View Full Version : Proof that the Christian god cannot exist
Proof that the Christian god cannot exist.
This is a revision and refinement of a post I made over a year ago but there are so many new members now that I felt it worth a revisit.
Omniscience vs. Human Free will. A Paradox.
Omniscience: Perfect knowledge of past and future events.
Free will: Freedom to choose between alternatives without external coercion.
Paradox: Statements or events that have contradictory and inconsistent properties.
Proposal:
Christianity cannot claim that God is omniscient and also claim that humans have free will. The claims form a paradox, a falsehood.
Reasoning:
If God is omniscient then even before we are born God will have complete knowledge of every decision we are going to make.
Any apparent choice we make regarding the acceptance or denial of Jesus as a savior is predetermined. This must be true to satisfy the assertion that God is omniscient. Effectively we have no choice in the matter. What we think is free will is an illusion. Our choices have been coerced since we exist and act according to the will of God.
Alternatively if human free will is valid, meaning that the outcome of our decisions is not pre-determined or coerced, then God cannot be omniscient, since he would not know in advance our decisions.
Question:
If God knows the decision of every individual, before they are born, regarding the acceptance or denial of Jesus as a savior, then why does he create one set of individuals destined for heaven and another set destined for eternal damnation? This seems unjust, perverse and particularly evil.
Conclusions:
If God is omniscient then humans do not have free will (see argument above) and the apparent arbitrary choice of God to condemn many individuals to eternal damnation is evil. I.e. God does not possess the property of omni benevolence and is therefore not worth our attention.
If humans have true free will then God cannot be omniscient (see argument above). If he is not omniscient then he also cannot be omnipotent since knowledge of the future is a prerequisite for total action. Without these abilities God can no longer be deemed a god – i.e. God does not exist.
If humans do not have free will then the choice of whether to choose Jesus as a savior or not makes total nonsense of Christianity since the choice is pre-determined and we are merely puppets at the hands of an evil monster.
Cris
And I like it now. The simplicity of the argument may seem deceptive to those wrapped in the mystery of God. However, it is as simple as it seems. This is perhaps the greatest irony of centuries of somewhat-careful theological construction. Perhaps even more amusing is the idea that the theology might have worked out except that it is based entirely on a priori points, and those apparently cannot be revised. An interesting application of a logical structure that would eventually find its home amid the scientific method. There is, of course, nothing scientific about the nature of the a priori, and that's why the theology doesn't work.
But the simple fact is that whether we accept the work of Catholic theologians, and, later, the Protestant Reformers, it all diversifies from the same faulty a priori. Much like an error in an algebraic formula will stand out in the next generation; much like a genetic mutation will represent itself in the next generation--so, too, do the errors of theology declare themselves more and more boldly with each passing incarnation.
I think the Christian response might be severely limited: the two most acceptable methods of addressing this paradox are unacceptable to the faith: Either the Bible has misguided human perception, which is unacceptable for the Universal accessibility and simplicity of God's message; or God simply doesn't exist that way and the Bible has less credibility than Iron John.
You've spelled it out quite simply, Cris, and without assumptions of faith that cannot be evidenced. In this case, the Christians have painted us a portrait, and we apparently see it quite differently than they. Personally, I'm in definitive agreement with your arguement. Paradox accepted, impossibility of this God demonstrated.
Good show, mate ....
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
Thanks tiassa,
I’ve tried hard to derive equally compelling arguments on other aspects of God’s alleged abilities but none come out so well. The Omni-benevolence factor and the presence of evil in the world should work but the argument is not so sharp.
Of course my proof doesn’t show that a God doesn’t exist just that the Christian definition is impossible. But then that’s what happens when one plays with super superlatives. I guess if Christianity were to attempt to re-define its God to avoid the paradoxes like the above then really there wouldn’t be much left worth following.
Cris
It's a strong argument, Cris.
One down, a few to go. I wish it was that simple... The problem of course being that understanding the argument requires accepting logic, which, it seems doesn't quite agree with everyone. It's sometimes pretty darn hard to reason with the 'faithful'. But then again, I always liked the motto simple software for simple minds ;)
If I would be a Christian, I'd probably answer the argument as follows: It only means that God in his glory exists outside the boundaries of space and time, and his mind works in a way you couldn't possibly even begin to comprehend. His being compasses all that ever was or will be, spanning time from beginning to end simultaneously. Blah blah blah.
With a lot of extra capitals and pomposity. (No, I'm not a Creationist in disguise. Just heard enough of their arguments.) ;)
By the way, I always felt that hell might not be such a bad place after all: it would be populated with people of at least a somewhat higher average IQ than heaven. It wouldn't get dull, that's for sure.
Arto
Porfiry
06-23-01, 06:59 PM
it would be populated with people of at least a somewhat higher average IQ than heaven
LOL! :D
Arto,
You are right of course; the argument depends on rational thinking (use of reason), and faith doesn’t qualify.
But I think the proof works no matter how many super superlatives are added. Whether the god is semi-natural, supernatural, outside of space and time, or whatever, it still comes down to – if he knows what we are going to do then human actions are pre-determined – i.e. free will is an illusion, and he remains a mere puppeteer.
Oh yes and I like the hell part – yup looks like all the rational thinkers will go to hell – should provoke some really good debates without interruptions from the idiots who will have gone upstairs. So I’ll see you in hell:D
Cris
DEVILDOG
06-26-01, 02:57 AM
Originally posted by Arto
By the way, I always felt that hell might not be such a bad place after all: it would be populated with people of at least a somewhat higher average IQ than heaven. It wouldn't get dull, that's for sure.
Arto
Not to mention, that's where all MY friends will be. How 'bout ya'll friends.:D
If God is omniscient then humans do not have free will (see argument above) and the apparent arbitrary choice of God to condemn many individuals to eternal damnation is evil. I.e. God does not possess the property of omni benevolence and is therefore not worth our attention.
If humans have true free will then God cannot be omniscient (see argument above). If he is not omniscient then he also cannot be omnipotent since knowledge of the future is a prerequisite for total action. Without these abilities God can no longer be deemed a god – i.e. God does not exist.
If humans do not have free will then the choice of whether to choose Jesus as a savior or not makes total nonsense of Christianity since the choice is pre-determined and we are merely puppets at the hands of an evil monster.
cris,
my point of vue is that we have free will and that god is omniscient.i also think that hell and heaven exist because of our free will.knowing that god is omniscient and omnipotent and that he is the one who gave us full freedom to act , he created hell for our sins and heaven ,i'll say as a reward for our good actions.
life is about choices.
Hi Sensei,
Welcome to sciforums.
my point of vue is that we have free will and that god is omniscient.i also think that hell and heaven exist because of our free will.knowing that god is omniscient and omnipotent and that he is the one who gave us full freedom to act , he created hell for our sins and heaven ,i'll say as a reward for our good actions.
life is about choices.
Everyone is free of course to hold their own points of view, but the issue here is whether your view represents truth or not. Your statements really just represent an unsupported assertion; you have not addressed the problem of the paradox.
If the Christian god is omniscient then you will have the exact same analogous attributes as a computer program. Everything you do in your life and everything you are going to do has already been pre-determined (programmed by God). The computer program has absolutely no choice as to how it behaves once it has been started. In the same way if God created you according to his universal plans and if he has perfect knowledge of all future events then he has effectively programmed you to carry out those events. You have absolutely no free choice in the matter. Hence free will is a complete illusion, and Christianity is a mockery since it depends on free will to make that choice of being saved or not.
The only way free will is possible is if your future choices are unknown, i.e. have not been pre-programmed. In which case God cannot be omniscient and is hence severely limited in his capabilities, to the point where he cannot be a God according to Christian definitions.
Cris
Just stumbled upon the following link. It's an article written by Peter Kirby where the Omniscience VS Free will question is explored at some length and detail: http://home.earthlink.net/~kirby/xtianity/freewill.html
I include here a couple of sample quotes from the page. All emphases are mine ;)
Others have tried saying that "God is outside time" and "God observes all time." This talk of "outside" and "observing" time is very anthropomorphic, and I don't know what the theist "really" means when they say that God is "outside time." Did God walk out the door of "Time" restaurant for a smoke or something? Can I go outside time for a walk? Is God sitting on his couch watching space-time on his 4d television?
...
However, I do not see how compatibilism fits with a theism in which the creator God judges men based on their actions. This would be like a programmer punishing a computer because it gave the wrong answer. If God is an omnipotent creator, he would logically have simply made humans do what he wanted them to do in the first place (instead of making them so they do what he doesn't want and then punishing them for so doing). Thus, compatibilism makes God an incompetent.
And here's a very relevant quote for this discussion just now starting over at our forum:
These kinds of responses are frustrating because they are terribly vague. In some cases, such as Bedding's, the argument seems to go right over the head of the Christian, who simply insists that there couldn't be any inconsistencies in their cherished beliefs. If anyone cares to respond to my post, it would be much easier if you (1) pointed out the *specific* premise that you deny and (2) explained *exactly* why you do so, at length if you like, in light of my own discussion of the premises.
Also intriguing is the concept of whether an omniscient God would know his own future actions; i.e. would God himself have free will? Somewhat similar to the good old "Can God create a rock so big he can't lift it?"
Arto
Arto,
Thanks very much for the link. That's some heavy logic in parts but it seems to reach the same conclusions. I like this final quote in particular.
I will agree that omniscience _by itself_ does not necessarily imply a lack of "free will", since there is no explicit control being exercised.
However, if you add the attributes of Omnipotence and Creator of the universe to your definition of God, then there can be no "free will" of any kind. The "control" missing from the omniscience-alone argument is the act of creation. This control is absolute due to God's omnipotence. A God with these attributes in fact _must_ have explicitly caused each and every event that will ever occur (done at the moment of creation). The only way to allow for some sort of free will to exist is to modify God's attributes such that He is not either omnipotent, omniscient, or the creator of everything.
For example, "free will" would be theoretically possible if:
1. God didn't know what his creations would do (not omniscient).
or
2. God didn't have the ability to control every aspect of what He was creating (not omnipotent).
or
3. God didn't create the entire universe (not creator).
Without modifying one of these three attributes, there is no alternative to a deterministic universe with each event explicitly controlled by God.
If the Christian god is omniscient then you will have the exact same analogous attributes as a computer program. Everything you do in your life and everything you are going to do has already been pre-determined (programmed by God). The computer program has absolutely no choice as to how it behaves once it has been started. In the same way if God created you according to his universal plans and if he has perfect knowledge of all future events then he has effectively programmed you to carry out those events. You have absolutely no free choice in the matter. Hence free will is a complete illusion, and Christianity is a mockery since it depends on free will to make that choice of being saved or not.
The only way free will is possible is if your future choices are unknown, i.e. have not been pre-programmed. In which case God cannot be omniscient and is hence severely limited in his capabilities, to the point where he cannot be a God according to Christian definitions
hi
cris,let's clarify the concept of free will.as you know man is open to the world,his destiny isn't set in stone and how his life progresses
depend on an extent on the choices he makes; You can make a choice in your way of life or a choice in the actions you take .
we have a very real hand in making meaning for our selves ( even the refusal to make a choice is a choice).
you can't get always what you want and not all choices we make are going to work out,and we are not able to know wich are possible and wich are not.our choices are not pre-programmed so free will BUT doesn't mean that god is not omnicient,because why judjement,why hell why heaven ,if by GOD i'm programmed to be a criminal why should i pay for my CRIMES.in fact , according to me
2 things are programmed the day you will come to the world and the day your soul will be taken back (god is omniscient)now god let you do what you want in this period of time he gave people the power to decide for them selves ,man is the only artisan of his
destiny, GOD want it like that therefor more understandable the
existance of heaven and hell.
he created heaven and hell because he gave us free will and because he knew that this free will can lead us to the right or wrong way(therefor GOD is omnicient);important thing without programming our choices;you make your choices he will judje you at the end.
one more important thing i'm not imposing this opinion,it's just some thoughts that i want to share with all of you.
thank you:)
Although I don't post too often in the Religious Debate forum feeling that I really don't care to play mind games regular like, every so often something comes up and I have to stick my two cents in. This time it's the 'free will' bit.
A good while back, like maybe when I was nursing, I realized my control over my life was quite limited, including my choice to live. And then, many years later, I had an epiphany: I exited an airplane, went into free-fall and realized that until I decided to pull the rip-cord I had complete control over my life! It was solely my choice as to whether or not I lived or died ... that once I decided to pull the rip-cord, and did, others would again have a degree of control over my life.
Needless to say, I've exercised my 'free will' numberous times since, pulled the rip-cord, and am around to say (for what it's worth): The only time I have felt completely free, totally in control of my life, my future, has been the time I have spend in free-fall.
Cris, would you dispute the union of all free willing spirits constitutes omniscience?
Sensei,
Consider a criminal living in one of the seedier areas of LA. He came from a broken home, his parents were criminals, he had very little schooling, and he turns out to be a serial killer. He is quite evil and ruthless by normal standards. Does he have any free will to choose his actions?
If we say there is NOT a god or creator or controlling influence over the destiny of humans then clearly all his decisions are his own. He has complete free will to choose. Although some might say his environment and parental genes played a major role in his eventual psyche, and that his choices were going to be seriously biased – but that is another matter. And I am ignoring for the moment the philosophy of determinism.
Now consider a creator god who is omniscient, i.e. has perfect knowledge of all events throughout the whole of time.
Before this creator creates the universe he will have complete knowledge of everything that is going to happen, including all the actions and murders perpetrated by our evil LA citizen – who at this point of course doesn’t exist. In fact this god will know the actions and decisions that are going to be made by every human throughout their entire lives. He also knows with perfect certainty, which individuals will go to hell and which to heaven. In effect the whole of time has been mapped and is pre-determined. This must be true if your god is omniscient.
Apparently content with this plan he initiates the creation of the universe.
My question is how could our criminal be seen to have free will? He is completely powerless to do anything other than those actions that this god had pre-determined before the universe began. If our criminal were somehow to do some action that had not been pre-determined, i.e. an action that the god had not foreseen then this god could not be omniscient.
It is simply impossible for an omniscient creator god to coexist with people who have free will. You have no choice but to choose one or the other. Which do you choose? If you have free will then your god cannot be omniscient, if you insist on his omniscience then you have no free will.
Cris
Chagur,
But you did make the decision to pull the chord, right? Or am I talking to a ghost?
So what made you pull the chord? Determinism says that for every effect there is a cause. You pulled the chord (the effect), because of an instinctive survival instinct (the cause). The survival instinct (the effect this time) resulted from millions of years of evolutionary mutations (the cause). Etc, etc.
So here I could claim that again you really had no free will in your choice. Your action was determined by a very long series of causes and effects. What you think is free will is an illusion.
If you are not suffering from any mental ailments (e.g. clinical depression etc) then I’d bet that if you were in the same situation again you would still pull the chord. You really have no choice.
Please don’t take my bet. I already feel guilty about Truestory. Don’t ask.
Cris
Originally posted by frink
Cris, would you dispute the union of all free willing spirits constitutes omniscience?
Frink,
Sorry my friend I don't understand your question.
Cris
thecurly1
06-29-01, 06:34 PM
God is not something the simple human mind can comprehend. There is no debate between free will and omniscient being. The reason he is omniscient is because he knows everything. By debating the subject he has won. We already admit for God to exist he must be all knowing and almighty, which makes him infinitely intelligent. We are ultimately just a bunch of idiots relative to him. This is too complicated for anyone to understand, no matter how smart you think you are.
My final personal opinion may shock you all, God gave us free will. This is a gift from him to control our lives. I understand that this supposably isn't possible if we have free will, which would make the future malleable. Once again, this is too complicated for us to understand. Millions have tried ever since Christianity was founded, but no one has came up with any argument that holds up with enough validity. If they did no one would believe anymore. That is our answer.
Curly1,
God is not something the simple human mind can comprehend.
That is a cop out and a call to agnosticism (the claim that God is unknowable and incomprehensible). If you are a theist then be prepared to support your claims. You are also being ingenuous; you cannot make the claim that your god is omniscient and than state that you can’t explain how that is possible. If you KNOW he is omniscient then explain how you know that, and if you KNOW that humans have free will then explain how you know that. And if you can do all that then you must then explain the paradox I have proposed. If you are indeed an agnostic theist then you are not in a position to make any claims about any aspect of your god.
The reason he is omniscient is because he knows everything. The more you claim he knows the deeper becomes the paradox. If indeed he knows everything then he knows everything we are going to do – that is pre-determination again and prevents free will. Your answer that you don’t know how that is possible is unacceptable. The issue is not difficult. You are experiencing difficulty and are unable to explain it because it is a true paradox, an impossibility – hence your cowardly call to incomprehensibility.
This is too complicated for anyone to understand, no matter how smart you think you are. No it isn’t, it is simply impossible. You are the only ones who cannot understand it.
God gave us free will. This is a gift from him to control our lives. So a gift huh? So normally, without this gift, he created us as mindless puppets that he could control, and what, the gift was an afterthought? – Oops – this game is too boring, what can I give my Sims to make them more interesting?
Once again, this is too complicated for us to understand. Millions have tried ever since Christianity was founded, but no one has came up with any argument that holds up with enough validity. So maybe it is time to accept that there is no answer, stop smashing your head again a brick wall trying to solve something that is impossible. Accept the obvious inevitable outcome that your god as you have defined him cannot exist. It is time to face reality.
If they did no one would believe anymore. Now you are beginning to see the light. I have explained it quite adequately; the paradox is quite valid – your god cannot exist.
Cris
Cris--
So a gift huh? So normally, without this gift, he created us as mindless puppets that he could control, and what, the gift was an afterthought? Forgive the intrusion, but I believe that, as Genesis has it, free will was a mistake. An accident.
Oh, that's right, God doesn't make mistakes, right? Hmm .... so God gave us free will through a method calculated as to require our continued dependence, and thus inspire an "elective" revocation of free will. The absolute necessity of free will is required for faith, but God cannot stand the full potential of that free will, and must proscribe it. It's an ugly, ugly illustration that I've offered before: God is a shadow in a dark parking lot that growls in your ear and lets you know the knife is there--you lie still and take it, and try not to cry too loudly. And, much like she who chooses of free will to lie in the dark and take it--after all, it's a choice to do what he says, and not get stabbed to death--so, too, is compliance with God's demands no guarantee of anything. Just like that shadow can leave the knife in you anyway, God works in mysterious ways, and can punish you anyway. God wants childlike acceptance and obedience; strangely, what God doesn't understand is that the children may have received the instructions wrong. Apparently, it's the children's fault if the Father doesn't feel like communicating properly.So maybe it is time to accept that there is no answer, stop smashing your head again a brick wall trying to solve something that is impossible. It is only compassion toward human injury that makes me want to stop anyone from smashing their own head against a brick wall. Otherwise, I'm inclined to let people abuse themselves to death if they are so compelled. To be honest, I'm more worried about the smashing of heads other than one's own against brick walls.
To the other, I should probably remove my grinning, nosy self from this one for now ... just a couple of cents because it's Friday and one doctor says I'm healthy (two to go) ... so ... yeah. Unfortunately, I don't get to drink this weekend. Oh, well. Tangents, tangents ....
thanx much,
Tiassa :cool:
thecurly1
06-29-01, 10:40 PM
What I was simply trying to state, in this my last reply. Is that I don't believe that simple humans can understand something as complex as God, no matter what monotheist religion your talking about. If there is a God, which I believe there is I'm saying I don't think he would want us to figure it all out. Once again, if there is a God, which I believe there is, he would have control of what we know. Which isn't a violation of free will. Free will being control over circumstances, not information.
THAT IS ALL I'M GONNA SAY ABOUT THIS. FROM NOW ON I DON'T THINK I'LL DABBLE INSIDE THE RELIGIOUS THREADS.
Thecurly1,
Sorry curly1, it wasn’t personal. Thanks for introducing your viewpoint. I do understand what you are saying, but it is not a new perspective on the issue. I could argue with your new post of course but I don’t think you are ready to debate what you believe. I hope maybe I have given you something to think about. Come back when you are ready for a tough time.
So here is an ending thought – if he really didn’t want us to figure things out he should have removed our ability to reason.
Have fun whatever you do.
Cris
Tiassa,
In a teasing mood huh?
Perhaps ‘smashing’ was a little too graphical, in Britain I’d use a different phrase but I think it has a different implication in American English, like we say rubber instead of eraser, for example. Oh well no matter.
Glad your health sounds like it is improving. As for me, the last 3 weeks have been hellish – bad exposure to poison oak – a quarter of my body became covered in gross open oozing sores, definitely one of the worst experiences of my life. But the itching – ahhhh! So now I know that a nanogram (1 billionth of a gram) of the poison is enough to cause a rash, and a ¼ ounce is enough to affect every person on the planet. Definitely nasty stuff.
So enjoy the rest of your Friday.
Cris
DEVILDOG
06-30-01, 04:52 AM
Originally posted by Cris
Sensei,
Consider a criminal living in one of the seedier areas of LA. He came from a broken home, his parents were criminals, he had very little schooling, and he turns out to be a serial killer. He is quite evil and ruthless by normal standards. Does he have any free will to choose his actions?
Cris
Cris,
I'm waiting for the day when Christians decide that serial killers were put here by their god to control the Earth's population, therefore they can say that god IS a supreme being. They will probably say that those murdered will automatically enter heaven whether good or evil. There's pretty much no use in argueing with them they don't want to here it, most I've met that hear I'm an atheist are quick to say I don't have an open mind.[FONT=century gothic][SIZE=1]
Now you are beginning to see the light. I have explained it quite adequately; the paradox is quite valid – your god cannot exist.
cris your principal goal is to proove that god does not mine is to proove the contrary ;so in order to proove that god exist (without discussing of free will,because i already gave my opinion concernig this point"god gave us free will";so by prooving that god exiz i also proove that we have free will.)i'll argue that if God exists, then the objectivity of moral values, moral duties, and moral accountability is secured, but that in the absence of God, that is, if God does not exist, then morality is just a human convention, that is to say, morality is wholly subjective and non-binding. We might act in precisely the same ways that we do in fact act, but in the absence of God, such actions would no longer count as good (or evil), since if God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist. Thus, we cannot truly be good without God. On the other hand, if we do believe that moral values and duties are objective, that provides moral grounds for believing in God.
ok now considere thehypothesis that God exists. First, if God exists, objective moral values exist. To say that there are objective moral values is to say that something is right or wrong independently of whether anybody believes it to be so. It is to say, for example, that Nazi anti-Semitism was morally wrong, even though the Nazis who carried out the Holocaust thought that it was good; and it would still be wrong even if the Nazis had won World War II and succeeded in exterminating or brainwashing everybody who disagreed with them. On the theistic view, objective moral values are rooted in God. God's own holy and perfectly good nature supplies the absolute standard against which all actions and decisions are measured. God's moral nature is what Plato called the "Good." He is the locus and source of moral value. He is by nature loving, generous, just, faithful, kind, and so forth. Moreover, God's moral nature is expressed in relation to us in the form of divine commands which constitute our moral duties or obligationsFinally, on the theistic hypothesis God holds all persons morally accountable for their actions. Evil and wrong will be punished; righteousness will be vindicated. Good ultimately triumphs over evil, and we shall finally see that we do live in a moral universe after all. Despite the inequities of this life, in the end the scales of God's justice will be balanced. Thus, the moral choices we make in this life are infused with an eternal significance(so the example of the criminal that you gave me is going down if i can say so).
If God does not exist, then it is plausible to think that there are no objective moral values, that we have no moral duties, and that there is no moral accountability . Even if there were objective moral values and duties under naturalism, they are irrelevant because there is no moral accountability. If life ends at the grave, it makes no difference whether one lives as i don't know a stalin or a saint. "If there is no immortality, then all things are permitted."
we hold, as it seems rational to do, that objective moral values and duties do exist, then we have good grounds for believing in the existence of God. We cannot, then, truly be good without God; but if we can in some measure be good, then it follows that God exists.
there is others point that i should have submit but i don't want to go further;hey time to go to bed.
thanx:)
sensei.
May we thank you for your very kind interest in these most pressing and salient matters.
Oh, wait, how did that happen? Sorry.
Anyway Cris, about the union of all free will constituting omniscience:
All the arguments so far imply that God and man are wholly seperate entities. I am just suggesting that our souls, along with every spec in the universe is elementary to God. You and I are every bit as much a part of God as the rapist, the theif, Jesus, my dog, past present and future. Together, our collective is omniscience, our mortal bodies keeping us seperate until they expire. And yes, I have watched Star Wars too many times.
May we thank you for all your kind actions on behalf of all the children now...dang! There is goes again.
thecurly1
06-30-01, 08:23 PM
You did introduce me to a new point of view that I haven't experenced. Thanks for not ragging on my believes. Lets get along, God or no God.
I'm surprised that you asked, Cris.;)
All that that post was about was my feeling that in life there are a whole bunch of factors that affect whether you live or die, many of which you have not the slightest control over, and that I was fortunate enough to have an experience that allowed me to feel that for a few moments at least, I was in complete control of my life.
It was not a segue from the 'free will' discussion, at least in my mind, any more than your relating your experience with poison oak was a segue from 'Proof that the Christian god cannot exist'. But yes, I did refer to exercising my 'free will' in terms of being in total in control of my life, and I can understand the point you wanted to make.
Although, the expression you used 'an instinctive survival instinct' kind of threw me. Is there any other instinct than an instinctive one?:cool:
The other thing that threw me was your equating a desire to say 'Time to leave, folks. Thanks for all the fun' to a mental ailment (e.g. a clinical depression etc). Don't you think that it could be a rational decision?
Chagur,
So you think you are alive huh? OK I’ll give you the benefit of any doubt. :D
Your experience is interestingly different from other life experiences. Usually it is necessary to take some deliberate action to die, e.g. a gun to the head, jumping in front of a train, etc. But in your experience it was necessary to take a clear and deliberate action to live. I can’t think of too many scenarios where that occurs. So I think your realization that something special was happening was quite understandable, but only because it was unusual, and the contrast was so stark.
If we look at the normal flow of life, where absence of action is perceived as being able to survive without effort, then we see that your action was quite different to normal flow. However, this is only a perception. This ‘normal flow’ of life does not end in survival, the ultimate ending so far is death, if not from an illness but from senescence (old age), and many people if not most die before they gain old age.
Here are some decisions that can be made that enable people to take that positive control of their lives: Choosing healthy food, exercising regularly, concentration while driving, choosing an interesting job, taking steps to reduce stress levels, etc. These are real positive actions that can compare with you pulling a ripcord; the difference is that the effects take longer to materialize.
Perhaps I am not like you in that I see very few things in my life over which I do not have positive control. I am constantly re-evaluating my actions for purpose and direction. Planning ahead and setting goals help me achieve what I want. Most of this requires positive and deliberate actions. In 1996 I watched my sister (then 55) suffer and die from cancer. That is one of those rare cases where we have little personal control, but as a species we can strive to solve these afflictions – it takes planning and positive actions.
This leads me into one of my primary reasons for rejecting religions, and more positively working towards their ultimate downfall, especially Christianity. I have seen so many Christians fatalistically accept their misfortunes as the will of God. Or if they are healthy then they explicitly put their trust in their God that he will keep them healthy. And even when that fails, the approach is still that that must be the will of God. An acceptance that they have no control of their fate, that no effort they can make will make a difference. This I see as the greatest evil of religious acceptance and an attitude that helps to weaken the natural human instinct for survival, so in that respect religions are unnatural and morally evil in the sense that they detract from life.
So this brings me to operating on instinct. Do you really believe that as a rational and healthy person you could decide not to pull that ripcord? The adrenalin rush, the terror you would feel that you were about to be extinguished, all would work on your hormonal and nervous systems to encourage you to pull the cord. Only someone who was deranged and unable to think rationally would choose to die. Perhaps my survival instinct is stronger than yours, but I cannot imagine a scenario where I would choose to die. This again is where I see the evil in religions – they have again fatalistically accepted death as a good thing, it is their gateway to a better life – ahhh!
In these times of scientific breakthroughs, where anti-aging solutions are being developed daily, and where a total solution is on the near horizon, or where computing power and mind-uploading offer real potential, then I will strive with all my might to survive long enough to take all the benefits that science can offer. I do not see death as inevitable and I wish many more would adopt the same attitude and help fight harder for the science that we need. Religions seem to stand in the way of that progress, they are blocking the much needed stem-cell research, and they assume that death is a way to meet their God, and they make this assumption based on no more than ancient mythologies and with absolutely no credible evidence or proof. So not only do I disagree with religious beliefs, I also have no tolerance for those that hold such views, and I see religionists as positively obstructive to my personal survival.
Until I see at least a scrap of evidence that a god exists then I am assuming that I have free will and I can run my life without having my fate pre-determined by some mystical supernatural being. I will continue to treat every misfortune and every windfall with equal regard – they are events to be experienced from which I can learn and grow.
“Instinctive survival instinct” – hmm – I kinda overworked that sentence didn’t I? At age 48 I’m beginning to experience serious memory loss – can’t remember more than one thought or one word at a time. Perhaps I should read back what I write sometimes.
Have fun. Hope I covered all your points. Ah, probably more than you expected, sorry.
Cris
Usually it is necessary to take some deliberate action to die, e.g. a gun to the head, jumping in front of a train, etc. But in your experience it was necessary to take a clear and deliberate action to live.
Although the relating of my experience was extraneous to the thread, and I wondered if I should bother, your reply, Cris, makes me glad that I did.
I'm not near as introspective as you and the thought that a number of my activities over the years have required deliberate action to survive never occurred to me. I guess I still do what I did as a kid: take it for granted that my world is the same world that most other people experience. One of these days I accept that's not the case.
Also, it puts an interesting twist on the position a number have taken: 'You must have a death wish!' A position that I have never been able to understand. I've always felt that, if anything, I had a greater appreciation, and enjoyment, of life knowing that death might only be a stupid mistake away.
Again, thanks, Cris.
Chagur,
Awright, no problem.
Cris
Live long and prosper.
Hi sensei,
Interesting post. Thank your for reducing its size, I saw your earlier version where it looked like you had included some long cut and pastes from a reference book. I was worried that I would be arguing against a professional researcher.
Cris your principal goal is to prove that god does not mine is to prove the contrary; so in order to prove that god exist (without discussing of free will, because I already gave my opinion concerning this point “god gave us free will”; so by proving that god exist I also prove that we have free will.)
I think that what you are saying is that if you can prove that your god exists then that will also prove that human free will exists. Please correct me if I have misunderstood your intention.
You have set yourself several impossible tasks. The essential essence of every theistic religion is that there is no proof for the existence of the selected deity. This is the reason why faith is stressed. Religious faith is the belief in something where there is no proof. If there was proof then you would have no need of faith and your god could be subject to scientific study and become part of human knowledge. If there was any type of proof then be assured that the pope would be proclaiming this on every radio and TV station on the planet. Be very sure that there is nothing that can be in any way mistaken for proof for the existence of a god. Your claims of proof have failed before you begin.
i'll argue that if God exists, then the objectivity of moral values, moral duties, and moral accountability is secured, but that in the absence of God, that is, if God does not exist, then morality is just a human convention, that is to say, morality is wholly subjective and non-binding.
Ok, and I’ll do my best to show you where I think you are mistaken. But boy you have chosen a very contentious approach. Subjectivity versus objectivity is not a simple topic, and morality is similarly evasive to define.
Ok let’s start with morality. This subject concerns human behavior and especially the distinction between good and bad behavior according to generally accepted standards. What you want to show is that an independent and impartial authority must define morality so that it could be deemed objective. At the same time you are implying that humans are incapable of defining their own standards for morality. Is that correct?
We might act in precisely the same ways that we do in fact act, but in the absence of God, such actions would no longer count as good (or evil), since if God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist. That does not follow. Your logic is invalid.
You are assuming good and evil can only be defined as objective if God exists. But you have not proved that and so cannot use it as part of your argument. You must first define morality and explain why humans cannot define it objectively. But I am further confused when you say that even if our actions are the same whether God exists or not, somehow without a God we would not be able to perceive whether these actions are good or evil. But if the actions are the same then it really doesn’t make any difference whether we know or not. In which case if God did exist then he is redundant and irrelevant.
Here is a definition of morality that is widely accepted. “Good is anything that enhances life and evil is anything that detracts from life”. This covers almost all aspects of human life, from murder to love. Then add to this the fundamental basis of modern western law – “everyone is free to do anything they wish accept where such actions would interfere with the freedom of others”, and you have an extensive and objective set of guidelines for effective moral human behavior. Further refinements and additional details provide us everything we need and completely without the need for a god to exist.
Thus, we cannot truly be good without God. On the other hand, if we do believe that moral values and duties are objective that provides moral grounds for believing in God. Your conclusion is invalid since your premises are not established facts. Further I have shown that in your example God is irrelevant for effective moral behavior and I have demonstrated one example of how humans can objectively define a workable moral code.
ok now consider the hypothesis that God exists. First, if God exists, objective moral values exist. Why? Again you have not shown a proof, you are simply making an assertion. Your statement has no value.
To say that there are objective moral values is to say that something is right or wrong independently of whether anybody believes it to be so. No that is entirely false. If nobody believes or supports the moral code then it serves no one. Human morality must be a code of values required by man for his survival, well-being and happiness. A rational moral code must be based on man’s need for objective values, and his needs to determine those goals that are conducive to his well-being. A simple example: Food is of value to man, he needs it for his survival, but poison is not. If man is to survive then he must value food and disvalue poison. Man’s evaluations of a moral code must be based on, and agree with those things that are actually of value to him.
It is to say, for example, that Nazi anti-Semitism was morally wrong, even though the Nazis who carried out the Holocaust thought that it was good; and it would still be wrong even if the Nazis had won World War II and succeeded in exterminating or brainwashing everybody who disagreed with them. My human defined code above “good is anything that enhances life… evil detracts…” fits this example perfectly – why would we need a god to help us on this?
On the theistic view, objective moral values are rooted in God. Yes and they are designed specifically for the benefit of God and not for humans. In terms of Christianity God’s commandments are what you are calling this independent and objective moral code. The essence of such a code is authoritarianism based on a set of rules designed to serve God. The requirement for man is unquestioned obedience, whether he supports the rules or not. Disobedience is met with ultimate punishment. All you are supporting here is tyranny and terrorism, and these actions are considered by most humans as morally evil.
God's own holy and perfectly good nature supplies the absolute standard against which all actions and decisions are measured. God's moral nature is what Plato called the "Good." He is the locus and source of moral value. He is by nature loving, generous, just, faithful, kind, and so forth. Moreover, God's moral nature is expressed in relation to us in the form of divine commands, which constitute our moral duties or obligations. Well most of the bible describes mass murder, torture, terror, extreme threats, all perpetrated by the Christian god. I see no goodness or love in such a monster. And divine commands as I have already described represent the tyranny under which man would have to submit.
Finally, on the theistic hypothesis God holds all persons morally accountable for their actions. Evil and wrong will be punished; righteousness will be vindicated. Yes a code defined by God for the benefit of God, who demands unquestioning obedience (the attribute of tyrants) and if that is not forthcoming then terror of punishment and then the ultimate punishment of eternal torture – no mercy – the attributes of evil and the terrorist.
Good ultimately triumphs over evil, and we shall finally see that we do live in a moral universe after all. That is a fantasy perpetrated by Hollywood movies. Believe this at your own peril. If we can rid the world of irrational religions and their dangerous fundamentalist threats then we may be able to survive. Their destruction will eliminate the spread of ignorance and the fatalistic approach to human survival.
If God does not exist, then it is plausible to think that there are no objective moral values, that we have no moral duties, and that there is no moral accountability. Without a god and religions we would be free to establish our own objective values that will enable our survival. The accountability is for us to determine and will result in our ultimate survival if we learn fast enough and rid ourselves of ignorance and religious superstitions. Rules imposed on us by an evil tyrant are wholly unacceptable.
Even if there were objective moral values and duties under naturalism, they are irrelevant because there is no moral accountability. This is nonsense and a meaningless statement. A set of rational moral values can easily be defined by man to ensure his own survival; and he has no need to account for his actions to anyone but himself.
If life ends at the grave, it makes no difference whether one lives as i don't know a stalin or a saint. "If there is no immortality, then all things are permitted." That is a very sad assumption, and it shows considerable ignorance and condescension for your fellow man. Christianity rests its whole approach on the terror of hell because without the act of terrorism there would be no need to believe in its god. Man is driven by his evolutionary primeval instincts for survival. Those instincts, his intelligence, and ability to reason allow him to define a moral code that does not permit any arbitrary action. Instead if he was not burdened with the bigoted and irrational intrusions of religions especially Christianity, he would be able to create a far more pleasant world.
we hold, as it seems rational to do, that objective moral values and duties do exist, then we have good grounds for believing in the existence of God. We cannot, then, truly be good without God; but if we can in some measure be good, then it follows that God exists. Quite the reverse. You have not proven your point and I have shown you that God’s idea of morality is purely for his benefit not ours. Objective rational moral values can be determined by man for the benefit of man. There is as a result absolutely no need for the existence of any gods.
Sensei, it would be ethical if you could provide the book from which you quoted and the name of the author. Thanks.
Bye for now
Cris
Radical
07-02-01, 02:00 AM
GOD
Hi
1st of all why do u say xtianiy? and not Jewdaisem and Islam as well? they all belive in the same GOD besides the primal sin in which xtians belive.
now lets take ants for example
i am quite sure that ants think that they got free will to do what ever they want yet to us they seem to be rather closed.
and we altough non GODS(altough some GODeSSes walk among us) can predict what they will do and react maybe GOD was a smart Alien?.
infact if we managed to build a computer that will take into account every single particle in the cosmos we would have had in our bags a proof that there is no such a thing as "free will"
since it can all be computed and renderd into position.
(ofcourse that can not be since the computer will have to take into account its own particles taking into account its own particles that again are taking into account its own particles in a recursive manner)
or maybe the answer to it all is just a two digit number?
douglas adams.
Hi Radical,
Thanks for posting and welcome to sciforums.
1st of all why do u say xtianiy? and not Jewdaisem and Islam as well? they all belive in the same GOD besides the primal sin in which xtians belive.
Yes I agree that all three religions have roots in the same god. However, I have not read enough about Judaism and Islam to know how those religions define their deity. I do know that Catholicism has specifically defined the Christian god with the attributes of Omniscience, Omnipotence, and have stated that humans have free will. That makes a clear target for the criticism. However, if you know that Judaism and Islam have similar definitions then yes the paradox could apply there as well.
now lets take ants for example i am quite sure that ants think that they got free will to do what ever they want yet to us they seem to be rather closed.
and we altough non GODS(altough some GODeSSes walk among us) can predict what they will do and react maybe GOD was a smart Alien?.
Ah but the difference between ants and humans is that ants are not self-aware. That is they are not able to realize that they exist and their limited intelligence does not enable them to have any ability to choose beyond pure instinct. The effect of this is that would not be able to comprehend our existence. They are trapped by the extent of their evolutionary mutations. We are fundamentally different in that we can reason and can consider concepts that allow us to consider beings and intelligences far greater than ourselves.
As for a god being a smart alien: Well OK, but it would have to have been pretty powerful if it was the creator. But whatever, any definition of a god that did not include the attribute of omniscience would avoid the free will paradox.
infact if we managed to build a computer that will take into account every single particle in the cosmos we would have had in our bags a proof that there is no such a thing as "free will" since it can all be computed and rendered into position. (of course that can not be since the computer will have to take into account its own particles taking into account its own particles that again are taking into account its own particles in a recursive manner) or maybe the answer to it all is just a two digit number?
Ah but the philosophy of Determinism does maintain that every event has a cause and that we are the result of a long chain of causes and effects. Each action we take is the result of a previous cause, such that we do not have any free will. But I never liked that approach.
I will be very disappointed if everything can be reduced to 42. That will definitely be an anti-climax.
Stick around.
Cris
Quite the reverse. You have not proven your point and I have shown you that God’s idea of morality is purely for his benefit not ours. Objective rational moral values can be determined by man for the benefit of man. There is as a result absolutely no need for the existence of any gods.
cris, in the contrary i have well proved my point ,but as a good non believer you just don't want to see the light(if i can say it like that).
Without a god and religions we would be free to establish our own objective values that will enable our survival. The accountability is for us to determine and will result in our ultimate survival if we learn fast enough and rid ourselves of ignorance and religious superstitions. Rules imposed on us by an evil tyrant are wholly unacceptable.
SO GOD an evil tyrant?
you are denying the existence of God in the midst of full knowledge that God does indeed exist. you knows God exists, you are quite familiar with that fact, but you says "under no circumstance or situation will I admit to God's existence."
you clearly perceives the fingerprints of God on all of creation, but refuses to admit He is the Creator. you perceives the divine authorship of the TEN COMMANDMENTS, but refuse to admit that God is their Author. you percieve the perfection,the decorousness of the TEN COMMANDMENTS, but refuse to admit they are superior to all other laws. let me tell you something if an atheist could see the wounds in the body of christ and actually feel them with his hands,he would deny that the wounds are there.Atheism clearly perceives the divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ, but refuses to admit His divinity. deliberate effort to never admit the truth about God,that's what atheism is about.
GOD AN TYRANT EVIL ,hell no!!!,Atheism is the ultimate of satanism.if you ask satan about the existance of god he will deny it. Ask him about his own exixtance,same thing he will deny it.you holds the Bible in one hand, but you(atheists) deny its existence by denying its truth with the other hand.
there is 2 thing we must understand In order to understand the nature of atheism, the natures of righteousness and sin. to one another they are antithetical . Since sin is antithetical to righteousness, by its antithetical nature, it seeks to cancel out or nullify righteousness. Since it is an antithetical principle to righteousness, it remain true to its nature even in the most insane instances. this antithetical principle is called "the law of sin" which is at work in your hearts (atheist) causing you to reject God. The law of sin is the one that governs satan's kingdom.
Radical
07-02-01, 01:45 PM
ants are "too stupid" to be self aware as we do
but still they are self aware.
they will run away or attack regarding thier options.
ok forget ants
what about dolphins? apes? they are self-aware
i saw once on national geographic an ape that used a keyboard with pictures&signs to comunicate andit had the capacity to know what is "good" and what is "bad " and was ablet assmilate the idea of a phone (that some1 remotly can talk with it)
what if an ALien so powerfull landed here and looked a us as ants?
we may not seem self-aware to him or even grasp that ALIEN a all not anymore than an ant understands humans. since we are too "stupid" but from our point of view we are self-aware.
Cris, please don't be disappointed.
I spoke to God last night and s/he assured me that everything reduces to 43 because 42 isn't a prime number.
Rest easy.
Sensei,
cris, in the contrary i have well proved my point ,but as a good non believer you just don't want to see the light(if i can say it like that). I saw no proofs only numerous unsupported assertions. As an atheist I maintain a lack of belief in a god in the absence of credible evidence or proofs. The religionists have made the claims for the supernatural and must provide some credible proofs if they expect rational people to follow their ideas. My sense of personal survival is extremely strong and I would very much like to believe that there is a wonderful afterlife, but wishing and hoping that such a thing exists does not make it true. For something so fundamental and important to exist there has to be something more concrete than dubious and untestable ancient writings that are thousands of years old and that were written at times where integrity and objective reporting did not exist and political and religious manipulation was rife.
you are denying the existence of God in the midst of full knowledge that God does indeed exist. you knows God exists, you are quite familiar with that fact, but you says "under no circumstance or situation will I admit to God's existence." Do you realize that that is an insult? You are effectively calling me a liar and a hypocrite, that I believe one thing and am saying another. I suspect that you have always been part of a religious faith and have never had the benefit of experiencing an alternate view. Your indoctrination appears so complete that you cannot even conceive that someone might not share your limited viewpoint. Please be quite assured that I in no way have any semblance of a belief that your gods exists. I am not some type of disillusioned Christian that will eventually return to the fold. My lack of belief is fundamental to the way I run my life and extends back some 30+ years. I base my life on rationality; religions are outside of that discipline since they are by admission irrational (belief based on faith). And you are wrong to accuse me of not considering a situation where I would believe – all I need is real, substantial, and credible proof.
you clearly perceives the fingerprints of God on all of creation, but refuses to admit He is the Creator. The more down to earth and mundane theory of evolution goes a very long way to explain the formation of the planets and how life adapted to changing surroundings. There is substantial evidence for that. All the time there are alternative explanations to that of a creator god you will not have achieved a proof for his existence.
you perceives the divine authorship of the TEN COMMANDMENTS, but refuse to admit that God is their Author. Your arrogance that I must believe the same as you is very unfortunate. As to the 10 commandments: Which set do you follow? There were at least two sets of tablets and each had very different commandments on them. Then there is the protestant version, the catholic version, and the Hebrew version, all of which have very different wordings and don’t even agree on subject matter. But possibly of greater importance are the resultant punishments –
Ten Punishments(Let's post these in the schoolroom!)
1. Ex. 22:20: He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed.
2. Lev. 24:16: And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death.
3. Ex. 31:15: Whosoever doeth any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.
4. Ex. 21:15: He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
5. Ex. 21:17: He that curseth his father or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
6. Ex. 22:19: Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.
7. Lev. 20:13: If a man lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have com-mitted an abomination: they shall surely be put to death.
8. Lev. 20:10: And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death.
9. Mark 16:16: He that believeth not, shall be damned.
10. Mal. 2:1-4: And now, O ye priests, this commandment is for you. If you will not hear, and if ye will not lay it to heart to give glory to my name, ... behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces.
So no tolerance here, or mercy, or even a mention of a trial or justice. And of course it does make it easy for judges to set a sentence – when in doubt kill the offender. Saves all that imprisonment and rehabilitation nonsense, right?
you percieve the perfection,the decorousness of the TEN COMMANDMENTS, but refuse to admit they are superior to all other laws. I think maybe you are living on a different planet. Either that or you must be attempting a rather sick joke.
let me tell you something if an atheist could see the wounds in the body of christ and actually feel them with his hands, he would deny that the wounds are there. So now you believe I am blind and have no sense of touch. Atheism is not about denial it is about rational thought, evidence, and proofs. You have not provided any of these.
Atheism clearly perceives the divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ, but refuses to admit His divinity. Dream on. This is gibberish, which idiot are you quoting? Do you understand what is meant by propaganda? If you want to debate with an atheist then I suggest you discover some facts. You will not attract any respect if you continue to quote misinformation. Try this reference for a start – Click here for an introduction to atheism. (http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/intro.html)
deliberate effort to never admit the truth about God, that's what atheism is about. Do your homework before proceeding any further.
GOD AN TYRANT EVIL ,hell no!!! So explain why he feels it necessary to give commands and expect unquestioning obedience? Explain why his favorite punishment for everything seems to be death? Explain why he must enforce his demands by horrendous threats? Why does he use terror at all?
Atheism is the ultimate of satanism. This just shows your current level of ignorance and the depth of your religious indoctrination. One of the arguments atheists hold for their disbelief in gods is the lack of evidence for the supernatural. To then claim that they follow another supernatural entity instead shows a level of desperation on your part, and of course significant ignorance. Atheists hold the same level of credibility for satan as they do for gods – namely zero. Of course, from a different perspective, sa’tan is the Hebrew term for adversary.
The remainder of your post refers to righteousness and sin and how those concepts relate to atheism. Sin is defined as disobedience of God’s commands. Since atheism does not recognize gods then sin as defined here has no meaning to an atheist. You must first establish that a god exists before showing that sin has any realistic value. And mankind is perfectly capable of defining high moral standards that give people any sense of righteousness they need. There is no need for gods to inflict their despotic urges on us for us to live productive and fulfilling lives.
When you quote from reference material please state your source. If it is web based then a link to the article is better than copying the whole text into a post. If it is an offline book then please provide title and author names. It is clear you are quoting references in your posts. I would like to know with whom I am really debating. It would be nicer if I were debating with you against your words and beliefs.
Cris
Chagur,
Awright! I always suspected that there was something fundamentally wrong with the universe, and that simple change to 43 explains everything.
Thanks for passing on the correction.
Cris
let me tell you something if an atheist could see the wounds in the body of christ and actually feel them with his hands,he would deny that the wounds are there.What I like most of all about this purely diversionary tantrum is that it ignores everything hitherto objected to in the atheist perception of the Universe. Were one to put before an atheist a man named Jesus of Nazareth complete with wounded wrists and shins and side, no atheist would deny the presence of the wounds. In fact, you would have provided objective, undeniable evidence that a man calling himself Jesus was standing wounded before the atheist.
Objective demonstration: the objectivism of atheism will not deny the physical evidence placed before it. To the other, I feel it necessary to acknowledge the usual procedure surrounding such objectivism: objective demonstration shows only that the objectively posited hypothesis is true--in this case, that a man is wounded and calls himself Jesus. But I don't see why an atheist would deny what is demonstrable and testable when the evidence is before them: such a denial is religious.Without a god and religions we would be free to establish our own objective values that will enable our survival. The accountability is for us to determine and will result in our ultimate survival if we learn fast enough and rid ourselves of ignorance and religious superstitions. So ... you have a problem with that?
* What is objectionable to the idea of a species working toward its own survival?
* What is objectionable to the idea of that species accomplishing goals relevant to its continued survival?
Really, irresponsible statements like the above citation make me wonder if Christians aren't just waiting for God to show up and fix everything. That the ultimate goals of Christianity involve the forfeit of mortal life seems to indicate that Christianity is, as a philosophy and living practice, detrimental to the continued human endeavor.Rules imposed on us by an evil tyrant are wholly unacceptable.You are absolutely correct. What is even less acceptable is a set of rules imposed by the illusion of a tyrant. That is, a mass of people awarding to an imagined tyrant the authority to abuse not only that specific mass of people, but all other people as well. The Christian tyrant is a most repugnant tyrant.you are denying the existence of God in the midst of full knowledge that God does indeed exist. you knows God exists, you are quite familiar with that fact, but you says "under no circumstance or situation will I admit to God's existence."I know you wish that was true; it would make your pride so much easier to inflate. Atheists I know generally deny the existence of God amid a neck-deep flood of irresponsible theology designed to license the adherent to any number of improprieties ranging from human dominion to material extortion.you clearly perceives the fingerprints of God on all of creation, but refuses to admit He is the Creator. you perceives the divine authorship of the TEN COMMANDMENTS, but refuse to admit that God is their Author.Again and again: you wish and you wish. I know it would be easier if people's intellects were limited to the boundaries of your bitter imagination, but it simply isn't so. You'll have to do better than tell people what they think in order to counterpoint their assertions.GOD AN TYRANT EVIL ,hell no!!!,Atheism is the ultimate of satanism.And here you go with that silly bit about Satan. The problem with Satan is that no theology derived from the Bible yet explains exactly what the purpose of Satan is. No theory yet presented adequately explains the limits of Satan's authority, or excuses God from willful malice through His holy servant, Satan-El. Satan is, perhaps, the true redeemer: Christ died only once; the Devil is wounded daily by the lies of a billion faithful. Considering that two-thousand years of careful philosophical work have failed to produce any satisfactory description of Satan, I wish you luck in this endeavor.if you ask satan about the existance of god he will deny it. Ask him about his own exixtance,same thing he will deny it.you holds the Bible in one hand, but you(atheists) deny its existence by denying its truth with the other hand.Well, as I once advised a friend of ours here at Sciforums, Lori, here we enter a theological conundrum.
* I know for a fact that your description of Satan's behavior is inaccurate, assumptive, and based wholly in your hatred.
* Now: here's your choice--either I have met both your savior and your enemy, and learned a good deal about the nature of the cosmic stake at hand, or else my teenaged visions are as much balderdash as any other religious vision in the world.
So do you give credibility to a vision that describes a woeful, regretting Christ and a bewildered Devil, the only common trait of either is that nobody knows what the fight is about?
Or do you sack the credibility of a religious vision, and thereby undermine the credibility of all religious visions describing a scenario more favorable to your preconceived faith?
But in a faith-based arena, I have empirical proof that the statements or yours I've cited above are utterly false. Objectively, the data and conclusions reached by a plethora of preceeding philosophers has failed to give you theological justification for anything you say about Satan. You are, quite literally, speaking out of your ass.
Thus, you undermine your own observations of sin, as well, with such apathetic claptrap as The law of sin is the one that governs satan's kingdom.
Hey--it's your God. If you don't know these things about It, that's not my problem. But if you choose to spout irresponsible theology in a call for human subordination ... well, that is my problem. Have your facts straight--whoops ... that's right: you rely on faith, not facts.
But really, that's what it comes down to. If Christians had better faith that reality will play out to describe the theology they believe, such issues as these would not be so critical. To wit:
* I believe it was Radical who asked why these arguments don't spill over onto Islam or Judaism, or other religions. The answer is twofold and simple:
* Most of Sciforums' posters are western-educated amid the Christian and post-Christian first-world. When we get up in the morning, go to school or work, and when we come home at night to sleep, the most relevant abstract issues statistically find their orientation in the western criteria. Among these are theological matters, largely derived from Christianity. The Christian/Atheist split is much more common and relevant to our posters than, say, a Wiccan/Shiite split. You'll note, too, that many of our alternative theists (myself included) derive our systems from Western ideas; Sufism is as Islamic as I get, and my exposure to far Eastern philosophies is limited.
* Which brings the second reason about: We just don't have that many Jewish or Islamic posters to debate with. Sure, we might all be able to reach a consensus--or not--regarding Islamic salvation and women, but I'd rather let a Muslim interpret that for me so I can tell him what I find objectionable about it; otherwise, it's just a bunch of Westerners sitting around and harping on Muslims for no better cause than to ignore the issues more immediately relevant to us.
So we find ourselves constantly faced with ideas with which we have traditionally found fault. That fault would matter as little to me as the inherent faults of Native American shamanism if it was not continually presented in my life as an adversarial entity.
I would love to leave my issues at the label of Liberty: expression, privacy, individual governance. However, one label has personified for my entire life the effort to destroy those Liberties--Christian.
I hope the logical snares you've encountered here might show you the paucity of the present state of faith; I'm not so much out to ask people to forfeit their faith, but rather reconcile the concept of what they think their faith is to its actual practice.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
tiassa,
Nosy? Nah! You must know that I welcome any comments you might find time to make.
Feel free to jump in anytime.
Cris
rlpete2
07-02-01, 07:24 PM
Chris,
Perhaps you will disregard my posting because I readily admit to being an agnostic, but I feel impelled to point out that your initial posting and argument have a fatal logical flaw: omniscience is NOT incompatible with free will, because preknowledge is not necessarily control. I am not God, but I can observe a person taking a course of action that I know will have sad consequences; I can allow this scenario to procede, so that the child I'm watching will learn that defying the law of gravity will cause the tower of blocks to fall. I have presented the child with the blocks, but I have not compelled her to build an unstable stack; she has the power to decide to re-engineer the tower before it falls. Omniscience is not determinism.
Additionally, the idea that God is omniscient, all-powerful, eternal and good predates the Catholic Church and Christ by a few hundred years. It is a construct of Greek philosophers in reaction against the mythology of the times; the Olympian Gods were simply amplified humans, more powerful and mostly more corrupt than humans. The question posed was: if God exists, what is His nature? Their answer was that He must be Perfect!!! (Pardon my use of "He" but "She" is just as sexist and "It" implies an unaware object.) Then they decided that perfection meant omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, eternal (unchanging) and benevolent. If for a moment you can imagine God existing, you can certainly imagine the cosmic laughter at the idea of humans telling Him what He could and couldn't be.
These Greek philosophers were setting up a straw man... er, God, who could easily be knocked down by someone like you. It is clearly not the Jehovah of the Israelites, who can be seen to mature throughout the Old Testament from an imperious despot to the self-sacrificing Christ of the New Testament; that is not an unchanging God.
The "Perfect" God is self-contradictory, because humans judge goodness on the basis of benefit to humans, or humanity, perhaps is better. A God who "sees" brutality in Kosovo or Chicago and does nothing to stop it can't be "good." Of course it's possible that the Earth exists as a reform school for deviant souls, and misery that we experience is intended to help us understand and empathize with other beings....karma? Or perhaps God is not benevolent toward humans, or at least humans lik me; that doesn't make Him nonexistent, just someone I won't like very much.
All your argument would accomplish, if it were not flawed, is discrediting of one view of God. All you are saying is, "If God exists, then this and this and this, therefor God doesn't exist." I am agnostic because I feel and logically reason that a God who can be defined by humans is not a God, but a reflection of the minds of the humans who agree on the definition. That includes the definition that God does not exist. You can argue that it is possible that God does not exist, and I agree, but I don't see how you can prove nonexistence.
omniscience is NOT incompatible with free will, because preknowledge is not necessarily control. First, a note on omniscience.
* Accepting that the concept of "right and wrong" is valid,
* Accepting that moral responsibility arises from this abstract right and wrong, and
* Accepting that an omniscient being need not be omnipresent or omnicapable,
... we can assert that an omniscient being is limited in efficacy as relates right and wrong only by the means of information broadcast and reception available to said entity and its intended audience.
Of the three concepts individually, we can note a couple things, as well:
1) Is an omniscient being excused from morality?
2) To what moral responsibilities would an omniscient being be obliged?
I would assert that an omniscient being is not excused from morality. Life is life, and necessary standards prevail. Human convention prescribes a certain degree of morality which seems to be basic: the most successful societies have noted--if not honored--various forms of the maxim Thou shall not kill. Arbitrary mortal anarchy will extinct a population, any population. To exist within a mortal context and to possess omniscience does not excuse the entity from moral obligation.
Furthermore, I would assert that while principle demands no more obligation of the omniscient entity than it demands of anyone else, the practical effect is observably greater. After all, if you see the truck coming, and the child in the street, are you not guilty of some moral cruelty if you stand by and watch the accident merely because it's a slow afternoon? Does any person, regardless of omniscience, have an obligation to attempt to alleviate known potential for human tragedy? Is telling a child not to play with matches an overextension of one's moral boundaries? Is it somehow aggressive and therefore inappropriate to tell someone to move because the ceiling is about to come down on them?
When considering issues of omniscience in tandem with notions of God, we see certain conditions change dramatically. The above points become subject to two considerations:
* Certain attributions of God hold that God is not only omniscient, but also has immutable will (e.g.--Christianity). Such an assertion has the effect of nullifying free will: every "choice" a soul undertakes is planned and predetermined by God, for nothing happens without that God's will. In the abstract, this has the effect of making a host of immorality moral. A murder can be deemed moral if God wills it to be; there is even a Sufi (Islamic) tale that makes this point, though the established historical pattern of Christianity is to find more selfish, mortally-concerned justifications for murder. In the case of those gods who combine omniscience and immutable will, there is no escaping the determinism of a cruel God.
* God, the omniscient, is bound to morality lest there be two concurrent standards of God's will (entirely possible, but it's not my place to detail the paradigm; such would merely give the more desperate theists something to cling to, and I'm of the opinion that they can do their own homework if they're sincere). In this case, God either shirks moral responsibility, or claims a separate standard, for, knowing the outcome and designing morality, God is well aware that conditions have required immorality, and that the effects of that necessary immorality include the proliferation of more arbitrary immoralities. God, who judges, subjects people to conditions, knowing full well what the outcome will be, and then deems the outcome immoral. I submit that God is irresponsible at best, and cruel at worst: He knows, yet continues to ignore His own standard, and then punishes mercilessly in the name of Love. This does not seem to describe free will.These Greek philosophers were setting up a straw manI wanted to comment here that the Greeks had much less at stake; immortality was a different philosophy, then, and the Greek-derived Unmoved Mover had no personality traits: no hates, no loves, no pleasures, no rules, no writ-in-stone morals, no pride, no disrespect .... The Greek-derived Mover gave people far less reason to be knocked down.It is clearly not the Jehovah of the Israelites, who can be seen to mature throughout the Old Testament from an imperious despot to the self-sacrificing Christ of the New Testament; that is not an unchanging God. Here we reach an issue of faith that is difficult to debate. The dichotomy 'twixt starting points is a key factor. Historically, Christianity can be seen to have usurped the Jewish covenant rhetorically; the divine change of personality becomes intriguing. Furthermore, the Christian assumption of continuity of God's grace is a purely internalized one: the best demonstration we have of that inheritance of covenant and continuity of grace is a smattering of anti-Judaic propaganda written by Christian apologists in the first couple of centuries after Christ. I look at it historically, whereas many view the issue with unwavering faith.
I also find both intriguing and encouraging the notion that yes, God can make mistakes. This is the first of a list of things I require of the Christian God before it reconciles itself with its dogmatic aspect. The things Christians believe of God are often contradictory, and given license by the notion that one is not supposed to ask such questions about God. I know I've been harping on the point about the sacrifice of the intellect, but it's not like I'm making the term up. And the failure to reconcile the impossibilities of Christian theology marks a primary effect of that sacrifice.I am agnostic because I feel and logically reason that a God who can be defined by humans is not a God, but a reflection of the minds of the humans who agree on the definition. That includes the definition that God does not exist. It is difficult to define my personal theism, as Cris is well aware. Agnostic is not a term I choose to apply to myself. However, you will find absolutely no argument from me on this point.
Then again, you weren't aiming at me in the first place. So I guess there's that.
Anyway, that seems to be my small change.
thanx much,
Tiassa :cool:
rlpete2
07-02-01, 10:57 PM
Tiassa,
Thanks for your comment. Regarding morality applied to God: if we were to assume the existence of such an entity, not bound by our mortal material existence, and supposing that there is a spiritual aspect of ourselves, which is not mortal....
The suffering or even death of a human might be seen by such a God as simply a lesson, rather than a calamity. Is it immoral to punish a child to condition him/her to avoid running into the street? Our morality might be quite shortsighted. What is to the antelope, murder, is, to the lion, lunch. Our attitude toward death on the veldt depends on which species we feel greater empathy with. (It puzzles me that religious groups convinced of an afterlife are so preoccupied with preserving the life of the fetus, and so convinced that execution is the ultimate punishment. The prospect of a life in prison scares me more than an early death.)
This is the kind of unanswerable issue that the Taoists warn us is a waste of time and energy. I guess I'm using it as creative avoidance to avoid doing my laundry.
DEVILDOG
07-03-01, 05:20 AM
Originally posted by Cris
Sensei,
2. Lev. 24:16: And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death.
Cris
If God is the all-powerful, supreme being that the Christians believe him to be, then why is Satan a part of any discussion. Is the above quote not the very definition of Satan, why not just do away with him.
If God is the symbols of love, peace and happiness, then why have so many wars been fought in his name. One word Ireland. Almost every religion believes the other religions are going to hell because of the different beliefs of one religion to the next. If each believes that there's is the one true religion, wouldn't that mean that the others are praying to a false God?
So maybe after all is said and done the Atheist are the only one who will know before they die where they are headed. We also know that no matter what "Satanic acts or Saintly deeds" we do we will end up the same at death.
*Dead
*Worm food
*Hopefully missed
:rolleyes: :D :rolleyes:
cris,chocked huh?my bad ,but i wanted you to experience what a faith can feel when you call his god a devil,ihave to admit that my post was insolent but not as insolent as your last post regard to your purposes ,but i'll grant no importance to that,i'm here like you, to discuss of a subject .
pease note that my post was not a personal conception but it's
"how a faith"will react to your attack when you say that god is an evil.also note that (regard to your purposes:indoctrination ....and else) my belief has nothing to do with the subject i always discuss the problem of god without implying mt religious belief.
now if we have a concept of a Perfect Being ie like a perfect being must necessarily exist.
Why? If he did not exist, then he would not be perfect.
Assuredly that, than which nothing greater can be conceived, cannot exist in the understanding alone. For, suppose it exists in the understanding alone: so it can be conceived to exist in reality; which is greater. Therefore, if that, than which nothing greater can be conceived, exists in the understanding alone, the very being, than which nothing greater can be conceived, is one, than which a greater can be conceived. But obviously this is impossible. Hence there is no doubt that there exists a being, than which nothing greater can be conceived, and it exists both in the understanding and in reality.
"Greatest" (i.e., no "greater" being can be conceived of), it must have the quality of "existence." If this "Greatest" being were simply an idea in people's minds, then it would not have its own existence and, hence, wouldn't really qualify as "Greatest" anymore.
i don't know if you'll understand,you can find it non sense.
now let us have the idea of a perfect, infinite Being. But since we ourselves are neither perfect nor infinite, then this idea could not have come from within us. so, it must have come from outside of us from a real perfect, infinite being.
I myself am a substance, I should not, however, have the idea of an infinite substance, because I am a finite being, unless it were given me by some substance in reality infinite.
thanx just thoughs.
thecurly1
07-03-01, 02:49 PM
Intresting thoughts on the believe of God, i'm believe but will stay out of any serious feuding between atheists and monotheists. Your reply was very thought provoking to say the least.
pragmathen
07-03-01, 03:48 PM
Circular logic is your fort´e, apparently. Incidentally (and this has as much relevance as your last post, sensei), did you know that seiten in Japanese means scripture? <b>Seiten</b> is pronounced identical to <b>Satan</b>.
Seeing as how I'm just jumping in here, I'll leave that first bit for Cris.
Originally posted by sensei
pease note that my post was not a personal conception
Hey, sensei. I don't get that feeling at <i>all</i> from your post. You sound completely like a non-believer to me. Any moron could see that you're being entirely objective with respect to your belief system. But, hey, you're the teacher, therefore you are absolved of all the responsibility of that which you write.
but it's "how a faith"will react to your attack when you say that god is an evil.
Just how is it an attack when someone says that God is evil? Apparently you disagree with this conclusion. Tell me, sensei, what someone should think about your god? All good (greatest), with no hint of evil? Prepare to justify your reasoning. Oh, that's right, when confronted with purely reasonable ways in which it is fully demonstrated that your God cannot be anything but evil, you renounce your <b>sensei</b>-ship and resort to circular reasoning. I, and others like me, are fully prepared to bring up the horrible qualities of your god--are you prepared to address them. Or, would you rather, as Sir. Loone, address them by <i>not addressing</i> them?
also note that (regard to your purposes:indoctrination ....and else) my belief has nothing to do with the subject i always discuss the problem of god without implying mt religious belief.
Your belief has nothing to do with the subject? How ludicrously uninformed you are! Your belief system has <b>everything</b> to do with the subject. Just as mine does.
Ever hear of the watch theory? For the moment, I've forgotten the author (St. Thomas Aquinas, perhaps?). At any rate, in it, the author presents the example that the watch has order. It was created by someone. It has a purpose to fulfill, therefore the purpose of the watch is to tell time for the observer. If the watch manages to do this, then the watch is fulfilling its original purpose initiated by its creator.
Now, admittedly that's an argument in favor of a supreme being made by theists. Aquinas (AFAIK) says that this is the same with humanity. Take all the organs--skin, liver, bones, et cetera--of humans and throw them into a bag. Jiggle the bag around as much as you want--you'll never produce a human being, therefore it's ridiculous to say that humans were not created.
Great reasoning. Atheists never say that humans were created completely in the form they are in now. Theists balk at such talk of primordial soup combining to form complex multi-cellular life because they claim no such events are happening now. But conditions were different in the primordial days. Besides, those conditions can be duplicated (unlike proof for your god) along pressurized volcanic / oceanic lines where new creatures thrive and adapt to survive. In the unlikeliest places, new life forms evolve and change to better use the environment.
Aquinas, motivated by a sense of personal motivation to justify the existence of God, initiated this theory on the watch and the creator of the watch. Perhaps Aquinas failed to see that the purpose of the watch was not to tell time, but to be duplicated. Only those that believe in God (therefore he exists) think of the watch theory as broadly indicative of the existence of God. Atheists see the watch theory as an example of the adaptability of man--by trying to figure out how to duplicate the watch. Since the existence of God is unproveable at this point (and along every point in history), then it stands to reason that it is better to either disbelieve claims to the contrary or to take them with a grain of salt. When God makes his triumphant appearance to mankind, then atheists will be convinced. Unfortunately for you, sensei (just taking a guess--after all, you don't let slip your religious persuasions whatsoever), you will be among the dwindling crowd that becomes increasingly disappointed (and hopefully disaffected) with a belief in God.
now if we have a concept of a Perfect Being ie like a perfect being must necessarily exist.
Believing something exists does not make it so. Unless you happen to suffer from symptoms associated with schizophrenia, because you think and believe that God and Jesus Christ visited you when you were fourteen does not make it so. That's great for you, but for the rest of us, it remains unproveable, therefore untenable at best.
To say that because we have a word for the greatest, must imply that the greatest must be God is totally laughable (hehehehehehe, indeed). You take the word 'greatest' and apply the meaning of God to it. If there was a god, then he would have to be the greatest, else why would he be a god? Therefore, since the concept of the 'greatest' exists within our language, God must exist, else why would the 'greatest' even be part of our language?
We, as a human species, are more than capable of being exceptionally good without the use of lowering ourselves to believing in a God. Likewise, we are more than capable of debasing our inner desires to pillage, rape, and demean other fellow human beings. All without the rage or love of some supreme being. Humans are proveable, but a belief in God is not. Just because you believe does not make it so for everyone else. Just for you. But perhaps, sensei, you hold to the reasoning that not only you, but others believe as well. Well, if that's your line of thinking, then your god is in the minority, quanitatively. There are more Buddhists than Christians, therefore God is Buddha (or the collective) and not Elohim.
sensei, your logic is lacking to say the least. And, incidentally, your nickname is not conducive to instructing others on topics such as this. If it were indeed possible for you to separate your personal belief system and offer something on the other side of the argument, perhaps there would be more weight to your unstudied conclusions.
<b>sen</b>- which is another way of pronouncing a word that means to teach.
<b>sei</b>- which is part of seirei; implying holiness.
So, yeah, sensei. At no time at all do you let us know how you think on the subject of the (non-)existence of God.
thanks!
prag
thecurly1
07-03-01, 08:29 PM
In an earlier reply to the "Proof that the Christian god cannot exist" you said that if we built a computer that could track every particle from the big bang on we'd find out that there wouldn't be free will. WRONG! Every particle's position after this moment in time would be theoretical, in real life every particle can't be located, too many and moving to quick. We could say that there isn't free will because we can predict the weather, but they didn't say it was gonna rain on Independence Day, three days ago, but they were wrong. I'm not getting into weather god exists or not, but I think you can guess where this was gonna go if I continued this thread.
Believing something exists does not make it so. Unless you happen to suffer from symptoms associated with schizophrenia, because you think and believe that God and Jesus Christ visited you when you were fourteen does not make it so. That's great for you, but for the rest of us, it remains unproveable, therefore untenable at best.
exactly ,believing something exist does not make it so. the religions says god exist he is omnipotent ,he is omnicient... and else;but that's not enough to believe right?therefor i've pushed my reflexions more further and i had found enough evidence that god exist(i know not enough evidence for you) and also that what i have found catch what the religion says,therefor i believe in god.
that is why i separate my belief when i'm debating about god .
i think that the first recognition of god must come from our self.
We, as a human species, are more than capable of being exceptionally good
good!!!??what a foolish assertion,and i'll be glad to dicuss this with you of course if you can assert your opinion.
sensei, your logic is lacking to say the least. And, incidentally, your nickname is not conducive to instructing others on topics such as this. If it were indeed possible for you to separate your personal belief system and offer something on the other side of the argument, perhaps there would be more weight to your unstudied conclusions.
my logic please,you didn't even read what you call my logic,because if you did,why talking about the definition of sensei? AND not about my thoughts concerning the existance of god,NOT ABOUT WHY I BELIEVE IN GOD!,thoughts that you can discuss with me.
thanx for reminding me the meaning of sensei,but am i teaching you something?,NO,am i telling you to accept SOMETHING,HELL NO!!! i don't think so,I'M JUST EXPOSING NOT IMPOSING THOUGHTS,thoughts that i'll be glad to discuss with evrybody.
thanx much.
quantum61
07-04-01, 05:08 AM
MMMMMM...Well I believe that there is a higher being, but should we call him god? I mean there are contradictions in the bible and it was written by man. Maybe someone came all those centuries back with unknown powers or tech and us as primitives would call
him GOD. Case in point is when back early part of when man jump on those old sailing ships and started exploring this planet we called earth. They came across tribes of humans that was still in the stone age. And these stoneage tribes thought these beings in their weird dress and weapons where gods. And think about this too. Recently in the last few years scientist went around the world collecting DNA samples from all the people. And found something very strange, and that was that the DNA samples collected from Africa was older in the way the chromosomes are made up than the rest of the DNA collected outside of Africa. Now why is that if we came from Adam an eve why is there a difference. Now I am not a person to knock down some ones belief or religion but just a simple theory of mine, I think maybe we need to quit looking in our beliefs and maybe start looking out to the stars we may find out who or what we call GOD is
DEVILDOG
07-04-01, 06:57 AM
Recently @ work I was talking to someone about my atheism. They told me a story that they thought would change my belief. Needless to say it didn't, but it does go to show you, that believers will use just about anything to try to convert you. It goes as follows:
A young man went to his father and told him he no longer believed in God. He said, "I can't see him, touch him, taste him, smell him or hear him, So he can't exist. There is no proof."
The father looked at the son and replied, "I agree, but you can feel him if you try. Just that makes Him real. You live with your decision, one day I'll show you your proof."
Several months later the son was in a car crash. Both legs were broken in several places. The father went to visit him in the hospital. He told his son, "I know you are in pain, so I ask, can you see it, touch it, taste it, smell it, or hear it?"
The son replied, "No, why do you ask?"
The father said, "Then it must not exist. There is no proof."
The son said, "Dad, I can feel it. It is real."
The father said, "The same is true with God and this is your proof."
Now I ask, does just feeling something make it real? There are numerous stories of people feeling aliens watching them, so then they must be real also. (I believe in aliens, in case you were wondering). Many people say they feel they are in love then discover that it was only LUST. Show me good, hard, put-it-under-a-microscope-proof, I'll be the first one in the convert line, but until then don't try to convert us. Live with your "BELIEF", and we'll live with ours.
Radical
07-05-01, 01:04 PM
<h1> thecurly1 this is for you </h1>
moderators do tell if i'm out of order with h1
lets say the entire universe was a smal tomato.
if we managed to put into a computer the entire information about lets say the tomato we would be able to predict what will be the state of the tomato in lets say a zilion years from now.
(regarding that wealready know all the laws and such taing apart)
theefore if we had a super computer that was able to take into considiration the entire universe we wuld be ableto predict wha i was gonna write in my mesg 2moro.
ofcourse nowday such athing is not possible due to two things:
1) we do not have a system that will hold s much information
and we do not know all the laws
2) the computer will have to consider its own presence into the equation.(but again they also said man will never be able to fly)
as u can see alredy computer models can predict and estimate stuff consider what sort of computers we will have in lets say1000 years from now.
besides if we do invent time travel there won't bea computation time a all since we willsimply send a computer to te future and make it come back with an answer even if it took it zilion years.
thecurly1
07-05-01, 01:37 PM
I said that any prediction of the future is conjecture, a theory. It isn't sound and is open to change. Just because you hypothetically know where every particle is doesn't mean they will be there a minute, or a year from now.
rastus77
07-19-01, 02:11 PM
Hi Cris,
I'm a "Christian" (i hate to lump myself in with such a dispicable group of people) that takes what I read in the bible as the truth. I could give you a whole bunch of reasons why, good ones I think, but I won't for now. I agree with what I've read here that if God knows the future as a certainty then we are pretty much like a computer program.
I don't have an axe to grind and I'm not bitter because of some terrible experience with the religious establishment, catholic or otherwise. i do believe that "christian television" is a stench in the nostriles of every person who can think for themselves. I agree that religious people have and continue to pervert the word of God for their own selfish wants.
The bible taken at face value is a source of incredible insight. When I read it I see just how... Oh, ok I won't get into how great the Bible is. Back to the beginning of this thread.
I don't believe my future is fixed because I really do have a free will. I also believe God is omniscient. How do I reconcile these two beliefs and still be able to claim my IQ is pretty much the same as the general public? Actually I have no idea what my IQ is. Well, anyway...
It all comes down to how you define God's omniscience. To understand God's omniscience I believe you have to view it with his other attributes. God is also omnipresent and omnipotent.
Here's how the dictionary on MSN defines these words...
om·nis·cient [om níssee nt ] adjective
all-knowing: knowing or seeming to know everything
om·ni·pres·ent [òmnee prézz'nt ] adjective
1. always present everywhere: continuously and simultaneously present throughout the whole of creation
2. found everywhere: present or seemingly present all the time or everywhere
om·nip·o·tent [om nípptnt ] adjective
all-powerful: possessing complete, unlimited, or universal power and authority
God's attributes taken together help shed light on each. Where in theses definitions can you deduce that God knows all the future as a certainty? God's omniscience is only possible because of his omnipresence. The only thing i can say about God when considering these attributes is that because God is everywhere He knows everything that is going on. Nothing is hid from Him.
How does this do away with free will?
Classical Greek philosophy is where the idea of Omniscience as: Perfect knowledge of past and future events, originated.
The Greeks where obsessed with the idea of perfection. The state of perfection by definition meant that it was unchangable, in other words... static. This philosophy enter Christian theology early on and has tainted accurate intrepretation of scripture and therefore most everyones few of God.
Because God is all powerful he is able to determine certain aspects of the future. That does not mean that everything in the future is set.
How does the following scripture support the idea that God's omniscience means He knows everything in the future as set?
Genesis 6
5 The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time.
6 The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain.
7 So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth--men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air--for I am grieved that I have made them."
8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD.
It seems to me that there is something here and many other places in the bible that doesn't line up with Calvinistic (Classical) theology. How can this be?
Let's think for ourselves. God gave me a brain and told me to use it "come let us reason together". I happen to believe the bible. For me it is the standard I test everything with. A good question to ask yourself... What standard do I stand on? Why?
If I saw someone take a mathematics class and he flunked out because he didn't read the textbook, didn't pay attention to the instructor and generally disrupted the class by being totally abnoxious. Would you agree with me that the reason that this guy flunked was because the text book was screwy. Probably not... I'm doing a terrible job of trying to get my point across.
The point is, judge the bible by its own merits not by what you see some so called believers doing or saying.
For more about reconciling God's omniscience and our free will check out:
http://www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/index.asp?PageID=257
Its an excellent resource for understanding the idea that the future is partly open, even to God.
I guess I'm assuming that you are interested in the truth and that it can be determined.
Here's a quote from you welcoming sensie:
"Everyone is free of course to hold their own points of view, but the issue here is whether your view represents truth or not. Your statements really just represent an unsupported assertion; you have not addressed the problem of the paradox. "
I hope that i have addressed the issue of the paradox, let me know.
i'm glad you are a seeker of truth. So am I.
Maybe we can disuss the problem of evil in the world. If God is good and loving why so much suffering?
dan1123
07-19-01, 03:16 PM
The real question is how much does God know? Does he just know the future? That would leave free-will wide open. If, however, He knew every possible outcome of everything <i>He</i> did, then we would be in a different situation. And rastus77 has pretty much disproved that the Bible makes that claim in the above post.
So then, this is what I think is a good analogy of what God knows: Imagine that God sees a timeline in a single line in front of Him that has some form of definition, like a changing color or changing direction. Now, if God were to grab a part of the timeline and twist it (if the definition is by direction) in some way early on, He could see immediately afterwards how the rest of the timeline changed its shape, <i>but not before</i>. If He did know before, then we would not have free will.
In this way, He can know everything in the future without any problem of free will. He just cannot know for sure how we will react as beings with free-will when He interferes.
He just cannot know for sure how we will react as beings with free-will when He interferes.I consider the issue of the statement that With God all things are possible as officially put to rest as a falsehood. Thank you for clearing that up, Dan.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
dan1123
07-19-01, 04:00 PM
Correct.
It is easy to think up things that are impossible for God, because God cannot do things that are logical contradictions. It is easy however for the human mind to come up with contradictions and not think of them as contradictions.
For instance, it is impossible to make the same area of a surface lit and unlit at the same time. It is a logical contradiction--essentially meaningless. I could come up with the idea of a square-circle but that would not give something meaning, and God could not create such a thing.
Glad we could agree :-)
daktaklakpak
07-19-01, 04:56 PM
Pain is colorless and tasteless from the surface. However, we do know how pain is formed inside the nerve system, how pain is transmitted, and how pain can be blocked. For god, well....
It is easy to think up things that are impossible for God, because God cannot do things that are logical contradictions.
I have to agree. Sometimes, people who do not understand Christianity make assertations about 'why doesn't God do such-and-such' or 'why can't he just do thusly.' What must be understood, is that God is who is is (like He said, I AM that I AM). God cannot create logical contadictions -- for instance, a universe in which pi = 5.9385. The Bible even <i>explicitly</i> tells us of one of His limitations:
"Heb 6:18 That by two immutable things, in which <i>it was impossible for God to lie</i>, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us"
Gasp! Egads! Impossible for God to lie?!!?!? :eek:
There goes the omnipotence, right? I think when people refer to His omnipotence, they are refering more to His control over physical matter and events (for instance, His ability to give the word and halt rain for three years), and not so much as to His control over who is He is (He is who he is).
"Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever."
<hr>
I remember seeing this topic the first time around, and I don't think I got involved in it. Anyway, you're (Chris's) paradox is not valid. Consider the case where you watch a movie 500 times in a row. By the time you watch it again, you'll pretty much have a sort of "omniscience" about what is going on. You will every single thing that happens in the movie. Now, does that mean that the script-writer, producer, director, composer, special effects team, cameramen, and actors/actresses did not have free-will when they made the movie? Of course not! Now consider you have a time machine, and you travel back to the time before the movie was even made and you watch it. You will know exactly what happens before it even happens!!! Yet all the people involved in the movie's production still have/had free will to decide how the movie will be made!!! Paradox broken.
Since God is outside of time, you could almost consider that He is looking back on history. He doesn't have to follow casuality if He is outside of time!
~Caleb
So without omniscience, and without omnipotence, what is God? This is an interesting question, because it brings to the surface God's fear of mankind in the Garden of Eden: he drove Adam and Eve out because the Tree of Life was all that was needed to make mankind the equal of God. It's in the Bible, so I'm not sure what's so hard about this concept; but some of our Christian posters are doing their utmost to show it true, though the laughable thing is that I'm as sure as I can be that's not their intent.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
he drove Adam and Eve out because the Tree of Life was all that was needed to make mankind the equal of God.
That was Satan's <i>lie</i>! Which apparently, you still believe?!?
Besides, if Satan had been telling the truth, we would all be gods right now.
~Caleb
daktaklakpak
07-23-01, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by Caleb
Yet all the people involved in the movie's production still have/had free will to decide how the movie will be made!!! Paradox broken.
Since God is outside of time, you could almost consider that He is looking back on history. He doesn't have to follow casuality if He is outside of time!
~Caleb
I wonder how 'free' the choices will be if you know the result already every time.
It like saying, "You can step in any direction you want, but I know you are going to step forward."
Caleb--That was Satan's lie! Which apparently, you still believe?!?
Besides, if Satan had been telling the truth, we would all be gods right now.What, pray tell, are you talking about? Hello? It's a Biblical event:And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. (Gen. 3.22-23, KJV)Hello?Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever"--
therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken. (Gen. 3.22-23, RSV)How many Bibles would you like me to quote?
Please demonstrate that the words spoken by God in Genesis 3.22 and 23 are Satan's lie.
What, is the Bible itself subject to rewrite?
The Lord God said ... and that's Satan's lie?
What, sir, are you talking about?
And how would we be gods? Who has eaten from the Tree of Life? Our godhood is exactly what the Lord feared, and is the reason, according to the Bible (as cited above), for the expulsion of mankind from the Garden.
Like I said: It's in the Bible; what's so hard about this concept? Does it not match up well with what Christians wish God was?
Hello?
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
My apologies on one point. I confused "Tree of Life" with "Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil" :o
However, it was Satans's lie that they would become as gods if they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Note however, that he behaves just like a typical deceptive advertiser today will. He mixes a slight amount of truth with a subtle twist to arrive at a completely false statement. Satan said they would become like God, knowing good from evil. The deception in this case, is when he implies that they will actually become God, or when he implies that God has lied to them. This is enough to "sell the product" and we've been suffering ever since. In this since, it <i>is</i> Satan's lie that we can at all become like God. That God is somehow hiding something wonderful from us, or lying to us about something.
Regarding the Tree of Life God didn't want man to eat from it, <i>not because we would become equal to Him</i>, but so that we wouldn't be forced to live forever in a miserable life of seperation from Him, and sin on earth. In fact, it fits in with what I was saying earlier about God setting up His plan. The punishment for sin was death, and not eating from the ToL was part of that punishment. If man had eaten from the ToL and lived forever, how could God have implemented His plan to take our place by dying on the cross. If man had eaten of the ToL, then he would have been an eternaly sinful being, just like the demons. God didn't want that to happen to his beloved creation.
So let's look at those verses you posted, and see what God really says.
"Then the LORD God said,"
Yes, that's the Lord God, not Satan :rolleyes:
"Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil;"
First, note that he uses past tense -- "has become" this is the result of having eaten from the ToKoG&E, since that had already past. It cannot refer to the ToL because they had not already eaten of it.
Second, note He says they became <i>like</i> Him <i>in the sense of knowing good and evil</i>. In other words, they had eaten, and now they knew what it was like to do evil, and now they had a consience and all that, and in that respect, they were <i>like</i> God, <b>not equal to Him</b>.
From here, your assertation seems to be that if they had eaten from the ToL they would have been equal to God. But what does God actually say?
"and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever"
He says they would live forever. Is that all that would be necessary to make them like God? Absolutely not!!! They would have had none of His divinity, none of His power, none of His presence, none of His person, none of His perfection (they were sinners, remeber), none of His holiness, and none of His knowledge!!! Shall I continue?
After that, it just says God drove man out of the garden. If God feared our living forever, then why would He send "His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him might not perish, but have <i>everlasting life</i>?"
~Caleb
So without omniscience, and without omnipotence, what is God?
<b>HE IS who HE IS.</b>
He is the God of the Bible:
The unchanging God "with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning."
The God who says "will never leave thee nor forsake thee" if you call upon His name.
He is the God who "shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus."
He is the God who "is my Shepherd" and who "restoreth my soul"
He is the God who allows me to boldly say "The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me."
He is the God who "prepares a place" for me.
He is the God with whom it is impossible to lie.
He is the God "without all contradiction."
He is the God who "will do great things."
He is the God "who only doeth wondrous things."
He is the God that sendeth "every good and pefect gift... from above"
He is the God who "shall neither slumber nor sleep."
He is the God who created the entire universe in 7 days with nothing but a few mere words.
He is the God by whom "All things were made... and without him was not any thing made that was made."
He is the God by whom "all things [were] created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist."
He is the God whose glory is declared in the heavens.
He is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.
He is the God who says "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve."
He is the God who "ruleth by his power for ever"
He is the God who "laid the foundations of the earth."
He is the God from whom the mountains flee, and the earth trembles.
He is the God who answers out of the whirlwind."
He is the God who "commandeth even the winds and water, and they obey him."
He is the God who "because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself."
He is the just God, who "According to their deeds, accordingly he will repay, fury to his adversaries, recompense to his enemies;"
He is "upright: and there is no unrighteousness in him."
He is the God who "cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man"
His "throne is established of old: [He is] from everlasting."
He is the God who "reigneth, [and] he is clothed with majesty; [he] is clothed with strength."
He is the "judge of the earth."
He is the God who "shalt break them with a rod of iron;" and "shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel."
He is the just God, who "will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity;"
He is the loving God who created all of us and gives us breath each day.
He is the God who will do "whatsoever ye shall ask in [His] name"
He is the God who "is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."
He is the God who "is not slack concerning his promise."
He is my Rock and my Salvation, He is the lifter of my head.
He is my sheild and my sustainer.
He is the potter.
He is the High Priest and the King.
He is eternal, He is holy, He is just, He is loving.
He is the God who "hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows."
He is the God who has the keys to Death and Hades
He is the God who can raise us from the dead.
He is the God who "shall redeem their soul from deceit and violence"
He is the God who shows "mercy unto thousands of them that love [Him], and keep [His] commandments."
He is the God who "commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."
He is the God who "so loved the world that He sent his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him might not perish, but have everlasting life"!!!
<b><i>"Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne,...for ever and ever....AMEN!!!"</i></b>
~Caleb
However, it was Satans's lie that they would become as gods if they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. A lie? God seemed to fear the same thing. Why are you so desperate to blame it all on Satan? You can't even demonstrate that Satan has a purpose except as God wills. Which makes him extraneous, unless he's God's flak man, at least.Note however, that he behaves just like a typical deceptive advertiser today will. He mixes a slight amount of truth with a subtle twist to arrive at a completely false statement. Satan said they would become like God, knowing good from evil. The deception in this case, is when he implies that they will actually become God, or when he implies that God has lied to them.I repeat, from the Bible:Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever"--
therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken. (Gen. 3.22-23, RSV)Do you see any mention of Satan in that passage? What was the lie again? Did Satan forget to mention the second tree or something? This is enough to "sell the product" and we've been suffering ever since.That's God's decision. Just because God set man up to force you to feel insignificant doesn't make it right. It's kind of like a battered wife: just because she stays doesn't make the beatings right.Regarding the Tree of Life God didn't want man to eat from it, not because we would become equal to Him, but so that we wouldn't be forced to live forever in a miserable life of seperation from Him, and sin on earth.I believe the passage in the Bible speaks of equality. I don't see the misery of separation there.Regarding the Tree of Life God didn't want man to eat from it, not because we would become equal to Him, but so that we wouldn't be forced to live forever in a miserable life of seperation from Him, and sin on earth. In fact, it fits in with what I was saying earlier about God setting up His plan. The punishment for sin was death, and not eating from the ToL was part of that punishment. If man had eaten from the ToL and lived forever, how could God have implemented His plan to take our place by dying on the cross. If man had eaten of the ToL, then he would have been an eternaly sinful being, just like the demons. God didn't want that to happen to his beloved creation.Since nothing happens in God's Universe without God's say-so, I'm not impressed. Or is God's Will ineffective in the Universe?So let's look at those verses you posted, and see what God really says. I believe you pinned it on the head: After that, it just says God drove man out of the garden. If God feared our living forever, then why would He send "His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him might not perish, but have everlasting life?"Because He is God and wants it to be that way; it is a method of ensuring human servitude and devotion. You'll note in the end that He wishes for Humanity to evolve out of the Living Universe, as well. You were born into a state of separation because God chose that it should be that way. I know you want to love Him, but you have to understand at some point that you're just lying to yourself if you blame Satan.HE IS who HE IS.Regarding this post: that's wonderful, dear. How old were you when you were taught to believe that?
But he is not a God who can love purely, for he requires a toll for his love.
He is not an honest God, for he is known to lie.
He is, indeed, a jealous God, demanding the destruction of entire cultures.
He is, indeed an angry God, who would throw you into the lake of fire for the state of separation that he has willed upon you.
He is, essentially, a racketeer.
And it shows. Given the deadly history of this religion, I tend to think my interpretation is more accurate to the religion's relationship with the human endeavor.
Next time you choose to enumerate your smallness, try being genuine. It's much more impressive.
--Tiassa :cool:
DEVILDOG
07-24-01, 05:23 AM
Watching a movie and being god can't be compared. Even if you were to watch the movie 100,000 times, I'm quite sure there will be at least one, if not several small details you will likely miss or forget. If you were to go back in time, as you said, you would have changed the course of history. Let's just say you happen to sneeze, someone politely says, "Bless you." The original course of history would not have had that person saying that. Every person who sees or comes in contact with you is changed, so history is changed. Who is to say that the movie will come out the same way, now that history has changed.
OK, you go back in time,you will remember everything you unintentionally changed, and how it was before the change, because you caused the change. Would this not change the future, after the point when you decided to go back in time?
My point being, as of now there are no "time machines"(other than clocks, watches, etc.), So your idea may have been well intended, but no proof was offered. The paradox is still alive and well. Hell, who knows we may actually be a part of someone else's DREAM, and all of this may not really be happening. Wait, I should watch what I say, that statement may start a new religion....DREAMOLOGISM. :p
DEVILDOG
07-24-01, 06:04 AM
Originally posted by Caleb
<b>HE IS who HE IS.</b>
Thanks for clearing up his identity for me. "I am what I am, and that's all that I am." (Popeye)
<b>He is the God who has the keys to Death and Hades
</b>
This little quote reminded me that YOUR god, has the very same powers that Zeus had. Amazing isn't it. Zeus was one up on him though, he could change anyone, anyway he wanted to, at anytime.
As an interesting side note, One can conjecture, that if there were a hypothetical "perfect being", he could not change. If He is perfect, then there is no way he can become better, therefore, any change would be a change for the worse. But he if he were to change for the worse, he would not be perfect in the first place. It's like being at the North Pole. No matter which way you go, its always South.
~Caleb
One can conjecture, that if there were a hypothetical "perfect being", he could not change. This is a theological quandary that has plagued Catholic diabology throughout. The issue there, of course, was the necessity of the Devil versus the responsibility of God for evil versus the idea that God is Goodness. It is also the basis of the assertion that God has no learning curve.
What, then, of the imperfect creations of God? Is this by design or necessity? Either way, then, the sin and debauchery of the world is perfection, for it is the will of a perfect and unchanging God. It does make it easier to look a starving child in the eye and say, "But this is Good that you're dying painfully, for God wills it."No matter which way you go, its always South. Not necessarily.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
dan1123
07-24-01, 09:47 PM
It does make it easier to look a starving child in the eye and say, "But this is Good that you're dying painfully, for God wills it."
If the Christian God were like what you say, he would have sent down Buddha rather than Jesus Christ. Why would Jesus heal so many people if "God wills it" to happen? If death was God's design, then why would Jesus reverse it even once? Humanity is in rebellion against God, who is sovereign above all things (He has the last word), but He does not <i>will</i> everything to happen. This idea comes from fatalistic Babylonian religions rather than the Bible. After all, where would our freedom come from if God had to will every choice we made?
Why would Jesus heal so many people if "God wills it" to happen? If death was God's design, then why would Jesus reverse it even once?P.R. stunt. It's all about dominion. Jesus pulled a classic swindle: hop down, perform a few miracles, say, "Worship God, but nobody can get to his reward except through me," sign up the yokels, get their currency (souls), say, "Oops, I've gotta go out to the car to get your reward!" and takes off, leaving only a note that he'll be back someday.
Yes, it's absurd. So is that deity you've got going there.Humanity is in rebellion against God, who is sovereign above all things (He has the last word), but He does not will everything to happen.* Whatever.
* Humanity is in rebellion because God wanted it that way.
* Humanity is in rebellion because God blundered.
Take your choice.After all, where would our freedom come from if God had to will every choice we made?That's what blackmail is for. You know, the reward and the punishment? (I have made you in this fashion unacceptable to me; kiss my ass every day or I'll punish you for being unacceptable to me.)
--Tiassa :cool:
DEVILDOG
07-25-01, 03:11 AM
Originally posted by Caleb
It's like being at the North Pole. No matter which way you go, its always South.
~Caleb
So, let me get this straight....
I'm standing at the North Pole, I pull out my trusty Batman Compass, Look at the arrow pointing North, Follow it, And I'm heading South?????? :confused:
Not the most convincing analogy to get me to convert.
Christianity MUST say god is perfect. Who in thier right mind would follow an imperfect god on just faith? They will also say anything to keep their followers. Let's take,for instance, the original Catholic belief that your not suppose to eat meat on any Friday. The pope comes along and he decides hey you know what, I really like meat, lets just change that rule to you can eat meat on friday except during Lent.
While on the subject of the pope, isn't he worshiped just a little to much? He maybe preaching the catholic god's word, but that doesn't make everything he says the gospel. He is after all just a man. Not to mention the fact that most of the religions follow the same book of instruction yet they believe differently. So which is the correct path to follow, or do all roads lead NORTH
Rambler
07-25-01, 04:09 AM
Caleb (how's this then?),
I'm at the north pole (dead on) I put on my rocket pack and head straight up...... am I still going south??? Just jokes Caleb I did understand the point you were making...but I couldn't resist.
Sorry for butting in guys.....
Now dan or Caleb or Loone, or preferably someone who believes that this god listens and cares....could you ask it why its given up on healing (since you brought it up Dan)...in particular the thousands of children dying of AIDS in Africa???? I'd love one of you to ask that shithead up there what the go is???? We don't need to see a statue cry or visions of saints...how about just a little compasion for those who need it!!!!!!!
I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer....
Deadwood
07-25-01, 06:01 AM
Ah yes, God does care. He heals many. But when I say that He heals and give testimonies of Gods healing at work many of the people on this forum just scoff. Especially when I told you about Vanuatu, the following posts just told me how we were taking advantage of third world countries and that because they are uneducated and gullible they would just believe anything. :(
People from third world countries are just like that of first world countries. Just poorer. Intelligence is not a dependent variable on how much money you have. I beleive the smartest person in the world lives in a third world country.
Rambler I hope you don't do the same.
But anyway, because we have sinned, we get sick. This is why. we are not perfect. God chooses who He heals. In heaven, everyone will be healed. However, here, it is a huge blessing to receive healing. Jesus healed many people He came across. This is who God is. I know many people who have been healed of various ailments.
One person I know was told by God to pray with her next door neighbour who was having a heart operation. She felt really shy and didn't go over. But, as it happened, just before the person had to have the operation. She was told (not by God this time) that she had to drive him over to the hospital. So as it happened, she was driving him to the hospital and on the way she stopped the car and asked him if she could pray over him. So he said yes. As it happened, when the man went to the operating table, he ended up being sent back out because he had nothing wrong with him. Not only was he healed but he also saved a lot of money.
Another story. A person I know has numerous times had to get skin cancers removed. This particular one, had to be removed surgically. Before the operation, he had asked some people from prayer group(Roman Catholic by the way) to pray for him. So they prayed, and well you know the story, he was sent out of the operating room, because there was nothing to operate on.
Another story, one woman I know had a broken foot. She was prayed over, and the broken foot was healed then and there. No more of them thingy's you have to walk with.
Another story. One person I know had epilepsy since he was young and had to have tablets. People prayed for him over a period of time. And well you know the story, he doesn't have to take any more tablets for epilepsy.
Jesus Christ has also used one of my church ministers to do every single miracle that Jesus did in the Gospel except heal leprosy. Because he has never met anyone with Leprosy. Even brought back two people from the dead.
Angels have been seen in and around our church also.
You see healing is a very huge blessing, not a right. Also, I think this may have been mentioned earlier. If God just healed everyone, then we wouldn't have the free will to believe in Him or not. We would just know He exists. However, God does give us proof of His existence, which is also another huge blessing, but whether you want to believe this proof or not, is purely up to you. Know one can choose for you.
Doctors cannot explain these healings. So it is up to you. This is freewill. As it stands (this is what I believe, so please bare with me) the only way back to God, is through Jesus christ. I don't know about the ones who never get a chance. But remember, the Christian God is a just and merciful God. His mercy is also greater than His justice. Not even all Christians get healed. We may be given a "thorn in the flesh" so as we don't exalt ourselves. I think that would happen in the current state of the world if everyone were healed as much I would love everyone to be healed. I think that people would start assuming equallity with God. But this is my view. I realise many peoples views differ, so please, don't laugh at me, explain to me why you think I am right or wrong.
Thanks :)
Deadwood
07-25-01, 06:07 AM
Sorry, also something that I forgot to mention is that, Christians are meant to suffer.
DEVILDOG
07-25-01, 06:25 AM
Originally posted by Deadwood
Jesus Christ has also used one of my church ministers to do every single miracle that Jesus did in the Gospel except heal leprosy. Because he has never met anyone with Leprosy. Even brought back two people from the dead.
Angels have been seen in and around our church also.
Let's get some facts:
1. Minister's name.
2. Church's name.
3. Resurected's names.
4. Media's names that covered the story.
5. Any other proof of said events(not including hearsay.
Doctors cannot explain these healings. So it is up to you.
Science has proven the mind has the power to heal the body. Firewalkers for example believe that their faith prevents them from being burned, science has proven that a chemical is not released from their brain, as well as severe callusses on their feet and thus prevents the effect of burn scars.
daktaklakpak
07-25-01, 05:50 PM
Originally posted by Deadwood
But anyway, because we have sinned, we get sick.
After all these years, you still believe we get sick because we have sinned?
Don't tell me satan made all the virus and germs. Are we having a second creator here?
dan1123
07-25-01, 05:56 PM
I think he's talking about original sin... A sort of Pandora's box in a fruit if you will... Probably it is more indirect than that though--without access to the tree of life we're all destined to die, and maybe the fruit from the tree of life worked as some sort of universal medicine--but this is all speculation. The only sure thing from the Bible is that in the Garden of Eden, no human would ever get sick and die. After Adam and Eve ate the fruit and got kicked out, there is sickness and death. How exactly is up for grabs.
When Adam and Eve sinned, the entire universe was corrupted, particularly the planet Earth. I think the following is a likely explanation:
God created microbes, but they were "germs" in that they did not make anyone sick. There are many good microbes (probably more than there are bad ones, but I'm not sure) and they are a neccessary part of Earth's ecosysem, so to create Earth, God would need to create microbes.
During the fall, when nature became corrupted, some of these microbes mutated (some might use the word evolve, although they weren't really changing species) and became the harmful germs that we have today.
At least that's my thinking on the subject.
~Caleb
Rambler
07-25-01, 07:22 PM
Just to clearify things a little...you said above:
"Firewalkers for example believe that their faith prevents them from being burned, science has proven that a chemical is not released from their brain, as well as severe callusses on their feet and thus prevents the effect of burn scars."
actually firewalkers (and those who believe there is something extra-ordinary going on) are just ignorant of BASIC physics.
A firewalker (LOL) will walk say 10 meters on coals heated to 900 degrees centigrade and everyone is amazed....well guess what ANYONE can do it....the reason being is that coal/wood is a POOR conductor of heat....very poor infact (inefficient if you like). I would like to see these guru's actually stand in one place on those coals for the duration of a walk....it would hurt.... but better still take a 10 meter METAL plate (Big BBQ)...heat it to only 500 degrees centigrade and I bet my left one that there isn't a guru alive that wouldn't come out of that experience BURNT...badly...reason is metal is a GOOD conductor of heat. So chemicals in brain aside it's a load of crap.
Deadwood,
First of all the heart story, not the first time indigestion has been mis-diagnosed as a heart attack.....
infact all those story's aren't unique that's why you get told to seek a second and third opinion...modern medicine although its way past leaches sucking the illness out of you is still pretty primitive....but even if we choose to ignore that point we can't ignore the power of the human mind to heal itself, there is a word for it....plaseebo (sp?) ....there are plenty of non-christains out there that claim the same powers...is christ acting through those pagans too??? or is that satan??? no maybe its your minister doing some supernatural channeling???
But even if you ignore what I say above PLEASE answer this....did the man with the heart problem live a less sinfull life then an african child BORN with Aids...what is their sin??? why should they suffer, maybe your god is racist prick too ha?? reserves his treatments for the middle class white man??? or is it even more petty then that, reservse it only for those who are there to boost his delicate ego???
ITS BULLSHIT deadwood its inconsistent with what you preach your God has only managed to make this world more ignorant and hatefull....the deluded have had their time now wake the fuck up and smell the reality.....your god is a myth and a poor one at that.
Sorry all but I had to purge this god non-sense...should be good for a while again :D
Deadwood
07-26-01, 04:09 AM
infact all those story's aren't unique that's why you get told to seek a second and third opinion
Not having to take tablets or being able to walk. People even being able to get out of wheel chairs and walk for the first time. People being legally blind and able to see. Even one boy in vegas who had never been able to see in his whole life after being at one of Benny Hinn's preaching was able to see. It took a few minutes for him to be fully healed. Not all the time do you need a doctors opinion. But yes, they have no explanation. Also, with that boy, a whole stadium of people had an opinion. The parents also have an opinion. Can you guess what that opinion is? ;)
but even if we choose to ignore that point we can't ignore the power of the human mind to heal itself, there is a word for it....plaseebo (sp?)
So you believe also in something that has not been scientifically proven. Thanks :)
did the man with the heart problem live a less sinfull life then an african child BORN with Aids
All it takes is one sin to be imperfect. My two miscarrieged sisters also didn't get a chance to live on this Earth. Yet I still believe God is a God of compassion.
reserves his treatments for the middle class white man???
My Father does not heal based on race. People from all races and walks of life have been healed.
or is it even more petty then that, reservse it only for those who are there to boost his delicate ego???
My God does not need to have an ego. If you already are all-powerful, there is no such thing as a power trip or an ego. Whether I worship God or not does not effect His ego. Remember, He was just the same even before we were there to worship Him. But I believe that He does want to give us full-life in abundance. More than any mortal could imagine on this Earth. But God doesn't need our praise. But He still does love our praise.
there are plenty of non-christains out there that claim the same powers...is christ acting through those pagans too??? or is that satan???
Devils do have powers to make people sick. And with that they can take that sickness away also.
Thats all Rambler. I think I will just ignore your posts from now on. I don't have to be spoken in a manner with swearing and so forth that your last paragraph portrays. I am no different than anyone else on this forum. We all have a right to be spoken to with decency, and in a non-perverse manner.
Thank-you.
DEVILDOG
07-26-01, 05:13 AM
Originally posted by Deadwood
My Father does not heal based on race. People from all races and walks of life have been healed.
<b>Your father? As in god, or parental figure? If the latter is the case then I see the whole picture. You have been Fed the belief in god since you were knee-high to a grasshopper.
Now, don't get me wrong, I've known firsthand of a pretty amazing "miracle" myself. My grandmother went blind, legally and medically, for six months. She saw a lady, who rubbed a bone from (sp) medjegorie on her eyes, told her to say a novena the first 13 days of each month and no meat on Fridays. Well, six months later her sight was restored. Don't go saying that was divine intervention, because I would believe it was voodoo before I would believe that, but I feel it was the power of the mind to heal.
Here's why...
1. Why should her sight return, yet not a child's.
2. Is her faith any stronger than anyone else's?(no)
3. Did it return for the greater good of mankind?(no)
4. Did her regaining sight, restore anyone else's faith? (no)
So why then, what makes her special when so many others, who may need it more, are left unhealed?</b>
And now your opinion.......
Rambler
07-27-01, 01:01 AM
So you get to say all that and then run away....fine ignore me I could careless. I'm not about to appolagise for that post... the swearing may have been a touch strong but it wasn't aimed at you and I'm pretty sure you know who the target was...
If you were insulted by my dig at your God then perhaps you now have an understanding of how others feel when they are subject to christain preaching......I don't believe anyone is born tarnished..that idea is far more of an insult then a couple of words.
Anyways ignore me if you like, its your right...as it is mine to use strong language (well at least while the moderators allow it)....
now the rest of you reply:
__________
Not having to take tablets or being able to walk. People even being able to get out of wheel chairs and walk for the first time. People being legally blind and able to see. Even one boy in vegas who had never been able to see in his whole life after being at one of Benny Hinn's preaching was able to see. It took a few minutes for him to be fully healed. Not all the time do you need a doctors opinion. But yes, they have no explanation. Also, with that boy, a whole stadium of people had an opinion. The parents also have an opinion. Can you guess what that opinion is?
___________
Show me 1 crdeible report. Surely you don't expect me to just take your word for it.
____________
So you believe also in something that has not been scientifically proven. Thanks
____________
Yes I do, I believe the sun will rise tomorrow, I can't prove it but it has happened often enough that I can allow myself that bit of faith...placeebo's have also done the job time and time again...so yes I believe the power of suggestion has strong influence on people...hell just look at what telling people that hell might be waiting for them has done.
_____________
All it takes is one sin to be imperfect. My two miscarrieged sisters also didn't get a chance to live on this Earth. Yet I still believe God is a God of compassion.
____________
did these children commit these sins while in the womb???? try harder, why are all those children less important then those who can pay admission fees to benny's circus???
____________
My Father does not heal based on race. People from all races and walks of life have been healed.
____________
Yes it's based on your wallet....
____________
My God does not need to have an ego. If you already are all-powerful, there is no such thing as a power trip or an ego. Whether I worship God or not does not effect His ego. Remember, He was just the same even before we were there to worship Him. But I believe that He does want to give us full-life in abundance. More than any mortal could imagine on this Earth. But God doesn't need our praise. But He still does love our praise.
____________
I see so all those stories in the bible of genocide because God wasn't getting his due praises and arse kisses...wasn't about ego at all...hmmmm
_____________
Devils do have powers to make people sick. And with that they can take that sickness away also.
_____________
Like Benny????
the swearing may have been a touch strongSometimes I like to skewer the British, but it largely has to do with my perceptions of what has taken place in Ireland. I only swell with American Revolutionary pride when I'm considering the paradox of what it must be like to be the first British army troop to have to open fire against your own Loyalist countrymen. However, it was a Brit, Mr John (Ozzy) Osbourne, who, in Circus magazine, of all media, reminded me that The wonderful thing about America is that you have the right to be offended.
You know, it seems like venting steam has become a hate crime in America, while hate-inspired violence is becoming a right. When Matthew Shephard died, the defense claimed that extreme paranoia incited by aggressive homosexuals in the defendant's past justified the crime; not as a moral propriety, but as an essential insanity plea without pleading insanity. It didn't work. At the same time, anyone critical of the religion that coincidentally (y'know, I blame the religion for a lot, but at some point, a man must stand up and hold himself accountable--for God's sake is good enough for me if humanity isn't good enough for him) creates the most part of the paranoia regarding homosexuality is accused of hating something. Hell, you don't even have to be complaining about their position on homosexuality. You can simply be wondering about Scriptural paradox in juxtaposition to Perfection.
In other words, sir, don't let it worry you. My utterly unsolicited advice is to simply catalog it, and remember it next time; not as a moral lesson, I pray, as I'm not telling you anything new to you. However, as an idiot who has dreamed of being a writer ever since Uncle Shelby inspired him at ... age 5, I think, I consider those moments to which you refer in that inadequate snippet I have included to be something to smile at, and find a quieter, less profane, more subtly damaging way of saying it next time. I admit that we all do have our devilish sides, but so what? It's part of the intraspecies competition that keeps us healthy and that civilization will kill. You've done yourself a service by getting it off your chest; it provides you a new opportunity to examine the conundrum. And that's always fun.
Or so says me. But I'm experiencing a Thoreau couple of days, so I humbly beg your pardon for my pomposity.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
Rambler
07-27-01, 03:28 AM
I wouldn't even say it bothers me...I guess the ONLY reason that comes to mind as to why I even bothered to reply to deadwood is because one of my many flaws is I can't back down from a fight...especially when its started by someone taking a pompous position....
Everyone else,
hope these exchanges haven't interfered too much with the "discussion"
Have a good one all...my weekend has just begun and I'm running low on dopemein (sp?)...time to replenish mmmm m mm m :D
I am no different than anyone else on this forum. We all have a right to be spoken to with decency, and in a non-perverse manner. You mean like having your culture threatened? To be told that you deserve to die because someone thinks God says so?
Better yet, what of people who ignore what you say so that they can make their own point in a completely different vein? Say, exscinding words so that one feels one has an answer? What about that disrespect to communicative attempts shown by dismissive posts littering both sides of every aisle in this forum? Why did I get so steamed at Tony1? Because the best he could give anyone's thoughts was a smartassed retort requiring no thought whatsoever. What, you don't find it annoying when your hours of research and composition are dismissed with a cutesy, nonsensical metaphor, or a threat?
Or is it so bad to be called on bullshit that one just doesn't want to answer the charge of inconsistency?
I know that indignant twinge it inspires, but I would beg you to take a look around. At this point we're all being a little bit grubs and maggots; what, then, is the mission? You'll note that whereas one side of the aisle says Because one book says so, the other side won't resort to that tactic; they feel they have a better one. Likewise, what is the mission? To demand to be treated equally, or to raise yourself above such a mire for the glory of God? Put in practice: do you equalize by striking another man, or transcend for the glory of God?
Two simple points, and I would ask you to read them without attributing a sarcastic voice to them:
* Is it good enough to be equal to the infidels, or does a Christian have an obligation to God to elevate oneself in both idea and practice? (Why do such worldly illusions such as equality seem to obscure the personal relationship with God, and one's duties toward that relationship?)
* Did you not write that Christians are meant to suffer? It seems you feel inappropriately addressed in a disrespectful manner: isn't this part of what you choose when you decide to submit to this faith?
It is not that you deserve to be spoken or written to in any way more or less defamatory than anyone else. Considering the standard of practice at Sciforums (and I still consider this board far more civil than others), calling bullshit isn't that bad. I've had to do it a couple of times recently, myself. But your words that I've included at the begining of this post reflect a sentiment I, myself, wonder about from time to time; it seems acceptable here at Sciforums to call bullshit on one another from time to time, and wake the fuck up, while colloquial, is only harsh because one chooses to perceive it that way. The same point is made without the word fuck quite frequently from both sides of the aisle; what makes it any more disrespectful, other than one's choice to fixate on a single, exceptionally colloquial word?
I stop here because I realize my digression is running longer than my intent. But it's not like anyone threatened to kill you.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
Deadwood
07-28-01, 03:40 AM
Tiassa
If this forum is just going to turn into some sort of place where you can not debate in a way without people swearing in their responses. Then I don't want to be any part of it. My perception of swearing is pretty bad. Swearing is something you do only when you're really angry, not casually. And even in anger you still shouldn't swear.
Ephesians 4:26
"In your anger do not sin": Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry,
It is not my intention to come here and make people angry. If you don't like other peoples views then don't come to the religion forum, or thats the way that I see it, though you may think differently on the subject. I don't think it is petty to dislike swearing. Swearing should have no part in discussion or debate because it conveys to the reader that the person swearing is bringing the debate to a lower level.
If the swearing had not been used then I would most likely have had no problem. The only other problem I had was that my post caused Rambler to blaspheme my God. For this, I feel bad. Though my post was written with good intentions.
Also, the question was asked, I give an answer, then I receive a rude one back. How would a teacher feel if you asked them a question then they responded, and you responded back to them with swear words. The teacher would most likely wouldn't pay any attention to you again, because no matter what they say, they are just going to get sworn at.
Though I'm Christian, I still have feelings. I would certainly hope I have never hurt yours. But don't go saying that I hurt your feelings because I said you are a sinner. Because by your standards I am evil.
Now to your first question.
* Is it good enough to be equal to the infidels, or does a Christian have an obligation to God to elevate oneself in both idea and practice? (Why do such worldly illusions such as equality seem to obscure the personal relationship with God, and one's duties toward that relationship?)
What do you define as infedels. Is it a non-Christian? Also, it is not I who elevate myself, but God who elevates me to believe what I believe. I realise that you may not understand this. He has taught me a lot. Of course scientists could not find proof of this teaching. But anyone could see it by the way I live my life. Though I live in the world, I am not of the world. But I do not feel pride or anything like that in knowing Jesus. For I was once part of the world to, when I do not know. I have been Christian since I was little.
Now the second question
* Did you not write that Christians are meant to suffer? It seems you feel inappropriately addressed in a disrespectful manner: isn't this part of what you choose when you decide to submit to this faith?
Ah yes, it is what I choose. You know my stance on suffering and persecution, however, when I signed up for exosci, I did not choose to debate with people who aren't here to debate but to vent anger.
A guy last week in the city came to where I was eating by myself and preach scientology to me, that he was going to change the world, that he was Jesus Christ. You see, though we talked, we talked about our beliefs in a strong yet passive manner of mutual respect. Not once did one of us swear. Though I may have said to him that according to the bible was a false teacher and I told him why, he respected that. And though he may have said that the world would end in 6 months and that the bible was written by people other than the apostles, I respected that as well. For oneday, we would both know that we would both find out the truth. however, I do wish we could've spoken longer but I had to go to my next class.
So the point is, on this forum, we should all debate with mutual respect and not resort to coarse language.
Thank-you
That's all well and fine, Deadwood, and soon enough I'll haul this very subject over to Ethics & Morality: Why do you find certain things offensive? (Or the next guy ... it's not just about you, necessarily.)
I'm sticking my nose in because Rambler's words are no more severe than other people's words that don't generate such a response. I call bullshit on people every now and then, as well; I did the other day in a debate with Dan.My perception of swearing is pretty bad. And that's all I was after.
There are many ways to offend. Of the cussing that's gone on here in the past, I don't see the offensiveness, and that's part of why I bothered opening my yap at all. I'm sorry you perceive those words as offensive in any context. But I'll note American rock and roll this time: Dee Snider of Twisted Sister once explained, Nobody paid attention until someone decided they were offended. It works. And he wasn't talking about album sales.
Other posters find offense elsewhere; how many threads has Loone been invited to remove himself from for the uselessness of his interruptions? I think everyone recalls my last temper tantrums over Lawdog, and how much do you think it bugged me to see his fellow Christians hedging around, trying to say he's wrong without actually having to tell him, and while attempting to justify him with other rhetoric? In the end, the best thing I can recommend is to take the position that these people are only reinforcing my point.
When you become indignant, you demonstrate that you are the important consideration in the debate, and not the knowledge or spirit itself. So if you think Rambler's offensive, then just sit back and know it's part of the advantage that God brings you. One of the reasons I'll engage Loone at all is that he is so awful a demonstration of Christianity's potential that I'm happy to let him go on trashing its image. I've learned that to spend any amount of effort on a post should not offend me when it's written off in seconds by Loone's idiotic babble because I'm quite certain that the effect is advantageous to humanity: who would want to take the faith if it reduces them to that?
But, I'm happy to keep your debate standards in the back of my mind; it's only fair.
I'll even try to put this thread back on track: When Adam and Eve sinned, the entire universe was corrupted, particularly the planet Earth. I will skip my usual advocacy of the idea that this is by God's Will alone, and ask a question that sometimes comes up in debates on origins: Are we, humanity, the most important of God's creations in all the Universe? Are we the whole reason the Universe was created?
The notion seems outright silly to me, but there is no religion in the world whose creationary tale tells the story of another tribe being more important. As we view, say, the Judeo-Christian origins: Genesis makes a focus of God's creation, and the Bible traces the evolution of that idea to the Hebrews, and then to the Christian usurpation, which religion then attempted to conquer the world. But as it encountered pagan cultures, none of their tales of origin said that God created man for the Jews and then the Christians as such. Otherwise, they would submit on the day the Christians arrived according to their own religion, and not in superstition and fear.
For instance, to demonstrate how that concept would fit into a Creationist scheme, not only must the Creationist demonstrate the creator, which would settle this Topic nearly instantly (although it would be a hoot if there was a Creator who found the Christian myth insulting), but also must, to accommodate the corruption of the Universe, establish the universal medium by which that corruption occurred. How, did the corruption spread from the point of its origin?Devils do have powers to make people sick. And with that they can take that sickness away also.And I'll back Rambler's notion here: Benny Hinn? Oral Roberts? Bob Tilton? Jesus? (Note: Nobody has ever effectively countered the theory originally sponsored here at Sciforums by Emerald by which Jesus is the Devil, the basis of which being derived Biblically.)
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
Deadwood
07-29-01, 08:10 AM
Tiassa I think you were talking to me and not Caleb?
I offer you this passage to counter emeralds theory about Jesus being the Devil. This is actually Jesus' own words.
Mark 3
1
Another time he went into the synagogue, and a man with a shriveled hand was there.
2
Some of them were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal him on the Sabbath.
3
Jesus said to the man with the shriveled hand, "Stand up in front of everyone."
4
Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent.
5
He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored.
6
Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.
7
Jesus withdrew with his disciples to the lake, and a large crowd from Galilee followed.
8
When they heard all he was doing, many people came to him from Judea, Jerusalem, Idumea, and the regions across the Jordan and around Tyre and Sidon.
9
Because of the crowd he told his disciples to have a small boat ready for him, to keep the people from crowding him.
10
For he had healed many, so that those with diseases were pushing forward to touch him.
11
Whenever the evil spirits saw him, they fell down before him and cried out, "You are the Son of God."
12
But he gave them strict orders not to tell who he was.
13
Jesus went up on a mountainside and called to him those he wanted, and they came to him.
14
He appointed twelve--designating them apostles--that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach
15
and to have authority to drive out demons.
16
These are the twelve he appointed: Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter);
17
James son of Zebedee and his brother John (to them he gave the name Boanerges, which means Sons of Thunder);
18
Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot
19
and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.
20
Then Jesus entered a house, and again a crowd gathered, so that he and his disciples were not even able to eat.
21
When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, "He is out of his mind."
22
And the teachers of the law who came down from Jerusalem said, "He is possessed by Beelzebub! By the prince of demons he is driving out demons."
23
So Jesus called them and spoke to them in parables: "How can Satan drive out Satan?
24
If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
25
If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand.
26
And if Satan opposes himself and is divided, he cannot stand; his end has come.
27
In fact, no one can enter a strong man's house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man. Then he can rob his house.
28
I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them.
29
But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin."
30
He said this because they were saying, "He has an evil spirit."
31
Then Jesus' mother and brothers arrived. Standing outside, they sent someone in to call him.
32
A crowd was sitting around him, and they told him, "Your mother and brothers are outside looking for you."
33
"Who are my mother and my brothers?" he asked.
34
Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, "Here are my mother and my brothers!
35
Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."
: Are we, humanity, the most important of God's creations in all the Universe?
I would have to say in this universe yes. But are we the most important of all of Gods' creations. I couldn't tell you. Because I don't know.
Are we the whole reason the Universe was created
I couldn't say a definite yes, but we would be a huge part of it, if not the whole reason. But I could not forget the mammals, the birds, the fish of the sea. Plants and trees. These are all important to. They were probably created for God's as well as our enjoyment.
The notion seems outright silly to me, but there is no religion in the world whose creationary tale tells the story of another tribe being more important. As we view, say, the Judeo-Christian origins: Genesis makes a focus of God's creation, and the Bible traces the evolution of that idea to the Hebrews, and then to the Christian usurpation, which religion then attempted to conquer the world. But as it encountered pagan cultures, none of their tales of origin said that God created man for the Jews and then the Christians as such. Otherwise, they would submit on the day the Christians arrived according to their own religion, and not in superstition and fear.
I have to be honest and say I don't really understand what you are getting at here. But I will try and answer from my own understanding.
I'm not sure if you could call the first people Jewish because they were not under the covenent that we know of that God gave to Moses. But I think I can help you on this next quote.
As we view, say, the Judeo-Christian origins: Genesis makes a focus of God's creation, and the Bible traces the evolution of that idea to the Hebrews, and then to the Christian usurpation, which religion then attempted to conquer the world. But as it encountered pagan cultures, none of their tales of origin said that God created man for the Jews and then the Christians as such. Otherwise, they would submit on the day the Christians arrived according to their own religion, and not in superstition and fear.
I go by the assumption here that all men(as in mankind) were created for God and not Jews. So in saying that if someone were created for something that they would like it holds true and false. Some will be obedient and listen. Others will choose to follow their own path. Am I fair in saying this? Though, and you may not agree with me thats fine, we all have a body and a spirit, our spirit does long to be close to and be with our God. However, our current body(flesh) desires what is against Gods will, which is sin, the selfish desires of this world. So here we have a conflict between the flesh and the spirit.
So it is if God. Though we are created for Him, it does not neccessarily mean that we won't be against Him.
but also must, to accommodate the corruption of the Universe, establish the universal medium by which that corruption occurred. How, did the corruption spread from the point of its origin?
I believe that the "universal medium" that made the corruption of the universe is sin. This is how Judiasm and Christianity hold why the universe is in the state it is. But please remember that even Satan(means deceiver) was once Lucifer(I think it means enlightened or something along those lines). This was Lucifer before he had sinned. The reason that most Christians hold he sinned was pride. we come to this conclusion because he considered equality with God. This was because God made him very beatiful. Before he sinned and was corrupted, he was held very highly by God.
I think that Christianity is the only religion that says God suffers also. Though He is perfect, He suffers because of how lost many of us are, this is how much He cares about us, that He even be sad for our sake. He finds no pleasure in making people perish.
2Peter 3:9
8
But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day
9
The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
But, I'm happy to keep your debate standards in the back of my mind; it's only fair.
I'm all to happy to discuss things with people who want to discuss. :)
DEVILDOG
07-31-01, 07:04 AM
Originally posted by Deadwood
Swearing is something you do only when you're really angry, not casually.
First of all, being an ex-marine, the word in question FUCK, is part of my vocabulary. It is commonly used there, CASUALLY, and angrily. More often casually though. Even in bootcamp the drill instructors warn new recruits before going home for the first time that "mama" might not like their newly acquired way of communicating. The phrase "what the fuck" is heard numerous times during the day, while in bootcamp. To be more specific, every time the rules are broken.(They get broken a lot when you don't know them all yet.) So don't take offense to them too much.
The only other problem I had was that my post caused Rambler to blaspheme my God.
Secondly, there are two common, not necessarily correct, definitions for this word:
1. Fornication Under Consent (of the) King-permission to have sex with your wife. This is impossible since you can't fornicate with you wife by the true definition of the word fornicate.(voluntary sexual intercourse between an unmarried couple)
2. For(ced) Unlawful Carnal Knowledge-rape, sex with a minor, etc. More or less legal jargon.
Neither of these definitions are blasphemous unless you are a believer in your god. So if it is not said by a believer, it cannot be called blaspheme. My suggestions would then be:
1. Take it to heart, and feel hurt and betrayed by non-believers.
-OR-
2. Ignore it and continue on with your mission to convert everyone.
THE CHOICE IS YOURS
Deadwood
07-31-01, 07:50 AM
Hey Devildog
It wasn't actually from offense, it was just the fact that we are all here to discuss and when people start swearing in regard to your responses, I don't think its healthy.
People around me swear all the time casually and when angry. But I don't take offense to it. I just ignore it. As I stated I do have a pretty bad perception on swearing when people start swearing at me. Like I post on the "Bible is Bulls**t" thread without even a worry about swearing. But I don't like it being directed at me, its not in the spirit of good debate.
I don't swear that much myself, like today at one of my classes, I did a whole heap of work and couldn't save it to hard drive. I did so much work and I decided to save it to floppy. Then since my floppy decided to become damaged, it instantly restarted the system. then I swore, kinda just slipped out. Then I took the floppy out and said to it "now you made me swear". then the people sitting next to me started laughing at me and started imitating me saying "now you made me swear". I felt pretty bad for swearing and hope I don't do it next time.
I am noted for not swearing, so people find it either pretty funny or pretty serious when I do. Even the teacher took pitty on me.
but I prefer to say "sugar". Perhaps if you were still in the marines you could ask your drill instructor to say "sugar" next time. :D
BTW I am aware of the first definition.
Fixed the post, I think, and my apologies. Such errors are what happens when I stop to worry about inane things like this whining.
For the entire time I've posted here, Christians have maintained the utter disrespect of simply not paying attention to what anyone is writing: they affirm one another without ever knowing what they mean; they argue dead points over and over because they are either unwillling (disrespectful) or unable (ignorant) to figure out the point is dead; they dismiss carefully researched posts with sarcasm and generally assert such stupidities as, "No, I don't have to prove that because I have faith."
Generally, we the thinking try not to complain; we try to understand.
But if you think the cussing at this board is bad, take a trip around to the others.
This board isn't yours merely for the preaching: it's all of ours (courtesy Dave) for debate. And yes, debate steams people. If you don't like their reactions, consider at least why they react that way: again, I charge Christians to be without human empathy, else this leap is simple to take on faith.
When it comes to disrespect, cussing is much more economical than the alternative. Look at the amount of boardspace wasted by Loone and Tony1. They've never had any care for the topic they're posting in, and have behaved accordingly. If you can't think of anything to put down the cussing on your own, that's not my problem. I'm thankful that Dave chose not to intervene when Lawdog threatened people, and I got essentially the reaction I expected.
Disrespect, my ass.
I'm happy to debate on the terms set by the Christian posters, but what's the point of that? None of us would ever have anything to say for lack of an original thought. Oh, wait ... I have one: "Praise Jesus!" It's not like anyone's ever said that before. It's the most original and well-thought argument ever made at Sciforums.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
Deadwood
08-01-01, 06:42 AM
ummm, Tiassa, I have a post right up the top of the page that I replied back to which didn't receive a reply. So who is it who doesn't want to reply?
the fact is I do try my best to reply. If I miss something I'm sorry, I can't be answering to every single post.
Generally, we the thinking try not to complain; we try to understand.
Can say the same thing about others on this board including you.
You missed my post up the top there and now I am just going to keep on complaining even though it was just a terrible mistake. I think I will just expect the worst and say that it was a calculated evasion of that post. I think Militaristic metaphors are bad, but saying a well thought out post and being replied back with BULLSHIT and Wake the fuck up, I find that completely OK, these complaining Christians always whining. :rolleyes: (Deadwood actually did go and look for this post but couldn't find it, all this even though afterward Deadwood did actually reply and asked Tiassa and Pragmathan but didn't receive a reply saying where until about 5 days later. Then deadwood had to be busy and wasn't able to post. After this, Lawdog posted a topic about copernicus.
http://www.sciforums.com/t3232/s5ed568d2c4f2dabc3ff1b898743bce29/thread.html
but deadwood didn't receive any reply back, Lawdog ceased posting for a long time and now only posts occasionally.)
tiassa check with the facts and circumstances before you go on with you whining. You see I did ask Lawdog, but I got no reply. If you would have checked every post you would have seen and known that. But like me, you can't be everywhere at once.
If you don't like me, just say so. But please don't spread lies about my actions in this forums.
If you think that swearing is appropriate on this forum then you are old enough. I'm sure you can work out if you want to swear or not. I just hold the view that swearing is inappropriate.
and why do you put me in the same group as lawdog, he doesn't even like me, he thinks of me as an apostate(against the teachings of Jesus Christ and against Jesus Christ himself) as well as loone and Tony1. Please do not put us with someone who doesn't even like us. I have no problem being yolked with loone and tony1, the guys you love to hate, but why put me with lawdog? Is it just for conveniences sake, or so as you have something to say against us who actually do love people and would not want to see them die, but instead live so as they can have a fuller knowledge of the truth.
Oh no, looks like I'd better quit my whining.
Believe the worst in me if you like. But I know I am none of these things you say, apart from Christian. Thats all that matters.
you got something with lawdog, take it up with him. But don't drag me into his witch hunt, because like you, I don't want to be apart of that either.
A) We've been over the issues I have with your support for Lawdog. Your half-assed justifications in the To God be the Glory[/b] debate didn't cut it then. You chose to drag your own ass into that one, so don't lay it on me. At the time of your entry, it was still between Lawdog and Loone and myself. With evidence of my point manifest in Lawdog your first instinct was still to justify the hollow militarism of your faith. If you'd kept your mouth shut, we wouldn't be having this portion of the conversation.
B) Help me out with that ranting paragraph of yours: You missed my post up the top there and now I am just going to keep on complaining even though it was just a terrible mistake. What, you mean the top of this page, where you fought scripture with scripture and included a logical justification offered by Jesus that is of a method usually attributed to the Devil? The problem of Christian "logic" is that it stands not on its own merit but seeks fault in others' logics and accuses, much like a bilbical accuser. I consider the scriptural portion of the response thin at best.and why do you put me in the same group as lawdog, he doesn't even like me, he thinks of me as an apostate(against the teachings of Jesus Christ and against Jesus Christ himself) as well as loone and Tony1. Please do not put us with someone who doesn't even like us. I have no problem being yolked with loone and tony1, the guys you love to hate, but why put me with lawdog? Is it just for conveniences sake, or so as you have something to say against us who actually do love people and would not want to see them die, but instead live so as they can have a fuller knowledge of the truth. You know, you, sir, are the one who chose to intervene in my debate with Loone after[i] I pointed out the damaging aspect of those military metaphors as manifest by Lawdog. You simply repeated what Loone had already attempted to push, and then went on to blame it all on Satan. It seems you chose to throw yourself in with that lot; I have done nothing but hold you to your excuses.tiassa check with the facts and circumstances before you go on with you whining. You see I did ask Lawdog, but I got no reply. If you would have checked every post you would have seen and known that.So you [i]asked] Lawdog? Oooh, that's a fulfillment of your duty to God. Um, excuse me, sir, are you sure murdering something is right? Okay, just checking .... :rolleyes: Believe the worst in me if you like. But I know I am none of these things you say, apart from Christian. Thats all that matters. Unlike Christian philosophy, I don't assume the worst in peole, such as that silly notion about being born into sin. As to the rest of it, I'm going based on what you write.
A couple of notes on that post you're so distressed about: I would have to say in this universe yes. But are we the most important of all of Gods' creations. I couldn't tell you. Because I don't know. This is part of the problem of Christianity. The assumption of human (specifically Christian) importance compared to the Universe is part of the reason Christians fail utterly to understand their place in it. The world is there for Christian dominion, or something like that, and the results have been, as history has shown, catastrophic.I couldn't say a definite yes, but we would be a huge part of it, if not the whole reason. But I could not forget the mammals, the birds, the fish of the sea. Plants and trees. These are all important to. They were probably created for God's as well as our enjoyment. I believe this to be one of the dumbest things you've written here, sir.
We are part of the Universe, just like the stars. Did you know stars sing? Do you care?
I'll get to the rest of it later--must get to work. But here's a hint: if you want a reply, don't post the same old crap that's been covered, and don't be quite so ridiculous. Every once in a while, it's just not worth the bother because you demonstrate with your words that there are simple concepts about humanity that your faith precludes you from understanding.
Your faith is your choice, and your limitations are your choice. But it's not my fault when you will yourself to them.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
Unlike Christian philosophy, I don't assume the worst in peole ...
Tell me another ... Oh please do.
(posted in memory of my Chinese friend 'Won Hung Lo')
DEVILDOG
08-01-01, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by Deadwood
Perhaps if you were still in the marines you could ask your drill instructor to say "sugar" next time. :D
I'm quite sure the enemy would feel threatened with the battle cry,"Hey, Sugar You, Mothersugar!!!!"
:) ;) :p :D :o :D :p ;) :)
Rambler
08-01-01, 06:39 PM
First DEVILDOG:
ROFLMAO!!!!
You'd think I was the first person to say shit infront of a christain....
Hey Deadwood, take a GOOD look around on this forum...people swear thats what we do...your holier than thow nonsense is PURE hypocrasy (sp?, do I care??)....In a post above you repeated what I wrote i.e. BULLSHIT, and what the FUCK, the context you wrote it in wasn't directly aimed at me but niether was what I wrote (aimed at you...directly)...so do I get all super senitive now and complain because you wrote some words that I might not like...by your own admission you are surrounded by people who use such language in normal conversation and still you take offense to a couple of words on an internet forum....
Deadwood if your that easily offended stay the (turn away now deadwood) fuck off the internet....there's much worse then a few heated words....infact wrap yourself in cotton wool and stay inside I fear your super-sensitive nature might not like whats out there.....or else grow up...if you want to play with the big kids in the playground you'll need to do some growing up yourself....
BTW I think seasame street is on the tele at the moment...might be more your style...
Tell me another ... Oh please doThe next time you feel yourself irritated by some too-liberal-for-your-selfish-tastes idea I'm touting--say, prison and sentencing policies--remember that part of what I base this on is that people are not inherently evil, and that because a man has committed a wrong does not mean he will spend the rest of his life doing wrong. So if it makes you grind your teeth because I'm being too soft-hearted toward those other people you find so insignificant (or, rather, only significant enough to dislike), remember that it's because I don't assume the worst in people, and keep your piehole shut about it because you'll only be making a contradictory fool of yourself. Easy enough? Thought so ;)
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
Before you know it, Tiassa's erudition will affect you the same way it's affected me ... it's reduced me to platitudes.
All I could think of to reply to Tiassa's last post was ...
"Leopards don't change their spots!"
And even after harder thought, the best I could do was ...
"If you're not liberal when you're young, you have no heart. If you're not conservative when you're old, you have no brain."
Give Tiassa time to mature. Maybe like wine, Tiassa will improve with age.
DEVILDOG
08-02-01, 06:11 AM
WHAT WAS THE TOPIC AGAIN?????
:confused:
OH, I REMEMBER...
Someone asked me once, "If god does exist, who has more to lose when they die? The believer or the non-believer?
My answer to this is neither. If god does exist than how can he condemn a soul to hell because he could not believe. I say could not for the simple reason, that he was "given" a mind, heart, or whatever that would not accept the lack of proof.
Like they say about diving in a new area....Feet first, first time. It's better to have broken legs than a cracked skull.(ok maybe a bad analogy) Why should we dive into the belief head first when we might only be filling ourselves with false hope? How can so many praise god when millions of people who <b><u>DO</u></b> believe are suffering unjustly.
Don't go placing the blame on satan, if god is as powerful as is believed, he would have wiped him out a long time ago. The punishment for any deed against god is death, remember. Can't be anymore against him than satan.
I would rather believe in evolution, than believe some HIGHER being would be so cruel, yet expect us to worship him, when he's supposed to be all loving.
dan1123
08-02-01, 06:28 PM
If god does exist than how can he condemn a soul to hell because he could not believe.
You assume that there is no choice in how you believe. There is plenty of choice--in what you expose yourself to, in what you search for, etc.
I would rather believe in evolution, than believe some HIGHER being would be so cruel, yet expect us to worship him, when he's supposed to be all loving.
Would a loving parent give his child a $40,000 car after he already wrecked the last three? It isn't God's choice to force you into heaven. He tries to make it as easy as possible, and it is up to you to choose. Heaven isn't some place where you sit back with a beer and have scantily clad women feed you grapes all day. It is a place to be close to God, in His protection. If you do not do anything to try to be close to God now, then why would you want to be much closer forever?
Maybe I can follow Chagur's example and skip straight to vinegar.
Yummy.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
Sir. Loone
08-02-01, 07:18 PM
Silly Tiassa, Our GOD is the authority on whom goes to Heaven or not, and did anyone mention that a Christian could enjoy some of Heaven on Earth, even through trials and conflict!? Yes we can!
Woe unto those that call that which is 'good' evil! And the evil thing good! I have read DevilDog's and others mockery, and it only sums up as always to foolishness and hateful priedfull ignorance!:rolleyes: :D Your day of reconning will come! Jesus is your only hope of excape! Of the Judgment that is!:eek: :)
That's lovely, dear. Would you like some milk and cookies since you ate all your peas?
--Tiassa :cool:
Rambler
08-02-01, 08:35 PM
you wrote:
"Would a loving parent give his child a $40,000 car after he already wrecked the last three"
I'd have to say probably not.....however lets put it in the TRUE context:
Would a loving parent give his child a $40,000 car after he already wrecked the last three....because that "loving" parent sabotaged all the cars and then blamed the accidents on the child.
Would the child want another gift of that kind???
Now Loone:
you wrote:
"Woe unto those that call that which is 'good' evil! And the evil thing good"
I have read the bible, studied it etc etc had a full christain education and the conclusion I come to is that the evil is a product of your God so WOE unto you Loone....If your right and there is an almighty judgemental thing deciding your eternity I would LOVE to see you explain your devotion to the most corrupt human endevour in the history of humanity.
Sir. Loone
08-02-01, 09:10 PM
The DevilDog needs a distemper shot;) Boy he is way out in the woods somewhere!
dan1123
08-02-01, 10:04 PM
rambler:
Would a loving parent give his child a $40,000 car after he already wrecked the last three....because that "loving" parent sabotaged all the cars and then blamed the accidents on the child.
The loving parent sabotaged it? A more accurate representation of what the Bible describes is a brother sabotaged the ones before.
You seem to have the idea that it's humanity against God. God wants you to do one thing and you want to do another, but since God is bigger He's going to throw you into some fire pit for eternity. The Bible never denies that people want to do other than what God wants. The ending solution that the Bible says God comes up with is that He salvages anyone who asks Him--even if you've done contrary to God all your life.
Rambler
08-02-01, 11:39 PM
I disagree, sticking to the family analogy we can say the brother's (or sister's) hand was the one who performed the sabotage but it would be the parent that put the sibling in a position where they KNEW they would sabotage it. I guess the analogy wear's a little thin at this point. I don't know what version of Genisis you've read but the one I'm familiar with, god created adam and eve in his image (I take that to mean perfect) and then put the one thing that could and ultimatley would corrupt them in their faces (and then further tempted them by making it taboo, he knew what saying no will result in)...but it doesn't stop there he also lets satan loiter in the garden of eden (would you let a low life criminal hang out with your kids?)...being god it/he/she/he-she :D would KNOW what the outcome of this situation would be...so back to the analogy if the parent didn't teach the sibling that it is wrong to sabotage cars then it is the parent that is at fault merely saying don't do it has never got the message across to a child, they must be taught and they MUST be allowed to make a mistake...after all isn't that the most efficient way to learn . It seems to me like this god had all the power needed to avoid this massive fall from perfection and still it let it happen...to me that looks like it was an act with full intent. Hence God made it so.
DEVILDOG
08-03-01, 03:03 AM
Originally posted by dan1123
It is a place to be close to God, in His protection.
How can you talk of protection in the afterlife, when there is so much to protect here on Earth?
Children are dying because of lack of food.
Children are dying because of lack of medicines.
Children are dying because of lack of shelter.
CHILDREN ARE DYING, PERIOD.
As I said before, how can anyone praise god when he ALLOWS children to suffer. What greater good is achieved in it?
Sir Loone :
How is it a mockery. It's not my fault that there is more proof in the world of his non-existance(according to how his attributes are listed in the bible) than of his existance.
All of my parents' principles changed. Instead of, "You don't need dishonest people in your life," (the parental assumption being that my friends were dishonest), it became, "You have to make responsible choices." In other words, it doesn't matter if your employer is dishonest, kiss his ass.
Maybe the parent (like God) should have taught what is apparently supposed to be the relevant lesson in the first place, instead of worrying about what the neighbors think when you play with a child they don't like.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
DEVILDOG
08-03-01, 03:56 AM
Originally posted by Sir. Loone
The DevilDog needs a distemper shot;) Boy he is way out in the woods somewhere!
NOT THE WOODS, BUT THE BAYOU. THE ONLY GOD IN "THESE HERE PARTS" IS THE MIGHTY GATOR, FOR HE TRULY HAS THE POWER TO CHOOSE YOUR FATE.
Rambler
08-03-01, 04:34 AM
That maybe so...but only if you stand still. If it chases you for 10 meters (and its a decent sized croc) it will die of lactic acid poisoning.
It also helps if you have some gatoraid handy :D hear that Gatoraid...endoursments...send me money!!!!
Just some critical constructive critizism.
Not meant to harm, but enough is enough.
Yes, God knows what one is doing.
He gave a person free will.
Everyone will have to learn more.
But really, if a poster makes a statement about God and Free Will, and comes up with all that logic:
Why does the one that posted disprove him/her self by posting something that he/she had free will not to do?
You already disproved yourself by posting with the first post.
If you say you had no free will to look at what you are posting then I submit that you did have free will to decide not to post to prove your point when your action was disproving from the start.
Please, but keep learning, everyone makes mistakes.
Only the smart ones know and will admit it when it happens, otherwise the World may get really bad because of free will and do the nasty thing, all because of free will even with God knowing.
God can not break his own rules, he is not stumped, but you may be at the moment.
That will change.
Have some faith that everyone has permission to change.
Raion ...
Go to the beginning of this thread and read it all the way through and I think you'll find that almost every possible argument, pro or con, has been explored.
Why go through it all again?
Tamam Shud
dan1123
08-03-01, 09:10 PM
Devildog:
CHILDREN ARE DYING, PERIOD.
Yes they are, and babies are being murdered, and women are being raped, and a million other bad things are happening to innocent people all over the world.
That's what you have when the devil rules the world.
Yes, the Bible says that right now demons are ruling over the planet. If God takes them out, they take us out. The only way to get any of humanity away from being obliterated is to shield us. Yet the shield cannot get through from God's end, we have to reach for it.
Rambler:
being god it/he/she/he-she would KNOW what the outcome of this situation would be
Oh, really. Do <i>you</i> know what the outcome will be? The story isn't over yet.
If God takes them out, they take us out.Again we see questions of the scope of God's capability and authority. Or else that inextricable hostage-status is all part of His master plan.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
DEVILDOG
08-04-01, 03:15 AM
Originally posted by Raion
Just some critical constructive critizism.
Not meant to harm, but enough is enough.
Yes, God knows what one is doing.
He gave a person free will.
As far as the belief in creationism, you're right enough is enough. Reread the first post, if god is omniscient, and omnipotent than we have no free will. Therefore your entire post proves that you missed the whole point of this thread.
We have the free will to make these posts because there isn't a true god.
Originally posted by Dan1123
That's what you have when the devil rules the world.
Yes, the Bible says that right now demons are ruling over the planet. If God takes them out, they take us out. The only way to get any of humanity away from being obliterated is to shield us. Yet the shield cannot get through from God's end, we have to reach for it.
First, You're saying that this is hell, correct. The bible says that the devil rules over all of hell, so that would make Earth hell.
Secondly, I thought that he was supposed to be THE GREAT AND POWERFUL OZ..oops god(sorry lapse in judgement). If he cannot get this shield through to us with all his magnificient powers than how are we supposed to be able to reach it when he is said to be "stronger", for lack of a better word, than we are.
Third, If he was to take out satan why would we be taken out. How do you know they would obliterate us after seeing their leader destroyed. God is said to have kicked him out of heaven, if this is the case he should easily be able to control him. Or do we go back to the statement that god allows the evil because he enjoys watching people suffer unjustly.:rolleyes:
Originally posted by DEVILDOG
As far as the belief in creationism, you're right enough is enough.
It is tough to argue against the truth.
The only way for the theory of evolution to win is to suppress creationism.
J. B. S. Haldane laid evolution to rest with Haldane's dilemma.
And he's not even a Christian, as far as I know.
Reread the first post, if god is omniscient, and omnipotent than we have no free will.
So if your neighbour knows anything, or does anything, that limits you?
We have the free will to make these posts because there isn't a true god.
You have the free will to make these posts because there is a God.
If there were no God as creator, then you wouldn't be here.
The bible says that the devil rules over all of hell, so that would make Earth hell.
The Bible doesn't say that the devil rules hell.
It says he is the god of this world.
As for the shield thing, the shield is our faith.
God is said to have kicked him out of heaven, if this is the case he should easily be able to control him.
satan has little power.
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
(1 Peter 5:8, KJV).
All he has the power for, is looking for people he may devour.
He can't just go around deceiving people; he has to look for people that are easily deceived.
Or do we go back to the statement that god allows the evil because he enjoys watching people suffer unjustly
That was never the case, so there is nothing to go back to.
The point is, God created good and evil and told us to do good and avoid evil.
The penalty for evil is death, the reward for good is life.
Since we couldn't do good and avoid evil, God decided to count us as being able to do that if we believed him.
He sent Jesus to pay the penalty for our doing evil.
You have permission to control or get rid of - your anger!
Only then will you see all of the negativity that was within you!
Does that change anyone else?
Not really, but then you will have a different reality.
And God may decide that it was not good, and destroys the Heavens and the Earth, for it was He who created it.
Which attitude are you of -- perhaps indifference?
But, life is here in this Universe, and ying and yang, and all of it.
Space aliens dumped humans here at the far reaches of the Galaxy, they figured it would take many, many, many years to find others, and simply did not want to be bothered by humans anymore.
Planet Earth, a spaceship of time and space, roaming the Universe along with the mothership, the Milky Way Galaxy, and humans can not control it or the other 50 local galaxies we're travelin' with through space and time.
I would be concerned, a terrible something or other may happen to all of humanity, at any time.
Originally posted by Raion
I would be concerned, a terrible something or other may happen to all of humanity, at any time.
Safe bet.
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
(2 Peter 3:10-12, KJV).
dan1123
08-05-01, 10:24 PM
Or else that inextricable hostage-status is all part of His master plan.
Sure, why not? At one point I wondered why people loved stories where the hero comes into some sort of conflict with some evil enemy, and after a battle, the hero comes out victorious in the end. How often does that happen in real life? I haven't witnessed anything like that. In the real world, if the hero gets a victory, the hero himself has some flaw that taints it in some way.
So why do we like those types of stories? I think (wild speculation to ensue) we might be living in some vast piece of literature of the type that I explained above. And God is reading/writing/watching/interacting with us as humanity carries on until the end.
Something to think about.
Dan--
The problem is that I can't escape one thing: The inextricable hostage thing seems to remove free will. It also makes the whole schmoo seem pointless save for feeding the Almighty Ego.
Really, it keeps coming back to that. The contradictions of Christian faith are only important because Christians act on them in a manner that seems arbitrary. If you're all being blackmailed, that explains a good deal, though.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
Sir. Loone
08-14-01, 05:52 PM
GOD exist inspite of the worlds view of the Day! And contradictions in the Bible mentioned can be easily misunderstood by the 'unregenerate' person that is really not interested in becoming a believer in our Judeo-Christian Faith! If you have bought the lie that matter is all there is, it will be one's downfall, there's truly is far more to life then what meets the eyes of man and science! If refuses to think more highly then Ignorance! "The 'fool' has said in his heart 'there is no God!" (Psalms 14:1)
:o :cool:
Sir. Loone
08-14-01, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by Raion
You have permission to control or get rid of - your anger!
Only then will you see all of the negativity that was within you!
Does that change anyone else?
Not really, but then you will have a different reality.
And God may decide that it was not good, and destroys the Heavens and the Earth, for it was He who created it.
Which attitude are you of -- perhaps indifference?
But, life is here in this Universe, and ying and yang, and all of it.
Space aliens dumped humans here at the far reaches of the Galaxy, they figured it would take many, many, many years to find others, and simply did not want to be bothered by humans anymore.
Planet Earth, a spaceship of time and space, roaming the Universe along with the mothership, the Milky Way Galaxy, and humans can not control it or the other 50 local galaxies we're travelin' with through space and time.
I would be concerned, a terrible something or other may happen to all of humanity, at any time.
Space aliens dumped humans here at the far reaches of the Galaxy, they figured it would take many, many, many years to find others, and simply did not want to be bothered by humans anymore. Not true! GOD Created us in 'His' image, and for His own good pleaser! We were certainly not put here by ETs! By the way where did they come from?:rolleyes:
By the way where did they come from?Zeta Reticuli. Incidentally, this is the question that Creationists seem to be afraid to answer, usually rendering time--and therefore all things occurring within its confines--to fiction. This is only problematic, then, since God would therefore be judging you on things that never really happened. :rolleyes:
--Tiassa :cool:
Sir. Loone
08-14-01, 06:45 PM
Originally posted by tiassa
Zeta Reticuli. :cool:
Zeta Reticuli had to come from somewhere too!:D (though fiction)
GOD created all in the universe and beyond! And not afraid to answer questions about creation GOD as being the author of all that is, life and you!
GOD created all in the universe and beyond!You missed the point--surprise, surprise :rolleyes: --and provided an example that can be turned around quite easily: God, though fictional, had to come from somewhere.
Alpha and Omega? God has no beginning? Then time itself becomes a fiction, and thus the things within time are fictitious, and God is Judging people for things that never really happened. When someone fails to understand the nature of their faith, as you continually demonstrate you have, they end up making irresponsible claims on His behalf, as you continually do.
At least pretend you know what the point is. With enough practice at that, you might actually come to know in the end.
:rolleyes:,
Tiassa :cool:
dan1123
08-15-01, 07:30 PM
The problem is that I can't escape one thing: The inextricable hostage thing seems to remove free will. It also makes the whole schmoo seem pointless save for feeding the Almighty Ego.
Let's say that you're staying at a resort, and at the end of your stay you decide that you don't deserve to have to pay for your stay. So the owner of the resort threatens to have you sent to jail unless you do pay for his services. Are you a hostage in that situation, or do you owe someone for his services?
Do you realize how greatly you tip your hand with the presuppositions of your analogy? Are we at the resort specifically because of the owner's will? Does the resort owner have the power to punish us merely because we don't want to be at his resort? How about just for not appreciating his taste? Does the resort owner govern our feelings as payment for our stay which is solely at his will? And does he have the right to punish us if he knows that we don't like the accommodations he has provided while placing us in his resort at his will so he can demand payment? (On edit): Do you realize that you have countered the question of whether or not an act is of free will by constructing an analogy that describes you performing an act of free will and then asking if it sounds like free will?
You really should leave it a little more abstract, Dan ... one invites all sorts of conceptual difficulties when boxing in an analogy to such limiting circumstances as the Bible offers.
It sounds like extortion--at least--to me.
:rolleyes:,
Tiassa :cool:
I don't know if I want to be drawed in this debate but I would like to say something. What about all the
archaeology discoveries that have been made I think theirs over 2,000 or more alone that proves the Bible
to be true. And not only that what about all the old testament prophecies That came to pass
concerning Jesus, birth, death and resurrection and no one else has fulfilled them or could fulfill them
except Jesus Christ whom you have crucified??
Stretch
08-16-01, 01:40 AM
bdmart
What archeological discoveries? There are references to places and people, but no proof as to the divine nature of the Bible.
As to the prophecies, ask any Jew wether they have come to pass.
Take care
:(
Deadwood
08-16-01, 03:04 AM
Zeta Reticuli.
That is a star in the Orion Constellation. So it is a real place. whether there is Intelligent lifeforms on it I personally couldn't say. Though they are termed the alien "greys" if you didn't know already.
You missed the point--surprise, surprise --and provided an example that can be turned around quite easily: God, though fictional, had to come from somewhere.
Lets turn that around a bit shall we. God is true, has always been and is everywhere.
Alpha and Omega? God has no beginning? Then time itself becomes a fiction
Instead of being fictitious time is created. If God created time, then He did not have to have a beginning as we know in time. He exists for eternity with no beginning and no end.
and God is Judging people for things that never really happened.
Now you're basing what Loone said by your own words and not what Sir Loone said. Do not alter peoples posts please. But yes, if everything that happens is fictitious I would have to agree with you, but we know that everything that has hapened is not fictitious.
bdmart
What archeological discoveries? There are references to places and people, but no proof as to the divine nature of the Bible.
Hey bdmart, 3 posts in 2 years hey? :D Well I put this link up sometime ago and did a search to find it and well here is a great link of an aerchealogist now deceased. Hope you enjoy it.
http://www.biblerevelations.org/ronwyatt.htm
As to the prophecies, ask any Jew wether they have come to pass.
Many Jews believe[d] in Jesus as Lord and Saviour, many Jews do not.
If you look at the Old Testament many of the Prophets that God had commisioned were killed, beaten and terribly treated. Whereas false prophets were praised, looked at as wise and from God, held in high esteem and well treated.
Here are some more links.
http://www.endtimes.org/messiah.html
http://www.bible.ca/b-prophecy-60.htm
for the second link if you want to look up the verses you may type in the passage as it says at www.biblegateway.com
Enjoy :)
Lets turn that around a bit shall we. God is true, has always been and is everywhere. But I'm sure you actually had a point in that, right? Or is it just the Tony1 inspired rubber-glue approach?Instead of being fictitious time is created. If God created time, then He did not have to have a beginning as we know in time. He exists for eternity with no beginning and no end. Nice excuse ... I'll have to think on this one for a while. No wonder God never changes.Now you're basing what Loone said by your own words and not what Sir Loone said. Do not alter peoples posts please. But yes, if everything that happens is fictitious I would have to agree with you, but we know that everything that has hapened is not fictitious. Oh, please, Deadwood ... Loone is perfectly capable of speaking for himself ... oh, wait .... :rolleyes:
So please demonstrated how I have altered Loone's post. Although a bright guy like you--I'm sure you would have included that in your post if it was a valid point.
And how, sir, do we know that everything that has happened is not fictitious? And I do not refer here to the subjectivity of history and faith. I believe Descartes once posited the idea that our experiences are possibly dreams--someone else's. It is well-established among most people who aren't blinded by religious faith that nothing about reality is guaranteed. Reality itself can be established to be fictitious. Descartes is a good place to start, as I recall, and I'll have to dig up a couple of others for you if necessary.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
Rambler
08-16-01, 03:58 AM
You've hit the nail on the head!!!
You Wrote:
"When someone fails to understand the nature of their faith, .....they end up making irresponsible claims on His behalf...."
And that my dear friends is how the Bible came to be.
DeadWood!!!
HELLO!!!!! jews that belive Jesus to be the messiah are no longer Jews they are CHRISTAIN!!!! DER!!!!!
also I love how all your counter arguments are completely on your say so, great post :D
dan1123
08-16-01, 06:31 PM
Reality itself can be established to be fictitious. Descartes is a good place to start, as I recall, and I'll have to dig up a couple of others for you if necessary.
If I remember correctly, Descartes had to assume a Creator who would not deceive him in order to establish the reality of his surroundings.
You Wrote:
"When someone fails to understand the nature of their faith, .....they end up making irresponsible claims on His behalf...."
And that my dear friends is how the Bible came to be.
I would assume that you don't know very much about the differences in God described in the Bible versus the gods of other religions. Worshipping objects and forces of nature as things with wills of their own are far more apt to being misrepresented than the Bible. If a prophet claimed to speak for God in ancient Israel, and he wasn't 100% accurate, it was a death sentence. If one letter was wrong when the Bible was being copied in ancient times, the page was destroyed. The covenants described in the Bible show a God who gives Himself the hardest part of the deal--fitting if you're the most powerful one entering the deal. It shows a God who doesn't pass judgement until He is sure things are bad--a God who allows people to speak on behalf of others and is willing to bend over backwards for their requests. It also shows a God who is holy, to whom people dare not speak or look. He is described as far greater than the most powerful forces of nature--the light of the sun is described as being confounded in His presence. The Bible does not describe a god that can be explained away by a misunderstanding scientifically or philosophically. This is what makes the Bible compelling.
Rambler
08-16-01, 08:14 PM
Sorry about the format of my reply...
you wrote:
"If a prophet claimed to speak for God in ancient Israel, and he wasn't 100% accurate, it was a death sentence"
Who were the judges and executioners???, if it wasn't God himself (and I assume that is not what you are saying), then who were these people to assume the role of judgment on behalf of this spitefull God.
Next:
"It shows a God who doesn't pass judgement until He is sure things are bad--a God who allows people to speak on behalf of others and is willing to bend over backwards for their requests"
A god who doesn't pass judgement until he is sure things are bad...if we were to believe the bible, God would have known what will be before it happened, so in fact he would have judged us before we were even created. As to the rest of the above statement, I'm afraid it comes down to mere heresay, I can't believe that statement on your assertion alone since my experience with your God was anything but positive.
And Finally:
"The Bible does not describe a god that can be explained away by a misunderstanding scientifically or philosophically. This is what makes the Bible compelling."
No the Bible describes a God that can't be explained since nothing is known for certain, we are forced to rely on the stories (again without supporting evidence) of ancient people whom I might add have alot in common with Pagan mythology. And that is what makes the bible pure fiction, (not even an enaging fiction...).
HELLO!!!!! jews that belive Jesus to be the messiah are no longer Jews they are CHRISTAIN!!!!
On the contrary, they are a completed Jew. They have discovered the ultimate in Judaism -- they have found the Messiah!!!
<i>Mat 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"</i>
But one day:
<i>Zec 12:10 "...and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son..."
Rom 11:26-27 "And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins."</i>
Interestingly, there is rapid growth in the movement of Messianic Jews.
~Caleb
rkmountain
08-16-01, 11:21 PM
Ok, so I looked up omnicient. It means having total knowlage-knowing everything. So I am confused. If God exists he could be omnicient and still allow free will in humans. Just because He may be omniscient doesn't mean he controls our lives or choices we make. Am I right?
Rambler
08-17-01, 12:40 AM
CHRISTAIN, i.e. follower of Christ!!!!let me make it a little less complicated for you Caleb CHRIST-ain, can you see where your religion got its name from??
No such thing as a completed Jew, Jews don't believe their messiah has come therefore to believe the messiah is christ is to no longer be a jew!!!! simple!!!!!
but anyway, what are you? a christain or a completed Jew??
Stretch:
Well I wasn't trying to prove the divine nature of the Bible. I was just trying to make a
point. And you said: "As to the prophecies, ask any Jew wether they have come to pass."
Well what about a Messianic Jew? they believe.
later:)
Deadwood:
thanks for the links
*Originally posted by tiassa
Incidentally, this is the question that Creationists seem to be afraid to answer,*
Carl Sagan wasn't afraid to answer that.
His idea was that there was all this cosmic semen floating around the universe ("panspermia").
Mind you, he accidentally forgot to mention where that came from.
*Originally posted by tiassa
No wonder God never changes.*
For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
(Malachi 3:6, KJV).
*Originally posted by Rambler
so in fact he would have judged us before we were even created.*
He did.
The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
(Revelation 17:8, KJV).
*Originally posted by rkmountain
Just because He may be omniscient doesn't mean he controls our lives or choices we make. Am I right?*
Regardless of whether God is omniscient, you aren't.
*Originally posted by Rambler
No such thing as a completed Jew, Jews don't believe their messiah has come therefore to believe the messiah is christ is to no longer be a jew!*
Right about the first thing.
It is exactly the opposite about the second. See next.
*Originally posted by Deadwood
Many Jews believe[d] in Jesus as Lord and Saviour, many Jews do not. *
Things have changed.
Only Jews believe in Jesus as Lord and Savior.
For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
(Romans 2:28,29, KJV).
Einsteins brain
08-18-01, 09:09 PM
My point is, you have no power over things of this world. You can pretend and define things in your own mind all you wish, but this does not make them exist in reality. We have the ability to fool ourselves, and puff ourselves up as gods standing on our own made-up universes. Big deal.
The real tragedy here is the broken relationship between us and the true God of the universe. He gives us the gift of life and we shove it in His face saying we don't need Him--we can be our own gods. Heck, we can make up gods that are more palatable to us and define worshipping them as "good" or "right". We can do whatever we please--because we ate the fruit. But all of this is empty authority without power.
Sir. Loone
08-19-01, 05:39 PM
GOD 'is' who He have said He is! He can not deny Himself, nor deny His own written Holy Word! (The Holy Bible!)
JESUS can not deny His Father(GOD) who sent Him to Earth, and had raised Him back to life and 'is' now seated at the 'right hand' of Father GOD in Heaven! Nor the Father deny His Son (JESUS)!
We are free to our own beliefs, but with..eternal consequences! And the consequences are so final, that the truly 'Holy Spirit Filled' Christians of this world need not be ashamed, nor to hold the 'Light of the Truth' under a bush, or not to cloak it from view no matter what the secular world would think! [In the saving of lifes!]
Christians, let your 'light' so shine before men to see your good works! Be not afraid! Fear only the Lord GOD of Heaven!:D
Sinners, we will believe in the Father, Son (JESUS), and the Holy Spirit of GOD (the Spirit of Truth) even unto our DEATHS! We know the truth, and the 'wisdom' that is far above what Man will ever have apart from being in JESUS! Our Savior! All other 'knowledge' will in time, come to pass! But the Word of GOD is Forever!
Peace!:)
DEVILDOG
08-20-01, 02:41 AM
Looks like the end is near, according to the bible the apocalypse has started. The signs are falling into place. I guess the non-believers will be proved correct.
AND I QUOTE (TOO)
"... And a great star fell from the Heavens, blazing like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water. The name of the star is Wormwood, and many died from the water, because it was made bitter." (Revelations 8:10)
The Chernobyl Disaster
Chernobyl is a town in north central Ukraine and is home to a nuclear plant of the same name. On April 26, 1986, one of the four nuclear reactors malfunctioned and sent 100 million curies of radionuclides into the atmosphere.
Radiation leaked as far as Sweden Poland, Finland, the Ukraine, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and even Russia. Tens of thousands of reindeers as far as Lapland have lost their lives because of radiation poisoning. The disaster has killed approximately 40,000 people; and another estimated 250,000 have relocated away from the contaminated soil. Animals that live in the rivers, or have drank from the rivers have died from contamination.
The Chernobyl Nuclear disaster is another biblical prophecy that has already come to pass. We know this because in Ukrainian, the word "chernobyl" means "wormwood (bitter)."
That entire quote can be found on the "Apocalypse Revealed " website along with 28 others in the revelations section.
Apocalypse Revealed (http://members.nbci.com/apocalypse23/aahome.html)
Still not believing the MYTH........
Deadwood
08-20-01, 06:38 AM
Hey Devil Dog.
I always thought that verse to mean a meteor. But it is very interesteing what you say.
<i>"... And a great star fell from the Heavens, blazing like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water. The name of the star is Wormwood, and many died from the water, because it was made bitter." (Revelations 8:10)</i>
This is very interesting. I've heard alot about endtime events, and know that there is a bit of disagreement between different groups, but I think Revelation really is future prophecy (there are some groups that say the whole book has already been fulfilled). With that particular verse, it is true, I have heard the same thing about Wormword=Cherynobel. However, that does not necessarily mean that the Cherynobel catastrophe was the fulfilment of this prophecy. It may be an advance warning. Think about a nuclear missile for a moment. It has a long, skinny section tapering to a point, and when it launches, it has a flame at the wider end. Turn it upside down, and it would look just like a "torch." It would certainly look like one. And during a nuclear strike, the missile would appear to "fall from the heavens" along its trajrctory. Now, is it really that inconcievable that someone might name a nuclear misssile "Cherynobel" after the famous disaster?
Deadwood, I've also heard the idea that this could refer to a meteor. While that is possible, I think there is a more likely candidate for a meteor than that verse. Like these:
<i>"Rev 8:8 And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood;
Rev 8:9 And the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, and had life, died; and the third part of the ships were destroyed."</i>
but then again, we don't really know for sure how these prophecies will be fulfilled. The interesting thing is, a nuclear device named cherynobel contaminating water isn't all that far fetched (considering its happened once before) to our modern world. On the other hand, the people back then (such as John, writting the prophecy) would have had no clue. Nor would they have known about burning mountains falling into the sea (meteors). If John hadn't seen the actual event or been told by someone who had (Jesus, who is God, and knows the ending already), then there would have been no natural way to envision what John was talking about in terms of known prcesses and objects. But it all makes sense today, because, just like the angel Gabriel told Daniel,
<i>"Dan 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall <u>run to and fro</u>, and <u>knowledge shall be increased.</u>"</i>
Considering that the fastest form of land transportation for thousands and thousands of years was the horse, it is no surprise that we, with locomotives, automobiles, airplanes, and even space shuttles, would be considered "running" to and fro. And just look at how often we use them. Run to work in the morning, run home, run to soccer practice, run out to the store for a gallon of milk. And of course, knowledge has been increased -- we now have technology that they couldn't have dreamed of back then!
Daniel's prophecies are coming true, and shedding light on the possibility of how John's prophecies in Revelation might come true.
~Caleb
Radical
08-20-01, 01:45 PM
[QUOTE]!This is very interesting. I've heard alot about endtime events, and know that there is a bit of disagreement between different groups, but I think Revelation really is future prophecy (there are some groups that say the whole book has already been fulfilled). With that particular verse, it is true, I have heard the same thing about Wormword=Cherynobel. However, that does not necessarily mean that the Cherynobel catastrophe was the fulfilment of this prophecy. It may be an advance warning. Think about a nuclear missile for a moment. It has a long, skinny section tapering to a point, and when it launches, it has a flame at the wider end. Turn it upside down, and it would look just like a "torch." It would certainly look like one. And during a nuclear strike, the missile would appear to "fall from the heavens" along its trajrctory. Now, is it really that inconcievable that someone might name a nuclear misssile "Cherynobel" after the famous disaster?
/QUOTE]
so does IVEN KANIBEL(that crazy ramp,fire jumping dude)
So does his name mean Wormwood (or bitter), and does he have the power to turn ~33% of the world's water supply poisonous? I doubt it! (BTW, I don't know who he is other than your breif description)
~Caleb
HOWARDSTERN
08-20-01, 10:31 PM
Sure God exists. And to prove it, I am now stating that you atheists are going to hell!!!!!!
YES YES, thats right. When all you atheists die, your hell will be to listen to the HOWARDSTERN SHOW FOREVER & EVER ! ! ! ! ! !
I look foward to it!
Every-day forever more, you will be forced to listen to HAOWARD & SHALL HAVE NO ABILITY TO REPLY ! ! ! ! ! !:cool: :D :cool:
I personally cannot think of a greater torture for the damned!!!!!
Howard--
I believe the author Dan Simmons already covered that suggestion, whereby the condemned were sentenced to spend eternity in Hell being tortured and forced to watch televangelists. I believe the story is called Vanni Fucci is Alive and Well and Living in Hell, and was presented in the book Prayers to Broken Stones
Your suggestion, however, is more menacing: at least the televangelists have a certain comic value ;)
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
DEVILDOG
08-23-01, 06:15 AM
Originally posted by Caleb
So does his name mean Wormwood (or bitter), and does he have the power to turn ~33% of the world's water supply poisonous? I doubt it! (BTW, I don't know who he is other than your breif description)
~Caleb
My guess is he meant Evil Kenievel the motorcyclist who set world records in car jumping, canyon jumping, etc., in the 70's (I believe). The records were only recently broken......by his son, Evil Kenievel, Jr.
Godless
08-27-01, 10:16 AM
I posted your argument in a atheist board, it's about to get shred to pices by other atheists, and theists alike. Though I do think you demonstrated some thought to the pice of work you did. Here's the link if you want to read some of their objections.
Ps. I'm julio!. hope this works!.
http://pub45.ezboard.com/fwastelandofwondersfrm1.showMessage?topicID=3339.t opic
Godless,
Great stuff. They haven't quite come to terms with the essentials yet though Perhaps I'll join in.
Thanks for the link.
Cris
Godless
08-27-01, 04:25 PM
Well you didn't get mad! I was conserned. I likes that, yea I'm watching the developments myself. We'll see what happens feel free to jump in, this is a cool board full of Humanists, agnostics, atheists, and ofcourse theists.
I believe you'll fit right in! "welcome"
Sir. Loone
08-28-01, 06:31 PM
Never the less! GOD is in charge of all creation, in the Heavens and the Earth, space, worlds unknown! And HELL ! GOD is......GOD! And He came to Earth 2000 years ago as a baby, and He lived among us, had feelings as we do, ate and drink, laughed and cried as we have yet without sinning! He enjoyed life when it was enjoyable, and was well acquainted with grief and pain, and loneliness, on this 'fallen world.' Had died, to make the ULTIMATE Sacrifice for our sins that we, even such as I could come boldly before the Throne of GOD for forgiveness of sins! And He has conquered Sin and Death, and HE lives forevermore at the right hand of Father GOD in Heaven, and will come again to reclaim His own and to bring the Throne of GOD down to a 'new' Heaven' and a 'new' Earth,' and then there shall be pease on Earth! GOD is the GOD of Love! HE is Love and He cares for you 'know-it-alls' to! :D Give Him a chance! Well give Him another chance! :eek: :) Well good day! I believe in GOD the Father, GOD the Son, GOD the Holy Spirit! And I will never change my mind about Him, well only for the better! To the Glory of Almighty GOD Supreme!
Sir. Loone
08-28-01, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by HOWARDSTERN
Sure God exists. And to prove it, I am now stating that you atheists are going to hell!!!!!! They really are, but do not have to go there!! JESUS SAVES! HE FORGIVES!
YES YES, thats right. When all you atheists die, your hell will be to listen to the HOWARDSTERN SHOW FOREVER & EVER ! ! ! ! ! !
Every-day forever more, you will be forced to listen to HAOWARD & SHALL HAVE NO ABILITY TO REPLY ! ! ! ! ! !:cool: :D :cool:
I personally cannot think of a greater torture for the damned!!!!! The 'worm' that dieth not!!:rolleyes:
There is such a thing, believe it or not, but would be something far worst then "Howardstern" for many!
JESUS THE MISIAH SAVES SOULS FROM HELL'S FIERRY!:o :)
Loone, just a reminder, you are preaching again and not debating, and I don't think anyone is listenening to you.
Would your god consider that you are using your time wisely or just see you as wasting your time on heathens and us lost souls that will never change.
Give us up and find others that are more gullible and easier targets.
Godless
08-29-01, 12:08 AM
Originally posted by Sir. Loone
The 'worm' that dieth not!!:rolleyes:
There is such a thing, believe it or not, but would be something far worst then "Howardstern" for many!
JESUS THE MISIAH SAVES SOULS FROM HELL'S FIERRY!:o :)
:p Sir Loone? your name fits!, you I can see are a lost puppy bible thumper from the south eh?
Cool answer me this, "First there's Adam, then god made Eve from Adams limb correct?, ok, then they procreate have two children, *here there's an understanding that there's only 4 people on Earth* correct?, ok, lets move on, The two children named one Able the other Caine, ok correct? good, it gets better, Able kills Caine, then god vanishes Able from Eden correct? ok, How the hell can Able get married elsewhere with another woman? when there's only suppose to be 4 people on Earth?"
Rambler
08-29-01, 01:09 AM
we've been down this path before....and got nowhere.
(BTW don't expect an answer from "sir" Loone...unless you are happy with "sound bite" preaching)
I actually asked what the deal was back then with procreation etc...now the god lovers told me that Adam and Eve had MANY kids and only some were mentioned so there were more then 4 people...also at that time God hadn't decided that shagging your sister was bad...so all of adam and eve's kids were having it off with each other....anyways that was the answers I got...wish I could remeber the thread. They were poor answrs but there you go...
Also as a slight observation: Eve was made from Adams Rib...he got to keep his limbs :D
Godless
08-29-01, 07:24 AM
got sliced, lol, shagging sisters eh? no wonder they always tell us in church "we are all related" LOL.
DEVILDOG
08-29-01, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by Rambler
...also at that time God hadn't decided that shagging your sister was bad...so all of adam and eve's kids were having it off with each other....
Also as a slight observation: Eve was made from Adams Rib...he got to keep his limbs :D
Let's take the leap...
(case#1)Eve was made from Adam's rib, therefore she is essentially a part of him. Today's standards would classify this as cloning, except for the sex change thing. This is nonetheless a clear case of INCEST. Scientifically, that would explain the diminished mental capacity of the sons. How did this family from one miraculously populated the entire Earth.
(case#2)The great flood....we've all heard the story. The Earth was flooded and everything was killed off except the inhabitants of the ark. So basically, we're talking about eight family members miraculously repopulating the Earth. Another clear case of INCEST.
(verdict of both cases)INCEST IS AS BIBLICAL AS ONE CAN GET. IT CAN BE TRACED BACK TO THE ORIGIN OF THE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY. THIS WOULD ALSO CLARIFY RAMBLER'S SIGNATURE QUOTE AS MEANING THEY'RE INBRED.
...Have you ever noticed how Creationists look so Un-evolved??........ Bill Hicks (Arizona Bay)CREDIT RAMBLER
*Originally posted by Cris
Would your god consider that you are using your time wisely or just see you as wasting your time on heathens and us lost souls that will never change.*
As I understand it, you've changed several times.
Non-Christian to Christian.
Christian to Hindu in the form of TM.
Now, agnostic or atheist, although you appear to not have made up your mind.
Consider this our attempt to help you decide whether you are atheist or agnostic.
*Give us up and find others that are more gullible and easier targets.*
Gullibility isn't the issue.
You seem rather vague in your beliefs and we simply wish to give you an opportunity to choose between deciding that there is no God, or deciding that you don't know whether there is a God, or not.
Of course, if you choose the latter, we'd have to help you decide whether you do know there is no God, or whether you do know there is God.
*Originally posted by Godless
How the hell can Able get married elsewhere with another woman? when there's only suppose to be 4 people on Earth?"*
And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
(Genesis 5:4, KJV).
Some people think that Adam didn't beget daughters until after he begat Seth, but "and" does not mean "after."
*Originally posted by DEVILDOG
INCEST IS AS BIBLICAL AS ONE CAN GET. IT CAN BE TRACED BACK TO THE ORIGIN OF THE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY.*
You thought you could get in a little dig at the Christians.
It explains a few things about you, too, seeing as it is talking about the whole human race.
You are human, aren't you?
DEVILDOG
09-02-01, 02:11 AM
Originally posted by tony1
*Originally posted by DEVILDOG
INCEST IS AS BIBLICAL AS ONE CAN GET. IT CAN BE TRACED BACK TO THE ORIGIN OF THE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY.*
You thought you could get in a little dig at the Christians.
It explains a few things about you, too, seeing as it is talking about the whole human race.
You are human, aren't you?
What I simply said is if you believe in what the bible states than incest is biblical. Since some of the human race does not believe in your god, and some do not believe in any god, then no it does NOT refer to the "whole human race". It only refers to those who believe in the bible, followers of the christian faith.
And yes, I am human on my mother's side.:D
*Originally posted by DEVILDOG
What I simply said is if you believe in what the bible states than incest is biblical.*
I get that.
* Since some of the human race does not believe in your god, and some do not believe in any god, then no it does NOT refer to the "whole human race". It only refers to those who believe in the bible, followers of the christian faith.*
The truth refers to everybody.
The truth doesn't change just because someone doesn't believe it.
DEVILDOG
09-03-01, 05:10 AM
Originally posted by tony1
The truth doesn't change just because someone doesn't believe it.
That statement is not necessarily true, many convicted felons would beg to differ. Recently a man here in Louisiana was released from jail after serving 19+ years. A DNA test that wasn't available because technology hadn't advanced that far when he was convicted proved his innocence. Throughout his sentence he swore his innocence, but the convicting jury did not believe him. So, I'll say this, if someone doesn't believe it, then the truth means nothing.
The truth might set you free, but 19+ years is one "helluva" test of his faith!!! Although he didn't thank god for his release in the press conference. Maybe he learned the real truth while serving his god forsaken sentence!!!!!!!!!
*Originally posted by DEVILDOG
Throughout his sentence he swore his innocence, but the convicting jury did not believe him. So, I'll say this, if someone doesn't believe it, then the truth means nothing.*
It meant release after 19+ years for that guy.
It also means that the people who didn't believe the truth were WRONG.
I tend to run from people who use the word truth. How can we define the truth? What if we have differing perceptions? Who is deemed to have the correct perception?
Cris had some interesting points. How can a person accept two facts that are in diametric opposition. It is a common belief that man has freewill and so many believe in a god. It is just a wonderous trick acheived by the brain that allows us to compartmentalize data. 1984 was a good foreshadow to this area of thinking.
I have another issue with those who practice Christian religions. Their main character stated plainly that organized practice such as Churches, were evil. Was it not he that knocked the collection tables over? Is it not a common practice of Churches to hand out collection plates? If this is not a hypocritical practice than I cannot consider any practice to be such.
Bebelina
09-05-01, 05:06 PM
Just as anything else, only exists for those who belives in it and are aware of it and the concept. And since the concept of the christian God is so firmly planted in humanity today, almost everybody is aware of it, then it´s more likely to actually exist, but there is no way to prove it. The belief in itself can generate another form of existence. The Christian God only exist because people believe in it. If people stopped then that lifeform would transform itself to its original form and identity, that is not dependable on the human belief system. It has taken that form to please us, out of love. To join the game. It´s a question of if you want to be in or out, do you want to play or don´t you? :p
That is what I think anyway....:) and another thing I think, is that anybody that claimes to know the truth is less likely to actually know the truth. ;)
LordManimal
09-05-01, 05:41 PM
There ARE no truths.... sounds corny, I know, but it's one of my fundamental beliefs. With that said, lets consider the history of religion over the course of say... the last 8,000 years. I won't go into one my typical 10 page rants, so I'll make this brief and to the point.
What makes you think that after 15K years (maybe longer, it's always up for debate), humans would suddenly "Get it right" in the last few thousand, and discover "God"? Why do Christians have such a hard time drawing lines between thier "God" and the "God" of any other people at any other point in History? Why do they not thank the Romans for actually letting their religion have a chance? Were it not for a certain Ceasar (the name escapes me, but I'm sure someone here can recall), Christianity would have remained the tiny little cult it was. One Ceasar made it the official religion of the Empire, and suddenly Christianity was famous. I notice they give no credit to anyone other than themselves or their "God" for it's success.
I also see it like this; If I was a God, and I wanted people to worship me, why on Earth would I choose an obscure and almost ineffective way of showing my power? Why would my biggest (unverifable) act be letting my envicar die? And die miserably at that?
LOOK AT MY ALLMIGHTY AND AWSOME POWER!!! I SHALL LET YOU DRAG MY SON THROUGH THE STREETS, BEAT HIM, STARVE HIM, AND THROW THINGS AT HIM UNTIL HE'S UNRECOGNIZABLE AS A MAN!!! FEAR ME!!!!
If I was inventing a religion, I can think of a lot better stories to make up than that.... I mean the flood, that wasn't so bad. You guys should run with that. Maybe do a quick re-write of that book of yours, and you might get some more members. It's already been re-written several times by different people (shhhh!! Don't tell anyone!), so why not just sit down and do it again? You need a good story to draw people nowadays, and guys. Guys. That whole "sheep" theme, has GOT to go. "Blood of the Lamb", sacrificing sheep to Him, come into the "flock", etc. Why not go for something more trendy like.... "Gang"? Or, if you insist upon the whole sheep thing, why not "Lamb of the Bloods". At least then, you might catch some of that inner city crowd. Just some helpfull hints!
--LM
<b><i>Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
Rom 5:16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
Rom 5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Gal 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
Heb 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. [i.e. of sin]
</i></b>
If Christianity were just a made-up religion, you would have a great point. But His death was necessary to pay for our sins. When we put our faith in him, we acknowledge our sin, and the fact that its penalty has been pre-paid by Christ.
You are also mistaken when you say that this death was his greatest act. His greatest act was not just his death, but his <b>RESURECTION</b> 3 days later. And this is a historicaly verifiable fact. The Christian Church can be traced back qute early in its history, and new papyrological research is showing that the gospels were probably written substantially earlier than the unproven method of "litery criticism" has suggested. Josephus, the great Jewish historian, though not himself a Christian, mentions them in his writtings, and the fact that they believed in a resurected Messiah. There were 500 witnesses mentioned by Paul who saw the risen Saviour. One of the biggest evidences of his resurection was the fact that the church began at all (and I mean b4 Constantine politicized the whole thing). You start with a small band of followers who were scared out of their wits by the crucifixion of their leader. They were like "sheep without a shepherd". Why should they continue to follow a dead man? They almost quit right there. But then something changed their lives. They went from scattering and hiding, to laying the foundations for one of the world's largest religions.
~Caleb
Godless
09-05-01, 08:20 PM
Originally posted by Caleb
<b><i>Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
Rom 5:16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
Rom 5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Gal 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
Heb 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. [i.e. of sin]
</i></b>
If Christianity were just a made-up religion, you would have a great point. But His death was necessary to pay for our sins. When we put our faith in him, we acknowledge our sin, and the fact that its penalty has been pre-paid by Christ.
You are also mistaken when you say that this death was his greatest act. His greatest act was not just his death, but his <b>RESURECTION</b> 3 days later. And this is a historicaly verifiable fact. The Christian Church can be traced back qute early in its history, and new papyrological research is showing that the gospels were probably written substantially earlier than the unproven method of "litery criticism" has suggested. Josephus, the great Jewish historian, though not himself a Christian, mentions them in his writtings, and the fact that they believed in a resurected Messiah. There were 500 witnesses mentioned by Paul who saw the risen Saviour. One of the biggest evidences of his resurection was the fact that the church began at all (and I mean b4 Constantine politicized the whole thing). You start with a small band of followers who were scared out of their wits by the crucifixion of their leader. They were like "sheep without a shepherd". Why should they continue to follow a dead man? They almost quit right there. But then something changed their lives. They went from scattering and hiding, to laying the foundations for one of the world's largest religions.
~Caleb
Why destroy that which is good, and ideal image of god, for the wickedness and sinfulness of others? it makes no sence, Would you punish your children as such? the little boy did something bad, he broke your computer, the little girl never touched it, are you going to punish her instead? Your god uses this idealogy!!.
KalvinB
09-05-01, 08:35 PM
That's a poor analogy.
Death came by one and life came by one. I think God's got it straightened out. Those who believe in him are not subject to Adam's sin (death). Those who reject God...yeah if it weren't for Adam's sin you'd be perfect.
Ben
LOOK AT MY ALLMIGHTY AND AWSOME POWER!!! I SHALL LET YOU DRAG MY SON THROUGH THE STREETS, BEAT HIM, STARVE HIM, AND THROW THINGS AT HIM UNTIL HE'S UNRECOGNIZABLE AS A MAN!!! FEAR ME!!!!
That was great. I think the stories are hackneyed, at best. The comparison to sheep is pathetic because it has relevance. Like sheep they follow blindly, never questioning.
It seems to me that the stories I am familiar with all involve the God character screwing with peoples lives, making bets and forcing people into evil acts. That was just the first book.
The second book is weird beacause it's basically the same story told by multiple people. Only about 1% of the stories are plausable and this leaves us with some crazy lunatic that ran into a city, knocked down some tables, was betrayed, then was caught and hung. We have every reason to believe that the death was not by choice and yet modern dogma would deny such a thought as heresy. How does some Jewish guy dying 19?? years ago pay for the sins of man? Have you ever seen a person ressurected? If he was ressurected then why didn't he stay so? Wouldn't the act of coming back erase the act of dying? There are fundamental errors in the logic of this story, but that can be said of all the stories.
What kind of fiction is this, horror? Shouldn't the book resemble the principles it was built on?
I suppose I should tell you why I wrote this book, well, it's like this. I was drifting from church to church looking for the right one. The true church. Unfortunately it seemed that none of them upheld the correct doctrines. My eternal soul is begging for salvation and there seemed no one was here to help me. I was very depressed. But I still read the Bible cover to cover, over and over. One day as I was reading through James and read the passage "If any man lacks wisdom let him ask God." I don't know why I hadn't noticed it before. I quickly ran to the woods and tripped over a log in my hurry. Since I was on my knees anyway at this point I decided this is where I should pray.
Dear God,
I am young and pretty ignorant according to most people. I've read your book and enjoy it greatly. Well lately it seems like none of the churches around here have the truth. Can you tell me which is the true church? It says here you'll give me wisdom if I ask. I want to know.
Amen.
There was a bright light that shined above my head as I finished my prayer. I tried to look up but was blinded. "Hello, I'm Jesus Christ." Came a voice, "You know you're right, these churches are all corrupt. Bunch of a apostates. You know they all came from that whore of Babylon. What do you expect?" "Wow, Jesus Christ, will you sign my book?" I asked eagerly. "That book is a waste of time. Do you really believe that after 2000 years, it has stayed the same?" Jesus then floated the book out of my hands and burned it in mid air. "Tell you what I'm going to do. I am going to help you right a new book. One that is not corrupt." "But who would believe it came from you?" "You ever seen a Tel-evangelist?" "Well, yeah." "You tell people 'Jesus said so' and most people will believe anything you have to say." "Oh. Neat."
"But wait, doesn't there need to be two or three witnesses?" "Kid you got me cornered. Meet my dad." Another light came down from the sky. I looked and say a man with a great white beard and a slightly off white rob. "Hi. This is Jesus, my kid, in who I am well pleased." I could only stare in amazement. "Do you have a name?" "Father." "Oh…neat." "I got work to do, call me if you need me." And the light went away. "Well, what about the Holy Ghost?" Jesus looked around quick and then pointed to a tree. In it was a dove. "He's the quiet type." A light shined down on the dove and apparently scared it. The bird flew into the street and got nailed by a semi truck. "Gasp." I could only stare. "Come on, we have work to do." "But…"
Over the next several months I listened to the doctrines of Jesus and wrote them down. Most of the time Jesus sat in the recliner watching PAX TV cursing everyone who said "Jesus said so." He also drank a lot of wine. I began to think he really was a wine-o. But I couldn't complain, he tells the best stories when he's drunk.
Within a year I was ready to tell the world. I titled the book, "What Jesus Really Said." I was horrified at the response. Everyone was calling me the apostate. I tried to tell them it was all true. I ran crying home and went up to Jesus as asked "I thought you said…" "Are you better than me? I tried to tell people myself and within three years I was nailed to a cross. Do you have any idea how much that stings?" "I understand…." "Go back out there and preach the good news. Soon they will see your strength in the face of adversity and they will begin to follow you."
Sure enough. After being hit by a few cars, tarred and feathered, shot a couple time, I got a following. And soon after that I was on TV. FOX gave me the spot. The show was titled "Who Wants to Listen to a Jesus Freak?" I was living large. I had fame, money and Jesus Christ living in my home.
Then one day I returned home to find only a note. "Tomorrow your life will be required of you. Just make sure you call it martyrdom. Jesus" "Christ…" Well I went to bed and prepared myself for the next day. I went into the studio and took my seat. The show went on and out of the audience came a shot. Hit me right in the chest. I knew it was over but I would go to hell rather than not take my revenge on my killer. I spotted him in the audience and pulled out my gun from my desk and shot him in the head. "I have been slain as a lamb at the slaughter!" I died a happy man.
As I stood before the pearly gates I saw Jesus walk over. "Hey, how's it going?" I asked. "Going great! Thanks to your martyrdom I've got claims on millions of souls. Come with me!" He took my hand and walked me away from the gates. "Wait a second…shouldn't I be going through the gates?" "I know another way in." He responded. Well I knew that teaching. As sure enough there I was. Sitting in hell watching Tel-evangelists for all eternity on PAX TV. Jesus turned into his true form and sat down in his chair and began drinking wine and pointing out which were quotes from him. "You know, you say you're Jesus Christ and people will believe anything you tell them."
So that is why I am writing this book. Because just reading the Bible is not a substitute for understanding it. Because just blindly following those you trust is not a wise thing to do. I want to write a book that makes you think about what you believe and why. I don't expect anyone to agree with everything contained in "The Book of Ben" but I would hope everyone who reads it will take the time to consider what it says and take the time to evaluate it by the scriptures to see what they really say.
I am an Athiest and I think that story is good.
DEVILDOG
09-06-01, 04:50 AM
Originally posted by tony1
It meant release after 19+ years for that guy.
How about we lock you up for 19+ years for something you didn't do, then ask if you feel the same way. I seriously doubt that you will. Wanna try?????
Sir. Loone
09-06-01, 06:36 PM
Originally posted by DEVILDOG
What I simply said is if you believe in what the bible states than incest is biblical. Since some of the human race does not believe in your god, and some do not believe in any god, then no it does NOT refer to the "whole human race". It only refers to those who believe in the bible, followers of the christian faith.
And yes, I am human on my mother's side.:D
Incest would be 'adultery' in one's own family! Sin. And the Bible is to all of Humanity, whether they believe not, herd not, or believe on Him that sent the Holy Word of GOD!
The truth of GOD's Holy Word is Absolute, and final authority in all creation!!
:)
daktaklakpak
09-06-01, 06:54 PM
Originally posted by tony1
It meant release after 19+ years for that guy.
It also means that the people who didn't believe the truth were WRONG.
What if he died one day before the DNA report?
Does the truth mean anything, then? Or should I ask, does the truth matter to a dead man?
Sir. Loone
09-06-01, 07:53 PM
Deadmen have met with their creator, GOD! If they have not believed in Him in life, they will be greatly surprised and terrified of the very truth of His existence!!:( :rolleyes: My GOD is a very real and Living Supreme Intelligent Person!! And we are made the image of the Creator GOD, and not apes, monkeys, slime! It is a good thing we are created in the image of GOD! Although our race is 'fallen,' we can come to know Him as Saviour, Helper, and Friend! But the ones that reject this will have a great problems with their philosophy of carnal-knowledge and science only! There are more then meets the eye in this universe, and most on this sight will have to learn the HARD WAY, OF DEATH AND DESTRUCTION the FOOL and their lies will perish in the Earth, but the Word of a Holy GOD endures to the end! Forever! :mad: Have fun !:D JESUS IS WAITING, and He can still save the VILEST OF SINNERS EVER! The day of reckoning IS coming!! And is coming fast and furious!:( :) JESUS SAVES!
LordManimal
09-07-01, 04:29 PM
And the Bible is to all of Humanity, whether they believe not, herd not, or believe on Him that sent the Holy Word of GOD!
ROFLOL
I LOVE it when they do this!!! I understand that no single person can be the absolute expert on any topic as broad as a religion, and that we (the non beleivers) pound them with our moral dellimas, and precise questions when they openly admit that they are imperfect and are only learning and striving to be the way that their GOD wants them to be. This, I understand, and I can forgive any answer of "I don't know." or "I'm not able to discuss that at this time....", "I'm not educated enough yet in the ways of my Lord to answer your questions..." or SOMETHING reasonable.
But when people resort to this mindless repetative dribble, THAT'S where I question the value in joining that group of people, especially a religion. If "The Book says", or "That's just the way He wants it" are as far as Christians can think on their own, then why not just give yourself a home lobotomy?! (they sell the kit: it's called the Bible)
Here's one for ya:
God wants us to know in NO UNCERTAIN terms that we are not perfect. That we can never be as good as him. Fine. (If a husband does that to his wife, it's called abuse though...) And we also know that the Book was written by mans own hand.
Lets turn this into a science experiment shall we? Take a clean glass of water (Gods word) and pour it though a motor-oil soaked cotton filter (man) into a jar (the Bible). Christians are drinking the water right out of that jar, and saying "MMMMMmmm!! That was good, GIMMIE SOME MORE!!!" If anyone says "Hey, there's something not quite right about that water..." they get chastised and told how they're going to die a million deaths and be forever parched if they don't partake of the water! Here comes another Christain! Belly up!
Unless God put the men that wrote the Bible into a higher position than his own "Son", making them MORE perfect that Jesus (Jesus basicly said "No" to God and wanted to die on Earth to absolve us of our sins, so he's obviously not as pefect as God) at least for long enough to write the Bible, then how can you argue that the Bible is truth? Do you REALLY think that all of us whom use our God given faculties (our minds) are tools of Satan? Last time I checked, Satan didn't have the power to CREATE, only to destroy....
Bebelina
09-07-01, 07:11 PM
..is how differently we chose to define truth. Some people believe that the truth is exclusively written down in one single book. Others think that it is to be found in the codes of nature, as DNA. And what is even more interesting is that almost all of the firm believers of one thesis or the other are ready and willing to judge the others to be wrong, sinners and so on. It is a bit frightening too, because it doesn´t always stop at arguing with words. People are ready to KILL to convince others that they are the sole owners of the truth. Is it worth it? To kill just to prove a point? How far are you personally ready to go to prove yours? And how important is it for you to have others believing you know the truth? :confused:
LordManimal
09-07-01, 07:32 PM
Very good indeed! I have two things to add, both of minor note:
#1. Sir Loone is, indeed a "Loon"e
#3. Belbelina has been adding some excellent neutral ground comments to the subject at hand, and I wanted to thank her/him for adding some levity to what could become an otherwise heated topic.
#9. I am actually a beleiver, although not in the conventional sense, obviously. I choose to think, rather than to follow. I beleive that God will come to me on his own terms, and as to what God is, I dare not waste anymore brainpower on the issue. I have decided that it is simply something I am capable of not understanding. I do not presume to know Gods will, (unlike most people, Sir Loone included). I would consider pretending that I knew the extent of Gods power, or of Gods wishes blasphemy in the highest. Although 99% of Christians will tell you word for word what God wants. Because they interpreted it that way from the Bible.
Roll that one around in the ole brainpan for a while.
#31. Most of post #9 is BS, but I'll let you decide what parts. ;-)
Religion is powerful. It forces factions into mutual hate and can lead to bloody wars. The power lies in the symbols that mean more than human life. When a person will die to bolster his/her religion, then we know we have a problem. I have problems with people who would persecute or murder others based upon their religious background or lack thereof.
There seems to be a misconception about athiests of late. We are thought of as contraries bent on the destruction of all organized religion. Because we are so few we have been villified as an extremest faction. There may be such groups, but I have yet to see them. We do not pretend to hold all the answers to the universe. We accept the fact that a God may be possible, but think it unlikely. Above all else I look to one unifying principle as the single hope for human beings: reason. It was what got us into this mess, and hopefully it will get us out of this situation.
I respect everyone except those who say stupid things.
nighthawk
09-08-01, 11:20 AM
I'm not going to argue with anyone on this subject of 'the Christian God cannont exist' because I am a Christian, I just wanted to give a heads up to LordManimal because he said something that Christians don't usually acknowledge, Satan didn't have the power to CREATE, only to destroy.
That's all that I'm going to say right now because I don't want to have to open mouth insert foot.
Sir. Loone
09-08-01, 02:09 PM
Originally posted by LordManimal
But when people resort to this mindless repetative dribble, THAT'S where I question the value in joining that group of people, especially a religion. If "The Book says", or "That's just the way He wants it" are as far as Christians can think on their own, then why not just give yourself a home lobotomy?! (they sell the kit: it's called the Bible)
Here's one for ya:
God wants us to know in NO UNCERTAIN terms that we are not perfect. That we can never be as good as him. Fine. (If a husband does that to his wife, it's called abuse though...) And we also know that the Book was written by mans own hand.
LordManimal, I Sir. Loone do and will quote from the Holy Bible (the Word of GOD Himself) and the Bible does teach us to quote from it and that the words of 'wisdom' ARE OF A HIGHER AUTHORITY & INTELLIGENCE & WISDOM then that of men! The Word of GOD the Bible and our Faith (more then a 'religion') in the Lord JESUS, is the very foundation of our faith in GOD. JESUS is very real and He helped me out of a jam just the other day! :) When GOD looks on a truly born-again person, He see's JESUS's sacrifice for my sins and imperfections, paid in full! In a 'white robe', clean and forgiven, even if we sin we have an advocate with the Father GOD for forgiveness of sins! The Bible was written by holy men inspired by the Holy Spirit of GOD! And Man is in fact is created in the image of GOD his Creator! Even though we humans are a fallen race JESUS has made a way to GOD out of Love for humanity.
Lets turn this into a science experiment shall we? Take a clean glass of water (Gods word) and pour it though a motor-oil soaked cotton filter (man) into a jar (the Bible). Christians are drinking the water right out of that jar, and saying "MMMMMmmm!! That was good, GIMMIE SOME MORE!!!" If anyone says "Hey, there's something not quite right about that water..." they get chastised and told how they're going to die a million deaths and be forever parched if they don't partake of the water! Here comes another Christain! Belly up!
LordManimal; Your science experiment is way off, not of reality. The Faith we have in the Lord Jesus Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit of GOD the Word of GOD purifies and cleans us from all unrighteousness! It is the Holy Spirit of GOD that really brings the Word (the 'Living Word') to life with understanding, so you read the Word of GOD, and the Spirit of GOD brings all things to remembrance that was read and the meaning of the Word of GOD is revealed to the Saints and then they give the message in the power of the Holy Spirit of GOD, so it IS FROM GOD! JESUS is the author of the Word and the Word from men that were 'created in the image of GOD' who wrote them, the Word was and is directly from GOD Himself, and not of man's cleverness! The Word of Truth is Truth! Bible is the inerrant Word of GOD Himself! GOD is a Spirit! And is a Person! Not and 'it,' nor a 'force!'
Unless God put the men that wrote the Bible into a higher position than his own "Son", making them MORE perfect that Jesus (Jesus basicly said "No" to God and wanted to die on Earth to absolve us of our sins, so he's obviously not as pefect as God) at least for long enough to write the Bible, then how can you argue that the Bible is truth? Do you REALLY think that all of us whom use our God given faculties (our minds) are tools of Satan? Last time I checked, Satan didn't have the power to CREATE, only to destroy.... :)
That the Bible says that we, the humanrace all were created in the image of GOD! That GOD have used men to write the Holy Scriptures, still it is directly from GOD Himself and not of men's cleverness! If you want to see GOD look at JESUS! He is in the image of GOD (and Man), in fact, He is GOD, GOD with us!! So the Word of the Bible is His very Words. And Satan is a LIAR, AND THE TRUTH IS NOT IN HIM! But did you not know that you are in the 'spirit of the Anti-Christ'!? It is the most dangerous position to be in! Warning to you! But even so, JESUS saves! It is still what is called 'the age of Grace', and hope someday soon you will find the true Truth of Truth! And not that of men that scorn that in which they do not, or refuse to understand!
Sir. Loone
09-08-01, 03:24 PM
Originally posted by LordManimal
#1. Sir Loone is, indeed a "Loon"e
#3. Belbelina has been adding some excellent neutral ground comments to the subject at hand, and I wanted to thank her/him for adding some levity to what could become an otherwise heated topic.
#9. I am actually a beleiver, although not in the conventional sense, obviously. I choose to think, rather than to follow. I beleive that God will come to me on his own terms, and as to what God is, I dare not waste anymore brainpower on the issue. I have decided that it is simply something I am capable of not understanding. I do not presume to know Gods will, (unlike most people, Sir Loone included). I would consider pretending that I knew the extent of Gods power, or of Gods wishes blasphemy in the highest. Although 99% of Christians will tell you word for word what God wants. Because they interpreted it that way from the Bible.
Roll that one around in the ole brainpan for a while.
#31. Most of post #9 is BS, but I'll let you decide what parts. ;-)
LordManimal; If you are a Christian you should edify and 'correct' your fellow believer in Christ, lift up those that are in Christ!:) But the Bible does teach that you should not be a "fence straddler". If you be for JESUS and His Holy Word as a Final authority or not! There is no neutral ground with GOD. He says that to be for Me or against Me, not luke-warmness. If you have read that scripture you know the rest. Put GOD and His Holy Word First above all things, and be not ashamed of it before no one! If I make Biblical errors it is fine with me that it would be pointed out in love, not scorn, the Word of GOD really does tell us to do that! Bright, but immature is what I'm getting from you at the time but aren't we all just a little immature here? Right, all there is to know is revealed by the Holy Spirit of GOD, and not 'mind power' alone, that could not fathom the deaths of the Truth of the Holy Scriptures! Thank GOD He is "no respecter of persons", that He will reveal Himself to any that will ask for forgiveness, wisdom. Draw closer to the Truth 'LordManimal', to the Word of GOD as I and the rest of Christianity has to! Remember that "ALL have sinned and come short of the Glory of GOD, there is none righteous, no not one." Watch your self pride, it is misleading. Go with JESUS and His Word as a finel authority (Bible). Or not at all, there is no compromise with GOD and His Holy Word! JESUS loves you!
I am leaning and growing in the Grace of GOD, and the Spirit of the witness is in me, I am not prideful , just doing it for the love of GOD!
Think,..JESUS says: "What so ever you do even unto the 'least' of these thy brother, you do it also unto me."
LordManimal
09-08-01, 04:37 PM
You're persistant! I like you.
I actually had no intention of being sarcastic or comical either one in my last statement. (aside from the Sir Loone is a Loon part. ;-) And, if you take a closer look at an earlier statement:
I understand that no single person can be the absolute expert on any topic as broad as a religion, and that we (the non beleivers) pound them with our moral dellimas, and precise questions when they openly admit that they are imperfect and are only learning and striving to be the way that their GOD wants them to be. This, I understand, and I can forgive any answer of "I don't know." or "I'm not able to discuss that at this time....", "I'm not educated enough yet in the ways of my Lord to answer your questions..." or SOMETHING reasonable.
You'll see that I hold no malice towards anyone, especially when they make mistakes. In fact, I am only "fairly well" versed in the bible myself, and in no position to point out errors without checking myself. I hold people that stick to their beliefs, regardless of circumstance or situation, in high regard in truth, but I do question the basis for your religion.
Like it or not, most thinking people would have to agree that organized religion is a good thing for people in this day and age. It forces a moral system on a society that if left to it's own devices, would most likely devour itself for lack of concience. I, however, choose to believe that mindlessly following an ideal that may or not be the "truth" (read Tegs post about TRUTH) is as dangerous as you believe that questioning the "truth" is. It's all a matter of perception, and perception is key.
To put it plainly: I do not disagree with your system, your religion or what makes you happy. Being a sheep in a herd. I DO however question how a thinking person with the best of intentions (like yourself) can allow yourself to be misled by one of the simplest of deceptions that Satan can accomplish. Didn't you read the story about "Say it in my name, and it's okay" or whatever it is? Some of the most vile acts in history were commited "In His name" and still are. Do you think that is what He wants?
Do you think He wanted Hitler to slay millions of his children? It was done in His name after all. Those "evil" Germans, were people JUST LIKE YOU whom believed what they were fed without considering it.
"Hitler says it's so, and thusly God must want it to be so. He believes that we are the Superior race. We must rid the world of the lessers. God wishes it. Glory to the Highest!!"
Can't you take off your own blinders and look at all the examples God has presented you? Don't you think that if you were Satan, one of the easiest things to do would be the manipulate the people with good intentions? "Psssst! God told me that he wanted you to pull down your pants and bend over....."
*Originally posted by Teg
How can we define the truth? What if we have differing perceptions?*
Truth is what falsehood opposes, and it doesn't depend on perception.
*Was it not he that knocked the collection tables over? Is it not a common practice of Churches to hand out collection plates?*
No, he knocked the money-changers' tables over.
*Originally posted by Bebelina
and another thing I think, is that anybody that claimes to know the truth is less likely to actually know the truth.*
Does it follow that anyone who claims to be lying is less likely to be lying?
*Originally posted by LordManimal
One Ceasar made it the official religion of the Empire, and suddenly Christianity was famous.*
You may be thinking of Constantine, and Catholicism.
*Originally posted by Teg
Like sheep they follow blindly, never questioning.*
You've obviously never seen sheep.
*Originally posted by DEVILDOG
How about we lock you up for 19+ years for something you didn't do, then ask if you feel the same way. I seriously doubt that you will.*
All you're doing is proving that the jurors who didn't believe the truth were WRONG.
*Originally posted by daktaklakpak
What if he died one day before the DNA report? *
The jurors would STILL be wrong.
*Originally posted by Bebelina
how differently we chose to define truth. Some people believe that the truth is exclusively written down in one single book. *
Since that book describes the Messiah, and you call yourself Messiah, I think I'll stick with the book.
*Originally posted by LordManimal
I beleive that God will come to me on his own terms*
Here are his terms...
But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
(Hebrews 11:6, KJV).
*Originally posted by Teg
We do not pretend to hold all the answers to the universe.*
We've noticed.
*We accept the fact that a God may be possible, but think it unlikely.*
Statistics at work.
If there were one trillion beings in the universe and only one is God, then statistically you'd be within 99.9999999% of being correct
But, you'd be wrong.
*Above all else I look to one unifying principle as the single hope for human beings: reason. It was what got us into this mess, and hopefully it will get us out of this situation. *
There is a rule of thumb type of definition of insanity floating around and it is doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different outcome.
*I respect everyone except those who say stupid things.*
Me, too. (see above)
LordManimal
09-08-01, 04:51 PM
There is a rule of thumb type of definition of insanity floating around and it is doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different outcome.
Then explain why some poker players make a living at it? Ha!
he he
LordManimal
09-08-01, 05:11 PM
Cris,
How well thought out your initial post was! Brilliant! I have never quite seen it put to words that elegantly! "Kudos" indeed! I received a link here from a friend, and never quite made my way to the beginning post, and I only just now read it. I now find it quite facinating how the topic has been shifted from "facts" (facts are fickle things, are they not?) to a debate on morality....
I've nothing more to add, but another voice. I have considered this exact paradox for many a year now, and have reached the same conclusion. I have found however, that you can begin to breach even the most diehard religious fanatic, and hit some amount of "self" (thought that doesn't revolve around God, or that persons service to Him) after you cross this logic barrier. Although I have noticed that it makes them exceptionally uncomfortable, and they tend to write it off as a limitation of understanding that God assigned to them. They just weren't "meant" to understand.
Blah! Religion appears to be the end of concious thought, so I can understand how easy it is for them to accept the fact that the existance of their God is a paradox. They simply give up, and don't wish to fight any longer..... sounds like the Matrix, no?
LordManimal, those are some very good points.
Tony1, I feel you were off on a few points:
*Originally poste by Tony1
*Originally posted by LordManimal
One Ceasar made it the official religion of the Empire, and suddenly Christianity was famous.*
You may be thinking of Constantine, and Catholicism
Drawing a line between Catholicism and Christianity is impossible. They are too close.
*Originally poste by Tony1
*Originally posted by Teg
How can we define the truth? What if we have differing perceptions?*
Truth is what falsehood opposes, and it doesn't depend on perception.
So then you are psychic? It is fun to think that a concept such as truth exists. There is an error in this thinking as we have no proven way of telling the difference between a lie and a truth.
*Originally poste by Tony1
*Originally posted by Teg
Like sheep they follow blindly, never questioning.*
You've obviously never seen sheep.
I have seen sheep. They are so easily rounded up by man and dog alike.
*Originally poste by Tony1
*Originally posted by Teg
We do not pretend to hold all the answers to the universe.*
We've noticed.
I may not hold every answer, but I can say with good probability that your book does not either. I have heard a lot about interpretation, but with enough interpretation I can find the answer to every question in The Catcher in the Rye
In the category of people who say stupid things I must include those who require a quite from the bible for every answer. This is a shortcut to thinking.
Let me first admit that I only read the first few and last few pages of this thread, so I apologize if I'm just adding more verbal garbage to the pile, but I was quite impressed with the (general) level of thoughtfulness in the early posts and wanted to comment.
It seems to me that they had the right of it when they were joking about rational thought vs. Christianity. I am, by the way, a Christian with all the irrational zealotry of believing in one faith, one God, one salvation, bible is entirely reliable, etc, etc... Logic (well exercised by Cris at the beginning) claims that there is no God. God (the one of the Christian bible) in turn claims that logic is a great and useful but ultimately flawed tool. You must put your faith (and I think that is the accurate term) in one or the other. Personally, having lived with myself for 27 years, I have no such faith left in my logic; it just doesn't stand up to the infinite complexity of day-to-day reality. There are lots of things I disagree with or don't understand in the bible, but I choose to give God the "benefit of the doubt". Don't get me wrong; I have faith in the combined intellect of humanity, just not as much.
With regard to the Christians posting here, please hear me in love when I say that some of you don't sound like you are trying to love people. Jesus said quite clearly that he did not come to debate with those who were confident in their own ability to deal with life (only the sick need a physician). He spent his time instead finding people in need and tending to them. He has done that for us and *commands* us to go and do the same. Is that what we're doing here?
Anyway, just some thoughts that I hope are an accurate reflection of Christ. Thank you to the thoughtful posters on both sides for better material than I expect on a forum. I hope and pray that logic fails you (and you know I mean that in the best possible way) so Jesus can come and pick you up.
Peace all
*Originally posted by LordManimal
Then explain why some poker players make a living at it?*
They play different cards each round?
*I now find it quite facinating how the topic has been shifted from "facts" (facts are fickle things, are they not?) to a debate on morality*
Just goes to show you how useless "facts" are.
Be careful though, Cris doesn't feel facts are fickle; he swears by them.
Although..., science has a habit of changing them from time to time.
*Religion appears to be the end of concious thought, so I can understand how easy it is for them to accept the fact that the existance of their God is a paradox.*
That would explain why atheists cease thinking consciously when the subject of religion comes up. It also explains why they think God is paradoxical.
*Originally posted by Teg
Drawing a line between Catholicism and Christianity is impossible. They are too close. *
If you ignore the total contradiction about everything between the two, you may be right.
They are so close it is like night and day.
And you know how hard it is to tell those two apart.
*It is fun to think that a concept such as truth exists. There is an error in this thinking as we have no proven way of telling the difference between a lie and a truth. *
There is the one proven way.
Truth contradicts only lies.
Lies contradict the truth and each other.
*I have seen sheep. They are so easily rounded up by man and dog alike. *
You've obviously never tried rounding up sheep. Those dogs have to work pretty hard at it, and they have to run around a lot more than the sheep do. One man could never round up sheep.
The whole point is that you have to get the sheep to follow you.
*I may not hold every answer, but I can say with good probability that your book does not either.*
There's that statistics thing again.
You can also say with good probability that any one lottery ticket will not win the lottery, either.
You'd be wrong.
*I have heard a lot about interpretation, but with enough interpretation I can find the answer to every question in The Catcher in the Rye *
I think the point to finding answers is finding right answers.
*In the category of people who say stupid things I must include those who require a quite from the bible for every answer.*
I've noticed that you require quotes from the Bible, otherwise you wouldn't know a single thing in it.
*Originally posted by etomai
Jesus said quite clearly that he did not come to debate*
He did?
*Is that what we're doing here? *
Yes.
And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God.
(Acts 19:8, KJV).
LordManimal
09-09-01, 07:56 AM
*Religion appears to be the end of concious thought, so I can understand how easy it is for them to accept the fact that the existance of their God is a paradox.*
That would explain why atheists cease thinking consciously when the subject of religion comes up. It also explains why they think God is paradoxical.
hahahaha That was one of the best play on words I've seen in a long time! Very good work! I am still chuckling over that one.
But praise aside, I think you may be getting a bit quote happy. I understand your want to take things out of context, because they're easier to disect and to answer, but I see a pattern developing thats going to lead to some misconception down the road. If I quote just the right sections in one of your posts I can make:
"God is a paradoxical atheist that causes the subject of thinking to not come up."
(Or better, I just don't have the time to put together a really good one.)
And that wouldn't be cool at all, now would it? I'm quite enjoying this discussion, but I don't want the first thing I see on the top of one of the back pages to be
"Posted by LordManimal: I think that God is a Hitler loving homo"
or something WAAAAAAAY offbase, and taken entirely out of context.
And to you etomai, welcome aboard! You make a good statement about the "WHY" you choose faith, which is something most have a hard time doing. I get the feeling that many "Christains" are only Christains because of some underlying sense of duty? Of flat out fear perhaps? I would, however, like to hear more about exactly why you find faith a comperable substitute for logic. You touched base with that, but left me wondering.
And I gotta agree with Teg on the Catholic thing, my father was Catholic my mother Babtist, so I've seen em both. Aside from different rituals, and the fact that the Catholics think you can rape your mother and say "I'm sorry" and get off scott free with God, they're exceptionally similar, from a personal standpoint....
Bebelina
09-09-01, 04:26 PM
Yes, Tony is getting a bit too qoute happy and twisting the qoutes too, to fit into his fast-food, oneliner Christianity.... :rolleyes:
*Originally posted by LordManimal
I think you may be getting a bit quote happy.*
You mean like this?
I generally quote so that people can see what I am responding to.
While I appreciate the humor inherent in grabbing huge lungfuls of marijuana smoke and allowing one's brain to wander randomly, I realize that some people may prefer a more focused approach.
*I understand your want to take things out of context, because they're easier to disect and to answer, but I see a pattern developing thats going to lead to some misconception down the road.*
It already has.
The random-walk, free-association enthusiasts complain about that all the time, but it is often diffcult to identify the context in extremely random statements.
* If I quote just the right sections in one of your posts I can make:
"God is a paradoxical atheist that causes the subject of thinking to not come up." *
That's great stuff, but I use the ellipsis to indicate missing words, as a general rule.
*I would, however, like to hear more about exactly why you find faith a comperable substitute for logic. You touched base with that, but left me wondering.*
Speaking for myself, of course, faith isn't really a substitute for logic; logic only goes so far.
Based on what I've seen on this and other forums, most people substitute random keystrokes for logic.
*Originally posted by Bebelina
Yes, Tony is getting a bit too qoute happy and twisting the qoutes too, to fit into his fast-food, oneliner Christianity....*
Oh no, have I rejected your claim to Female Messiahship too quickly?
Bebelina
09-10-01, 10:17 AM
Indeed you have, you infidel! :p
*Originally posted by Tony1*
Just goes to show you how useless "facts" are.
Be careful though, Cris doesn't feel facts are fickle; he swears by them.
Although..., science has a habit of changing them from time to time.
Now you are attacking facts? Without facts, where are we? You are a human being; that is a fact (maybe). We are communicating; that is a fact. We define our reality by what we know of it. Without facts we would be utterly lost. Without your knowledge of the harmful sideaffects of using rat poison, I could give you some to eat and you might happily do so.
...I appreciate...grabbing huge lungfuls of marijuana...
It's that easy. I know you dislike facts, but in this situation my bending of them may give others the impression that you enjoy marijuana. While this may or may not be true, I canmake it look to be the case. The facts are your salvation in this case. After looking at your full statement we can see that your words were taken out of context.
If you ignore the total contradiction about everything between the two, you may be right.They are so close it is like night and day. And you know how hard it is to tell those two apart.
Besides some small ritual changes, the general atmosphere, and a forgiving ritual, they are one in the same. They use the same book and have a common background. The only real difference is that historic breaking by Henry VIII. He was upset about being unable to divorce and so he made his own religion. We can only compare the two religions to other world religion and will find that there are no two as similar as these. They have the same history prior to Henry VIII and follow the same basic structure.
You've obviously never tried rounding up sheep. Those dogs have to work pretty hard at it, and they have to run around a lot more than the sheep do. One man could never round up sheep.
I have seen two amateurs do it without the aid of a sheep dog. They rounded up 700+. Sheep are worse than cows when it comes to the ability to follow blindly.
KalvinB
09-10-01, 05:15 PM
He wasn't attacking facts.
He was pointing out that science sometimes changes it's mind on what were previously called facts.
Ben
DEVILDOG
09-11-01, 05:05 AM
SORRY ABOUT THE LENGTH PEOPLE
Originally posted by tony1
While I appreciate the humor inherent in grabbing huge lungfuls of marijuana smoke and allowing one's brain to wander randomly, I realize that some people may prefer a more focused approach.
There you go with your marijuana fetish again and tiassa's not even in the room.
Is that why you believe in the bible so wholeheartedly because you got a bad batch and figured satan had a hand in it?
As many atheist have said in the past, break out the hard evidence, other than the bible, and we'll talk. Anyone can quote scriptures, there are many bible CDroms out there. Punch in a few keywords out jump many quotes in reference to what you keyed. They even have a few that break the "bible codes". Not hard but a waste of money in my opinion.
If they did have proof in the bible then why would they even have a such thing as bible codes. Why do they not have actual dates to each event in the bible. Historians that specialize in the bible don't agree on the actual crucifixion of christ as far as the day it happened.
(food for thought...At one time there was one christian church)
When Christ made Simon, "Peter (the Rock from which he would build his church)" and said, "I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven; what you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, what you let loose on earth, you let loose in heaven."(Matthew 16:19) he made Peter, and his successors (the succeeding Popes) the guardians of the truth. That is to say, the Popes are infallible in terms of matters pertaining to the Faith.
then...
In 1517 when Martin Luther, in protest, nailed his Ninety-Five Theses detailing the misuse of indulgences and other excesses of the Roman Catholic Church – at that time the only Christian Church – a wave of others such as Calvinists and Presbyterians followed questioning the Church and detaching themselves. According to Luther, Christianity lay in the direct communication of each person to God; not on the elaborate organization of the church headed by the Pope.
Originally posted by Teg
How can we define the truth? What if we have differing perceptions?
your answer was...
[i]Originally posted by tony1
Truth is what falsehood opposes, and it doesn't depend on perception.
I probabl missed your point but I believe the above proves it does matter on perception. Catholicism would still be the only religion if not for Martin Luther's perception or interpretation of the bible.
Devildog, sound...very sound!
Tony1's dislike for facts has manifested multiple times on this thread. If all of my logic came out of one book, just imagine how weak they would be. The strength in other studies in the realms of science and history, lies in numbers. History is only history with multiple accounts. Science is only science through multiple tests. Many stories in the Bible have questionable accuracy, as would only be the case due to the time period of it's writing. Because the major authors did not exist during the life of the main character, this too casts doubt on the story's validity.
I only ask that each person challenge what they are told. Don't just trust it, observe it. Only through verification of what you are told, may you find something that may be called a fact.
KalvinB
09-11-01, 11:44 PM
If you interpret the scripture the way Catholics do you would be correct. Mormons use the same verse the same way to justify prophets.
What Martin Luther did was show that ALL Christians have those keys. Not any one select authority. Obviously Luther was correct as there is a slew of scriptures showing just how correct he was. There's a lot involved with the issue and once you get the whole picture the Catholic and Mormon church are shown to be liars.
The Catholic church had to keep the Bible away from the common man to be able to hold such doctrine which is also how they stayed as the one church. When Luther came around that all changed. People READ FOR THEMSELVES just how messed up the Catholic church is on this issue.
Of course you wouldn't know that because you have no idea how a false chuch works or how to study the Bible to see what it says.
You also continually assume that anytime there's a split it's an indication that NO PARTIES hold the truth.
That is a rediculous assumption which you must hold to continually push your little crusade against the Bible or whatever. Just because not everyone knows the truth doesn't mean it cannot be known or that it is not known.
Ben
Deadwood
09-12-01, 02:04 AM
Devil dog, I'm not sure about your sources but if there was only one church I think it would be called Catholic(means: universal) but would not be Roman Catholic.
From what I've read of church history there were five major bishops each holding equal power. I can't remember all of them but there was the Bishop of Jeruselem, the Bishop of constantinople, the bishop of Rome and two others.
So what that made was four bishops situated in the east. And one bishop in the West(Rome). So what the Bishop of rome did in the 400's or 500's (correct me if I'm wrong) was write to the Bishop of the one in Greece I can't remember the name. The letter to that Bishop stated that the Bishop of Rome wanted him to relinquish full control to him(the Bishop of Rome). The Bishop of the one in Greece declined and became the Greek Orthodox church, and the Bishop of Roman became the Roman Catholic church.
So it was actually the Roman Catholics who started all this nonsense. Luther merely brought what I would say truth which the Roman Catholic church didn't like. I think because they would lose power. From what I've heard/seen the Roman Catholic church is only interested in power not doctrine. They even decided to put Catholic (universal) into there name probably so they could state they have absolute truth and authority. Therefore, Roman Catholics hold they are the universal church.
It is rumored this is why they have the Benedict, Fransiscan and another order. Because the Vatican actually houses secret archives of texts. Therefore, if one person had access to all of them that would mean they would become too powerful. Therefore, certain orders are only allowed to read certain texts.
I hope you found that somewhat interesting.
Thanks
They even decided to put Catholic (universal) into there name probably so they could state they have absolute truth and authority. Therefore, Roman Catholics hold they are the universal church. In fact, I'm pretty sure it was Ignatius of Antioch who first used the word catholic; I'll have to dig up my source for the exact epistle, but it was in the first or second century, which indicates that the word simply stuck.
thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
Stryder
09-12-01, 09:51 PM
Okay I'm going to quote something form the Bible, This of course isn't because I read from it, I just happened to find the pieces in revelation's that had me asking a few questions.
18:I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book. If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19:And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described book.
Okay from my understanding a modern day equivalent to this is placed in most good books at the start by the publisher, for instance:
The rights of XXXX to be identified as Author of this work has been asserted by XXXX in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988.
or
All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without prior permission in writing of the publishers.
From what I understand if I thought that there was more for me at the end of my life other than just having my energy slowly disperse as I decay in nothingness, Then I might have sculptured some mythology of some other land that I might transverse too.
Now if I was going to protect what I had written in this world although I had embarked to the mythological next, Then I think I would pretty much state something like:
If you quote my book, then that is fine with me, but if you try and steal it for your own I'm going to come back and make sure your haunted until you submit that you did something against my wishes.
Namely I'm playing on the fact that people at that period of time are Superstitious, so if I said they would be cursed... then they better darn well know it.
It worked for the egyptians for many years until their tombs were desecrated by robbers.
Also another quote from newer books really gets me thinking that some of the bibilical authors missed something,
All person named and portrayed in this book are purely fictional, any similarity to persons living or dead is purely coincidental and the author excpets no liability.
<HR>
Stryderunknown
I was unaware of that quote. It really puts this book in context. It is a work of mythology similar to The Iliad of Homer and The Odyssey. We define them as such due to their mystical content. Monsters and Demons alike populate their worlds and impossible acts are produced within their plots. How many have the belief that people can come back from the dead? All those that do must have their sanity checked.
There is another train of thought that we cannot read into the events as actual occurences but may glean moral messages from the book. I do not see the connection in certain issues such as the Jesus character's "self-sacrifice" seems to have no connection to anything relevant. Often the stories just show how powerful the Jesus character is or how vindictive the God character can be. Overall it is a banal piece and is also easily dwarfed by the superior literature of pieces from the same time period. Many contradictory elements are present making it a very frustrating read. Thankfully translators saw some of the contradictions such as a second reference to the supposedly dead Goliath character. There are many archaic references to cultures and people long gone. You almost need some seperate guide to reveal what they refer to.
I reiterate there are many superior books that can be more inciteful.
KalvinB
09-13-01, 04:14 AM
A classic example of a rant against the Bible based on a faulty interpretation.
What Revelation simply says at the end is
"If God didn't say it, don't say he did, if God did say it, don't say he didn't."
You can find such ideas in the OT as well. One person in the OT was given the burial of an ass for cutting a page out of a document written by a prophet. Revelation promises such people Hell for doing it. Deuteronomy says the same as Revelation.
I have no problem with this. Next time consult at least Google before jumping to conclusions about what the Bible says. Or...I dunno, ASK.
Ben
Deadwood
09-13-01, 04:25 AM
Tiassa, I wouldn't be surprised if the church was called the Catholic Church, but in the first or second century there was no Roman Catholic church. Even though the Bishop in Greece didn't bow down to the Bishop of Rome they still decided they were the universal church and only recognised themselves. Hence you have the Eastern Orthodox church excommunicated. Not sure what the status is right now but it goes back and forth. Its a joke to me.
In the first and second century there were many subcults such as the one that would become the Christian cult. They buried themselves underground in vaults with paintings of sheep and the Jesus character. They had no real organization. It was only after Constantine that they had weight. It was more of a random choice as he had gone through multiple religions. It simply happened that the Christian religion was the one that he chose shortly before his death. There was no devine reason as it was completely random.
Know your history and you shall know yourself!
Deadwood
09-14-01, 02:05 AM
Teg, what are your sources on that. I forget the title of my main source but it went something like this. "A guide to the Anglo Catholic Church: A manual for members of the Anglo Catholic communion"
It was written in 1897(somewhere around there late 1800's) and revised in 1967. This is the main source where I got the historical info.
Bebelina
09-14-01, 09:05 AM
Is he from NY? :confused:
My source?!?!?
My source is every history book about Rome and the Christian Cults. In particular I found this intriguing information in my Art History book.(along with some photographs of the caverns that held the bodies)
I would guess that if your source rewords the above information it is only to make themselves look better. There were no formal churches in the 1st or 2nd century. There were only informal gatherings. "A guide to the Anglo Catholic Church: A manual for members of the Anglo Catholic communion": the title gives away their motive.
*Originally posted by Bebelina
Indeed you have, you infidel!*
Perhaps it is because you forgot to tell us what your message is.
*Originally posted by Teg
Now you are attacking facts?*
Actually, it's the "fickle facts" put forth by LordManimal that I have trouble with.
*Without your knowledge of the harmful sideaffects of using rat poison, I could give you some to eat and you might happily do so.*
You do the same everyday without a second thought.
Just replace the word "rat" with the word "insect" and voila! a major component of your diet.
*After looking at your full statement we can see that your words were taken out of context. *
Whew!
I thought I was a closet toker there for a minute.
*Besides some small ritual changes, the general atmosphere, and a forgiving ritual, they are one in the same. They use the same book and have a common background. The only real difference is that historic breaking by Henry VIII. He was upset about being unable to divorce and so he made his own religion. We can only compare the two religions to other world religion and will find that there are no two as similar as these. They have the same history prior to Henry VIII and follow the same basic structure. *
Shows how little you can find out in the history books.
Henry VIII isn't anywhere near the central figure in Christianity, otherwise it would be called Henryanity.
Roman Catholicism is called that because it is centered on Rome.
Christianity is called that because it is centered on Christ.
*I have seen two amateurs do it without the aid of a sheep dog. They rounded up 700+. Sheep are worse than cows when it comes to the ability to follow blindly.*
Well, you've got me at a loss.
Few people willingly prove my points for me that effectively.
I said "one" man couldn't do it by himself.
You proved it by saying you saw "two" do it. Thanks.
I said sheep don't follow blindly.
Lo and behold, you say sheep are worse than cows when it comes to that.
I just can't argue with such brilliant points, even though they were mine.
*Originally posted by DEVILDOG
There you go with your marijuana fetish again and tiassa's not even in the room. *
Sorry, I thought he was.
*When Christ made Simon, "Peter (the Rock from which he would build his church)" and said, "I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven; what you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, what you let loose on earth, you let loose in heaven."(Matthew 16:19) he made Peter, and his successors (the succeeding Popes) the guardians of the truth. That is to say, the Popes are infallible in terms of matters pertaining to the Faith. *
Sounds very theological.
However, Peter wasn't the rock Jesus was building his church on.
He is building it on the statement, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."
As for the keys, anyone confessing the same gets them, too.
It just happens that in Matt. 16:19, Peter was the only one to say so.
*at that time the only Christian Church*
At that time there were a bunch of Christian groups (Albigenses, Waldenses, Anabaptists, etc.) around, and the Catholic church wasn't one of them.
*Catholicism would still be the only religion if not for Martin Luther's perception or interpretation of the bible.*
Truth still doesn't depend on perception.
Perception is simply recognition of what is already there; it doesn't create anything that isn't there.
*Originally posted by Teg
The strength in other studies in the realms of science and history, lies in numbers.*
Which mean nothing.
...for there is no restraint to the LORD to save by many or by few.
(1 Samuel 14:6, KJV).
*Originally posted by Stryderunknown
18:I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book. If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19:And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described book.*
Good quote.
It means that you will get your nothingness.
Earlier verses say that you will turn to smoke and ashes on the way there, though.
*Originally posted by Teg
I reiterate there are many superior books that can be more inciteful.*
Unfortunately, we have only your word that they are superior.
I'm not willing to bet my life that you're right.
I am, however, willing to bet my life that you are wrong.
*Originally posted by Deadwood
Even though the Bishop in Greece didn't bow down to the Bishop of Rome they still decided they were the universal church and only recognised themselves.
LMAO.
Obviously, those two don't understand what "universal" means.
*Originally posted by Teg
It was only after Constantine that they had weight.*
"they" being the Eastern Orthodox "catholic" church.
*Anglo Catholic*
More jokes.
They have obviously lost sight of what "catholic" means.
*Originally posted by Bebelina
Is he from NY?*
No.
I just can't spend as much time in front of the computer as some of you guys can.
But, thanks for asking.
Bebelina
09-17-01, 04:46 PM
My life is my message, but I will try to write it all down in a book, for you who don´t have the possibility to become close disciples. :D
So do not despair Tony, the rescue is coming.:D
Love is everything. :)
*Originally posted by Tony1
You do the same everyday without a second thought. Just replace the word[poison] "rat" with the word "insect" and voila! a major component of your diet.*
You forget that those poisons prevent the en masse starvation that would occur due to a lack of plentiful fruits and vegetables. Not everyone can afford environmentaly safe food. While we are on the subject engineering is fine in my book.
The strength in other studies in the realms of science and history, lies in numbers.
*Which mean nothing.*
So are you saying that you be just as inclined to believe a statement from 4 people as a statement echoed by 4 million?
Numbers are everything! Without them you would be running around naked with a spear in your hand.
*I have seen two amateurs do it without the aid of a sheep dog. They rounded up 700+. Sheep are worse than cows when it comes to the ability to follow blindly.*
*Well, you've got me at a loss. Few people willingly prove my points for me that effectively. I said "one" man couldn't do it by himself. You proved it by saying you saw "two" do it. Thanks. I said sheep don't follow blindly. Lo and behold, you say sheep are worse than cows when it comes to that.*
You like to take small distinctions and extrapolate fodder. How is it that 2 should be a big difference than one. I was simply making the point that I have never seen a sheep resist the herding.
*Shows how little you can find out in the history books. Henry VIII isn't anywhere near the central figure in Christianity, otherwise it would be called Henryanity. Roman Catholicism is called that because it is centered on Rome. Christianity is called that because it is centered on Christ.*
This is too laughable! The history of religion by Tony1! Some guys made the Roman Catholic Church and some other dudes created a Christian Church. The one was called Roman Catholic because it was in Rome (a ring of truth) and the other Christian (Catholicism is defined as a Christian religion). I was referring to the break by Henry VIII. If you remember your history, it was a split that resulted in the Protestant religion. This quickly became the national religion of England. Thus it was called the Church of England. Puritans were just an offshoot. Due to this fact all religions in America that are based on the bible(barring the Catholic religion) are all offshoots of Henry's Church.
The superior books can be anything from the collected works of Darwin to Frank Herbert's Dune. Both have a better take on the meaning of life.
*Originally posted by Bebelina
My life is my message, but I will try to write it all down in a book, for you who don´t have the possibility to become close disciples.*
Scary thought. You have disciples?
If your life is your message then your message is that you imagine that you are from another galaxy, you have pinkeye and you lack the ability to take a good long look at yourself.
*So do not despair Tony, the rescue is coming.*
Relax.
I've already been saved from believing stuff that you believe.
*Originally posted by Teg
Not everyone can afford environmentaly safe food.*
You're right.
Those who can't afford it are often called "sick" or "dead."
*So are you saying that you be just as inclined to believe a statement from 4 people as a statement echoed by 4 million?*
I would be more inclined to listen to the truth from two people than to lies from billions of people.
*You like to take small distinctions and extrapolate fodder.*
Actually, I don't like that at all.
You're the one generating the fodder.
No extrapolation is required.
*How is it that 2 should be a big difference than one.*
It is twice as many.
*Catholicism is defined as a Christian religion*
Only by Catholics and other non-Christians.
*I was referring to the break by Henry VIII. If you remember your history, it was a split that resulted in the Protestant religion.*
Man, are you ever confused.
Have you ever heard of Martin Luther?
*Due to this fact all religions in America that are based on the bible(barring the Catholic religion) are all offshoots of Henry's Church.*
Actually, only Episcopalianism is.
*The superior books can be anything from the collected works of Darwin to Frank Herbert's Dune. Both have a better take on the meaning of life. *
"Superior" means "better," not "worse."
And, "better" is the comparative of "good," not "bad."
I don't remember Darwin even discussing the meaning of life.
He couldn't have, since he obviously didn't know what life is.
blonde_cupid
01-03-02, 06:22 PM
Cris,
***If God is omniscient then even before we are born God will have complete knowledge of every decision we are going to make.***
O.K.
***Any apparent choice we make regarding the acceptance or denial of Jesus as a savior is predetermined.***
The choice "we" make is known by God* in advance. O.K.
***This must be true to satisfy the assertion that God is omniscient.***
O.K.
***Effectively we have no choice in the matter. What we think is free will is an illusion. Our choices have been coerced since we exist and act according to the will of God.***
Not O.K. What God* knows in advance is "our choice" - not God's* choice. It's not much different from knowing "our choice" after the fact.
For example, let's assume that you gave your daughter a choice of cereal or eggs this morning and you "saw" that "she" chose eggs. I hope you would agree that your "seeing" your daughter choose eggs was not coersion on your part and that she chose according to her will, not yours, even though you were able to observe what she chose. Now, let's assume that yesterday, you were somehow able to "see" what "she" was going to choose for breakfast today. Your advance knowledge would not change the fact that your daughter chose eggs. Eggs would still be "her" choice for breakfast even if you knew in advance what she would choose. Your advance knowledge did not coerce her into choosing eggs and she did not act according to your will. She was presented with two options and made her own choice, according to her will, even though you knew what her choice would be in advance.
Human free-will and the omniscience of God* can exist harmoneously. They are not mutually exclusive.
On the other hand... If, because you knew yesterday that your daughter would choose eggs for breakfast today, you decided to take away her choice and just put eggs in front of her for breakfast, then you would have effectively taken her choice away, coerced her into eating eggs and forced her to act according to your will, not hers.
I hope you can see the difference.
blonde_cupid
***Effectively we have no choice in the matter. What we think is free will is an illusion. Our choices have been coerced since we exist and act according to the will of God.***
Not O.K. What God* knows in advance is "our choice" - not God's* choice. It's not much different from knowing "our choice" after the fact. It is very different because you are not the creator of the universe. An omniscient creator creates the conditions where every action would take place and through his omniscience at the beginning of time could see that every detail occurs exactly according to plan.
If there was even a slight variation, i.e. someone made a different choice compared to the one he planned, then he would not be omniscient.
Now, let's assume that yesterday, you were somehow able to "see" what "she" was going to choose for breakfast today. Your advance knowledge would not change the fact that your daughter chose eggs. Eggs would still be "her" choice for breakfast even if you knew in advance what she would choose. Your advance knowledge did not coerce her into choosing eggs and she did not act according to your will. She was presented with two options and made her own choice, according to her will, even though you knew what her choice would be in advance. The same reasoning applies. I was not responsible for all the conditions that led to the perceived choice. There could be no free choice when all the conditions that led to the action were known beforehand and started by an omniscient creator.
The best example I can give is a computer program. A program is just a list of instructions, many of which are decisions. A program operates on data and the decisions made by the program will be different depending on the nature of the data.
If I both wrote the program and provided all the data (I am the creator), then I can predict with 100% accuracy (omniscience) every decision the program will make. The program has no free will in the matter because I created the data as well as the program.
In exactly the same way if a creator god is responsible for all of creation and is omniscient then the choices of all humans are entirely predictable because he designed it that way. The humans have no choice, and free will is an illusion.
Cris
blonde_cupid
01-04-02, 02:42 AM
Cris,
***An omniscient creator creates the conditions where every action would take place and through his omniscience at the beginning of time could see that every detail occurs exactly according to plan.***
Free will is part of the plan. As such, God* does not plan our choices. The action taken is taken freely. An omniscient God* that has given man free will can know your choice in advance but does not make the choice for you.
***If there was even a slight variation, i.e. someone made a different choice compared to the one he planned, then he would not be omniscient.***
There can be no variation. God* did not plan the choice. An omniscient God* that has given free will does not "plan" your choice. An omniscient God* "knows" your choice.
Your computer analogy does not work for me because, unlike God*, you planned the computer's decisions. You did not give the computer a choice. The computer did not have a free will.
However, if you created a bunch of computers and programmed them with a choice - like allowing them to randomly display either "Cris" or "blonde_cupid" when prompted for an answer to the question, "Who made you?" - then, most likely, you would not be able to predict with 100% accuracy which answer any given computer might give to that question at any given time.
You are not omniscient when it comes down to such choices.
Blonde_cupid,
Let me try a slightly different approach because I don’t think we are connecting and I don’t think you have seen my point yet.
Free Will: The apparent human ability to make choices that are not externally determined.
Or from Websters: freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention.
I think we’re ok with the definition of free will, right?
What you are saying is that even though a choice is known beforehand that doesn’t mean that free will has not been exercised.
My point is that that sequence is impossible.
If you know, or if anyone knows, that an apparent choice is going to be made at some point in the future then effectively that choice has already been determined, or pre-determined if you prefer. How you know or what mechanism is used is irrelevant. The point is that if it is known beforehand then the choice has already been made.
When the time comes for the event to occur then there can be no real choice. There cannot be any action other than the one that was pre-determined at the former time. The claim for free will becomes an illusion only.
IOW if the event has been pre-determined then that to my mind classifies as a prior cause and contradicts free will as defined above.
The issue with an omniscient god is that such a being would have perfect knowledge of every event from the beginning of his creation. It follows then that every event would be pre-determined. And as we see from the argument above anything that is pre-determined cannot also be determined by free will.
The existence of an omniscient creator and human free will cannot coexist.
Cris.
blonde_cupid
01-13-02, 05:27 PM
Cris,
Really... I see the point you are trying to make but I disagree with your argument.
***What you are saying is that even though a choice is known beforehand that doesn’t mean that free will has not been exercised.***
Correct.
***My point is that that sequence is impossible.***
I disagree.
***If you know, or if anyone knows, that an apparent choice is going to be made at some point in the future then effectively that choice has already been determined, or pre-determined if you prefer. How you know or what mechanism is used is irrelevant. The point is that if it is known beforehand then the choice has already been made.***
Yes, the choice is made... by whom? By the one who looks ahead and sees the choice being made? No. The choice is made by the one who makes the choice. The only way to know the choice is to allow the choice to be made.
***When the time comes for the event to occur then there can be no real choice. There cannot be any action other than the one that was pre-determined at the former time. The claim for free will becomes an illusion only.***
As far as I can determine, that is not true. I have been married for a loooonnnngggg time. My spouse knows me very well and knows with 100% certainty what my choice will be when I am faced with certain options. My spouse's knowledge was never a cause of that choice, not the first time and not the last time. Nor will my spouse's knowledge cause me to make the choice the next time or the time after that. I could make a different choice, but I will not, and my spouse knows that.
***IOW if the event has been pre-determined then that to my mind classifies as a prior cause and contradicts free will as defined above.***
My spouse knows me very well and can tell you with 100% certainty what my future choice will be when I am faced with certain options. In my mind, that pre-determination (my spouse's prior knowledge of what my choice will be) does not qualify as a prior cause because the actual choice is being made by me. That my choice is known by my spouse beforehand does not contradict my free will. I am still the one making the choice. My free will is very much in tact.
***The issue with an omniscient god is that such a being would have perfect knowledge of every event from the beginning of his creation. It follows then that every event would be pre-determined. And as we see from the argument above anything that is pre-determined cannot also be determined by free will.***
As you can see from my example, things can be pre-determined and also determined by free will.
***The existence of an omniscient creator and human free will cannot coexist.***
Sure they can. :)
Okay, Christmas dinner is at your house, Blonde Cupid. ;)
--Tiassa :cool:
blonde_cupid
01-13-02, 05:54 PM
***Okay, Christmas dinner is at your house, Blonde Cupid.***
Why not!? That's the way it's been for years now.
You know... you might have hit on something there. I think it would be great if the major participants in this forum were to get together, face-to-face, and have some of these discussions while sitting down and breaking bread together at the same table.
I'd be happy to do the cooking... maybe next Christmas if we're all still around...??? :)
Godless
01-13-02, 06:29 PM
There's already enough bickering in my family's christmas dinner, why go to start bickering about what no-one can prove!. :rolleyes: :confused:
blonde_cupid
01-13-02, 07:00 PM
Godless,
Lots of discussion goes on in my home but very little squabbling. It might be a welcome change for you... :)
blonde_cupid
01-13-02, 07:14 PM
***Your spouse is God?***
Not quite tiassa.
My spouse knows me very well and can predict with certainty some of my choices. God*, I believe, knows me even better. The intimate knowledge which both of them possess about me does not cause me to make the choices which I make. Their knowledge does not contradict my free will.
blonde_cupid
***If you know, or if anyone knows, that an apparent choice is going to be made at some point in the future then effectively that choice has already been determined, or pre-determined if you prefer. How you know or what mechanism is used is irrelevant. The point is that if it is known beforehand then the choice has already been made.***
Yes, the choice is made... by whom? By the one who looks ahead and sees the choice being made? No. The choice is made by the one who makes the choice. The only way to know the choice is to allow the choice to be made. Ok I see where we are not connecting.
We need to distinguish between clairvoyance (ability to look into the future) and omniscience (knowledge of all events, past present and future).
Clairvoyance would perhaps be like someone using a time machine and travelling forward into time and watching an event occur, and by that means obtaining knowledge of future events. And certainly they would not be the cause or part of the cause of the event.
Omniscience is not about observing what is going to happen but having pre-knowledge of what will happen. Remember god is all knowing. If he had to specifically look ahead to see what happens then there would be a point when he wouldn’t know. Omniscience is about knowing what will happen before it happens and is not about observing.
An omniscient god would have perfect knowledge about every event from the beginning of time to the end of time. He would know every choice before the choices were made, but then they wouldn’t be choices they would be simply pre-determined events.
My spouse knows me very well and knows with 100% certainty what my choice will be when I am faced with certain options. Ha ha, I know what you mean and my wife and I had similar experiences, but we did reach a point where we tried to not be so predictable and would deliberately make alternate choices. You cannot claim 100% certainty in this case; you can only claim a high degree of probability based on inductive reasoning. But we are talking of very different things here.
I am not claiming that mere knowledge of a future event will cause the event, what I am saying is that perfect pre-knowledge of a specific future event guarantees that that event will occur despite any perceived human choice. The event would have been planned at the moment of creation and that is the cause of the event and not human free will. This must be so if a creator god is omniscient. If he is to know every event in the entire history of the universe from the moment of creation then every event must have been pre-determined at the time of creation. The only controlling influence would be that of god and human free will cannot exist under such a condition.
I am still the one making the choice. My free will is very much in tact. Yes of course that is all true because an omnipotent omniscient god does not exist. You have not been pre-programmed and the future has not been written yet. What happens next is entirely up to us.
Cris
Sir. Loone
01-15-02, 08:25 PM
GOD is! No matter what you have said , your words are of ignorance of God's presence! I say that you do not know God, because you hate God and love the world and it's pleasers ! He sits in the Heavens and laughs at you all for denying His existence, He knows your fates since before time began! And ALL of us will have to give in account in the 'near future' before the Almighty God your Creator!:mad: ;) But JESUS is still willing to have you come unto Him for forgiveness of sins! And He still, and He will, despite what your friends and teachers and the Devil will tell any of you!
So long as you live, there will always be a chance with JESUS for forgiveness of sins and a peace of mind that you have never experienced before in your lives! "A peace that will surpass all understanding!" That 'peace' will keep your hearts even though any situations of life! And then you will know that GOD is too real, and He loves you! You where made in the image of GOD, and NOT the other way around! He is beautiful! You and I are 'fallen', and come far short of the Glory of GOD your Creator! But God has made a way for us humans to come to a HOLY GOD, and that is through JESUS the Son of God, who is really GOD!! He made the supreme 'sacrifice' 2000 years ago! All we need to do is to trust in Him!
GOD is not a 'monster', He is a friend that will be by your side through thick and thin!
Once a nation forgets GOD, the people will morn, and if not repentant, they shall parish in the Earth! And there will definitely be NO improvements of life apart from GOD's laws, love, and protection! The nation will fall!! Don't' believe me ?:bugeye: Watch the news this year!
But the people of God still have a voice! And JESUS 'still' can heal our lands!
God is watching you! And waiting, with open arms!
To cast of that you to which you do not understand, is of ~ignorance!
Hi Sir Loone,
GOD is! Explain how you know this.
your words are of ignorance of God's presence! Ignorance of something that doesn’t exist is not a problem. But I simply can’t find his presence anywhere I look. I really have no choice.
I say that you do not know God, because you hate God and love the world and it's pleasers ! No not at all. There is no value in expending energy on hating things that do not exist. I hold no animosity towards your deity. If you can show him to me then I’m sure I’d have no problem with him.
And I don’t particularly love this world either. It offers some interesting challenges, but all the time I’m locked into this inefficient and disease attracting biological form then pain and eventual death are not things I desire.
He sits in the Heavens and laughs at you all for denying His existence, When someone superior and capable of great wisdom and teaching laughs at someone who is far less capable then that is known as arrogance. Why should I be interested in such a spiteful being?
He knows your fates since before time began! If so then you understand the whole point of this topic. That pre-knowledge means pre-determination for humans who cannot therefore have any control of their own will. We would be merely puppets at the hands of an evil monster that you consider worthy of worship.
But JESUS is still willing to have you come unto Him for forgiveness of sins! And He still, and He will, despite what your friends and teachers and the Devil will tell any of you! Then let him make himself be clearly known to me. I have all my senses intact and am capable of great love and understanding. My mind is entirely open to new concepts and ideas. Why is it that he cannot find me of he exists?
You where made in the image of GOD, and NOT the other way around! He is beautiful!Are you saying that God looks like a human being? Why would he take on such a hideously inefficient design.
GOD is not a 'monster', He is a friend that will be by your side through thick and thin! If he has determined our fate for us, as you say, and when devoted Christians die horrible deaths then I fail to see how he is any sort of friend at all. Friends do not cause the death of their friends, such a person who does such evil is a monster.
To cast of that you to which you do not understand, is of ~ignorance!It is not possible to understand something that cannot be shown to be true or to even exist. To believe something mythological as if it were true is to show ignorance of reality. Fantasies cannot save you. I can understand your fear of reality because in the real world you will die – come to terms with that and stop pretending in non-existent invisible fantasies.
THERE IS NO GOD – THERE IS NO GOD – THERE IS NO GOD – THERE IS NO GOD.
"He sits in the Heavens and laughs at you all for denying His existence, He knows your fates since before time began!"
I'm glad your God is getting some amusement out of creating all these non-believers.
If he knew all our fates then he knew we would deny his existence. He is laughing at himself again for creating us as non-believers, this god of yours.
If only the joke were that funny, but its not. Its quite tragic.
Sir. Loone
01-17-02, 05:34 PM
Originally posted by Cris
Hi Sir Loone,
It is not possible to understand something that cannot be shown to be true or to even exist. To believe something mythological as if it were true is to show ignorance of reality. Fantasies cannot save you. I can understand your fear of reality because in the real world you will die – come to terms with that and stop pretending in non-existent invisible fantasies.
THERE IS NO GOD – THERE IS NO GOD – THERE IS NO GOD – THERE IS NO GOD.
Hi Cris!:D You are the 'created and not the Creator! GOD is love, and He is more real then you are!:) And His thoughts and ways are higher then that of ours! You exist because He exist, and you were created in his image, and your not an 'evolved' creepy creature, (ape) but that of GOD's designs, a living soul and a spirit that is immortal!
GOD always existed! He was the very same GOD a hundred 'trillion' centuries before the universe was created! And He does see the end from the beginning! Remember that God's thoughts and was are far higher then ours, and He knows more then anyone ever! He is the Supreme Being!:cool:
Your words little man, does not make any reality at all!:D You shall soon see for your selves that this GOD of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, was and is the GOD He says He is!
Live and learn my little 6'7" foot rabbit!:rolleyes: :D
Man is not an answer to himself, but GOD his Creator who loves him who He has created! I said that, but the Bible does have a better saying to that!
The Word of GOD is 'absolute' truth! YES every single word!
And He knows who you are and from start to finish!
Don't end up being "worm food"!
But, the person that will live forever in splendor in Paradise with a loving Heavenly father God that cares for you and yours!
Live and learn! It may take a life time for most, but some may find out sooner!
Sir. Loone
01-17-02, 05:50 PM
Originally posted by Deepuz
"He sits in the Heavens and laughs at you all for denying His existence, He knows your fates since before time began!"
I'm glad your God is getting some amusement out of creating all these non-believers.
If he knew all our fates then he knew we would deny his existence. He is laughing at himself again for creating us as non-believers, this god of yours.
If only the joke were that funny, but its not. Its quite tragic.
Read the Bible for your self, and go to Church, if you are not afraid of the truth!;)
And there are 'absolutes', the Word of GOD has answers that none others have! Man by himself is very limmited in understanding of the 'absolute truth'!
Live and learn all you that are 'youngsters'! And for the old, think again, you know not all there is to know about even your own selves! Live and learn, or become "Worm Food"! And later for the eternal fires of Judgment!:o
JESUS still can save all that will call upon His name!:)
Much too loud Loone. Please us a smaller font, unless of course you have poor eyesight.
As I said before making text larger doesn't add any extra weight to your baseless assertions, the larger size just makes you look even more foolish.
*Originally posted by Cris
When someone superior and capable of great wisdom and teaching laughs at someone who is far less capable then that is known as arrogance.*
Not really, since God isn't laughing at you for the sake of you, but for the sake of the specious arguments you propose for his non-existence.
I laugh, too.
*Originally posted by Deepuz
I'm glad your God is getting some amusement out of creating all these non-believers.*
It's not so much the non-believers, as it is the reasons they have for being non-believers.
*If only the joke were that funny, but its not. Its quite tragic.*
If it's that tragic, then why the jokes?
tony1,
When someone superior and capable of great wisdom and teaching laughs at someone who is far less capable then that is known as arrogance.[/i]*
Not really, since God isn't laughing at you for the sake of you, but for the sake of the specious arguments you propose for his non-existence.
I laugh, too.Yes I have noticed that when someone finally realizes that their claim is totally false they tend to be either speechless or resort to humor.
I notice that on one has been able to refute my argument, and you can only ‘laugh’, so I assume you finally realize that the Christian god cannot exist and therefore does not exist.
Cris
*Originally posted by Cris
Yes I have noticed that when someone finally realizes that their claim is totally false they tend to be either speechless or resort to humor.*
?
What kind of scientific aphorism is that?
I've taken part in many different kinds of contests over the years, and I have noticed a few things.
1. When you are the champion, the challengers will try anything to psyche you out.
2. The losers who really are good, but just failed to win, admit it.
3. The losers who are second-rate fire up the excuse generators and let them run wild.
4. Last but not least, I laugh at wannabe challengers who aren't even close, but I take the good ones seriously.
*I notice that on one has been able to refute my argument, and you can only ‘laugh’, so I assume you finally realize that the Christian god cannot exist and therefore does not exist.*
It's that point four thing from the list above.
Laughter is for those who aren't even close.
Besides, your point appeared to be that laughter is related to arrogance.
While I question the validity of that, I can concede it to you, if you can explain what difference that would make anyway.
Laughter is for those who aren't even close.
Besides, your point appeared to be that laughter is related to arrogance.
While I question the validity of that, I can concede it to you, if you can explain what difference that would make anyway.
If they weren't even close, disproving them should be quite easy shouldn't it? No, your laughter is not for those who aren't even close, rather for those who are too close for you to answer.
tony1,
Laughing or not can you refute my argument started in this thread?
Cris
*Originally posted by Xelios
If they weren't even close, disproving them should be quite easy shouldn't it?*
First, you'd have to realize that you aren't even in the same ball park, then you'd have to realize that you aren't in the same league, then you'd have to realize that you aren't on the team, and then you'd have to realize you don't know the game PLUS you'd have to find out what game IS being played.
When you are that far wrong, laughter is really the only option.
*Originally posted by Cris
Laughing or not can you refute my argument started in this thread?*
LOL!
Good point, Cris.
Yes, I can, and the laughter IS the refutation.
He that sits in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
(Psalms 2:4, KJV).
All that shows, tony, is your lack of understanding of the question.
Tony1,
As I thought, my proof has thwarted you. Since laughter can be interpreted many ways I will take it and your inability to provide a reasoned rebuttal that you cannot provide a reasoned rebuttal. If the issue was so trivial as you imply then you should have no trouble offering me a reason why I might be wrong. But you cannot do that can you?
Just to summarize for you:
An omniscient creator god will have perfect knowledge of every event that is to occur up until the end of time. This means that every choice and decision you will ever APPEAR to make will have been pre-determined from the beginning of time. The decision as to whether you, or anyone, go to heaven or hell, has already been determined by this god.
Pre-determination and human free will cannot coexist under such circumstances. If human free will is impossible then the Christian claim that people have freedom to choose between Christ and the Devil has no meaning and Christianity is similarly meaningless. And the claimed ‘all good’ god is truly evil for arbitrarily condemning a large number of innocent people to eternal torment.
If the Christian god is omniscient then human free will does not exist and Christianity is meaningless, humans would be no more than puppets in the hands of an evil monster.
If human free will is real then the Christian god cannot be omniscient and as such cannot be omnipotent. In short the definition of the Christian god and Christian claims for human free will would result in a paradox. Such a god as defined simply cannot exist, and therefore does not exist.
If you can refute this then be serious for a moment and make an attempt.
Cris
First, you'd have to realize that you aren't even in the same ball park, then you'd have to realize that you aren't in the same league, then you'd have to realize that you aren't on the team, and then you'd have to realize you don't know the game PLUS you'd have to find out what game IS being played.
When you are that far wrong, laughter is really the only option.
Being in your presence is uneducating- your words empty.
*Originally posted by Cris
As I thought, my proof has thwarted you.*
As usual, you inject a note of comedy to defuse the tension, so to speak.
*If the issue was so trivial as you imply then you should have no trouble offering me a reason why I might be wrong. But you cannot do that can you?*
Well, I could say look out the window, but you've rejected that.
Laughter is all that is left.
*An omniscient creator god will have perfect knowledge of every event that is to occur up until the end of time. This means that every choice and decision you will ever APPEAR to make will have been pre-determined from the beginning of time. The decision as to whether you, or anyone, go to heaven or hell, has already been determined by this god.
Pre-determination and human free will cannot coexist under such circumstances. If human free will is impossible then the Christian claim that people have freedom to choose between Christ and the Devil has no meaning and Christianity is similarly meaningless. And the claimed ‘all good’ god is truly evil for arbitrarily condemning a large number of innocent people to eternal torment.*
Of course, since eternal torment is NOT the "final resting place" for a large number of people, your theory, while off to a good start, kind of fizzles at the end of this section.
*If the Christian god is omniscient then human free will does not exist and Christianity is meaningless, humans would be no more than puppets in the hands of an evil monster.*
Of course, since your assumption of "evil monster" was based on the assumption of eternal torment, it, too, is invalid.
*If human free will is real then the Christian god cannot be omniscient and as such cannot be omnipotent. In short the definition of the Christian god and Christian claims for human free will would result in a paradox. Such a god as defined simply cannot exist, and therefore does not exist.
If you can refute this then be serious for a moment and make an attempt.*
Of course, the claim of omnipotence is questionable, too, since even an omnipotent God can delegate his power and leave the wielding of such power in the hands of his delegates.
Thus, no paradox.
Mind you, the argument you presented does in fact demolish the god you described, but since that god isn't God, you haven't accomplished as much as you may have hoped.
tony1,
Mind you, the argument you presented does in fact demolish the god you described, but since that god isn't God, you haven't accomplished as much as you may have hoped. Most Christians consider their god to be omnipotent and omniscient, among other claims of course.
Now I know you aren't included in 'most Christians' and I really do not know how to classify you. Perhaps you could describe the primary attributes of your god, for me, with particular reference to omipotence and omniscience etc. Please be as detailed as you can.
Hoping you will do this.
Cris
PS. Humor - it's my lifestyle, I tend to see humor in almost everything.
If I really offered you
1) A Happy Life for you and everyone you want to have a happy life
or
2) A headache for the rest of your life.
You have the free choice to do what you want.
But I still know what you would choose (and I'm only human)
Conspiracy
06-15-05, 06:54 PM
You make a good point Cris, and Im a Christian.
I think this phrase pretty much answers why we have no fucking clue why God does what he does
"God works in mysterious ways" stop me if you've heard this before
Alternatively if human free will is valid, meaning that the outcome of our decisions is not pre-determined or coerced, then God cannot be omniscient, since he would not know in advance our decisions.This house of cards appears to rest on one assumed (or missed) uknown: wether the Knowledge of God determines what happens or what happens determines God's Knowledge.
So my "smart" atheist friends: have you determined which it might be? You must have to have arrive at some conclusion such that it would be such a convivial atmosphere on the communal road to hell.
Of course we then consider time with regards to the Christian God (Is the Christian God in our time or "outside of" it?). Christians assume the latter so if you address the Christian God then you address a God not bound by our time.
The faithful non-sequiturs cannot use fish logic to disprove God's existence; the faithful non-sequiturs cannot disprove God's existence. Get out of your atheist shells will you? Better yet - stay in them and go to hell. :)
...since God isn't laughing at you for the sake of you, but for the sake of the specious arguments you propose for his non-existence.Man, I wish I had such talent. :DIt's not so much the non-believers, as it is the reasons they have for being non-believers.:D I love you brother as I'm sure God does.
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.