Causal:
I have my own ideas on spirituality. I cannot prove them. They might be wrong. I may change them at some point. I'm okay with that.
You can't see, touch or coverse with a guy named God.
Therefore you can't prove or disprove his existence, period.(He said, as if it were important or final
Later, Causal.
Wage-slave Chrisisall
Cheers for work!
I agree with these points, with the following qualifications:
As regards seeing, touching, or conversing with God, you're right: this can't be done--IF by these you mean the conventional human understanding. I cannot see God as I could some physical object. This presents me no difficulty, though, because God isn't a physical object, so the inability to see Him as a physical object poses no real objection to His existence. Same deal with touching Him: not a physical object. And if by conversing you mean an audible-voice to audible-voice exchange, then no, I can't converse with Him either. But these presuppose a material monism when it comes to proof or disproof of something. I think that this is fairly limiting in terms of what counts as "proof". I can neither see nor touch my wife's love for me, but I see evidence of it in the way she treats me. Likewise, I can neither see nor touch God, but I take effects of God to be proof of His existence (I ascribe the material world to the work of God, I ascribe my own changed lifestyle to the work of God) (of course, I also acknowledge that there are counter-arguments to this, but for the sake of expediency, I won't go into a comprehensive defense). In short, while it is true that God isn't available for investigation in any tangible form, this neither neither disproves His existence nor does it mean that there is no proof of any kind.
As regards the statement that you can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God, I agree with that as well--IF you mean that God's existence cannot be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. But I believe that God's existence can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt--though I hasten to add that the same argument may not be convincing to everyone. There is something about God's character that doesn't want to be provable beyond the shadow of a doubt. Were that the case, no faith would be required--and just about every conception of God that I know of emphasizes faith. There is something about faith that is inherently pleasing to God; I've spent a good deal of time thinking about it, and would be happy to discuss it with you, but I don't want to hijack the board (plus, it's rather involved).
Just wanted to extend a kudos to all involved in this discussion. This is a prime example of the way things can work if everybody discusses things calmly and rationally. Bravo Zulu!
________________________________________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I can neither see nor touch electrons, but I can make them jump with a wave of my (magnetic) wand. Your wife's love is mainfest by the effect it has on her actions. I can't see temperature, but we can all measure it with a themrometer. Not trying to be a pr*ck, but the point is that God appears to have no consistent effect on the things that we CAN observe. And so when you say
Quote:you can not bring any evidence- even indirect evidence- that we can all look at and say "Oh yeah". If you COULD prove God beyond a reasonable doubt, we wouldn't all be talking about it anymore.
But I believe that God's existence can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt--though I hasten to add that the same argument may not be convincing to everyone
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Please, start that thread!
Originally posted by Causal:
There is something about faith that is inherently pleasing to God; I've spent a good deal of time thinking about it, and would be happy to discuss it with you, but I don't want to hijack the board (plus, it's rather involved).
I'm SURE you would get a positive response.
Don't make me do it; I start too many as it is
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:that would be a short wait for a train that comes.
Originally posted by SignyM:
If you COULD prove God beyond a reasonable doubt,
And that ain't how it happens, apparently.
ChrisisallMal-like
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
I can neither see nor touch electrons, but I can make them jump with a wave of my (magnetic) wand. Your wife's love is mainfest by the effect it has on her actions. I can't see temperature, but we can all measure it with a themrometer. Not trying to be a pr*ck, but the point is that God appears to have no consistent effect on the things that we CAN observe. And so when you sayQuote:you can not bring any evidence- even indirect evidence- that we can all look at and say "Oh yeah". If you COULD prove God beyond a reasonable doubt, we wouldn't all be talking about it anymore.
But I believe that God's existence can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt--though I hasten to add that the same argument may not be convincing to everyone
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
So I started by being all pissed off, then stopped and saw this:
Quote:
...you can not bring any evidence- even indirect evidence- that we can all look at and say "Oh yeah".
And you know, you're absolutely right, there isn't any evidence that we can all agree to. But agreement isn't requisite for truth. If I propose, "death in the world proves there is no God", any number of people will disagree with that. But their disagreement has nothing to do with the truth value of that proposition. The truth value of that proposition is fixed and it it is independent of what anyone thinks about it. Similarly, the truth value of propositions in support of God's existence is fixed and independent of human judgments concerning those propositions. And disagreement in judgment in no way changes or invalidates the truth value (whatever it may be). I guess this is just a long and technical way to say that just because you don't accept something as evidence doesn't make it so.
This whole thing is an exercise in presuppositions, in any event. The people on one side presuppose certain things, and use them as evidence for God's existence and give arguments for that; but of course, these arguments can't be proven conclusively apart from the presuppositional axioms that form their foundations. The people on the other side presuppose certain conditions which would preclude God's existence, then argue against the existence of God on those bases; but again, these can't be proven conclusively either.
You're certainly right, Signym; there is no possible way to prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that God exists. But be honest: you can't prove He doesn't, either.
________________________________________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by queenofthenorth:
Haha. My plan is coming to fruition.
Exactly what I wanted you to think.
Oh, and BTW, for those of you who weren't aware, this discussion has also been extended over into a "part 2" thread: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=18898 (for the sake of folks like myself who have dial-up, and don't have another few centuries to wait for this somewhat lengthy thread to load).
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:No, but being able to test an idea IS necessary for "truth". I'm not talking about a "logical" framework but a scientific one. In science, you can never "prove" a hypothesis. For example, I can hypothesize that cyanide is poisonous to humans- but I can't prove it because there may be a few rare exceptions. I'd have to test every single human. But what you can do is form your hypothesis in a way that is can be disproved. I can say that cyanide is non-toxic, and just one case can disprove that statement. That's called the null hypothesis.
And you know, you're absolutely right, there isn't any evidence that we can all agree to. But agreement isn't requisite for truth.
Quote:Well, I thought I was pretty clear about my assumptions: there is a universe, we are part of it, and we come to know it through our senses. And I thought I was pretty clear that these were assumptions.
This whole thing is an exercise in presuppositions, in any event. The people on one side presuppose certain things, and use them as evidence for God's existence and give arguments for that; but of course, these arguments can't be proven conclusively apart from the presuppositional axioms that form their foundations. The people on the other side presuppose certain conditions which would preclude God's existence, then argue against the existence of God on those bases; but again, these can't be proven conclusively either.
Quote:First of all, 'proving' something (in my book) is an unfair test. Can't be done. But hypotheses can be tested. And some hypotheses are so reliable that we have come to use them in our everyday life. If "god" were as reliable a working hypothesis as gravity or electrons, we would be using that concept to light our cities or grow our food. Unfortunately, "god" can't be turned on by flipping a switch or opening a valve. In fact, "god" as a hypothesis seems to be either ineffectual or so far outside of the real world that it can't even be tested. If it can't be tested, it can't be disproved.
You're certainly right, Signym; there is no possible way to prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that God exists. But be honest: you can't prove He doesn't, either.
In any case, IMHO you haven't even demonstrated god beyond a reasonable doubt. When do you supposed you might actually get around to it?
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME