|
|
|
woolytoad
Skeptic Friend
313 Posts |
 Posted - 04/13/2005 : 18:05:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Timgraysr
My question is this. I look at sights for other beliefs. Save for Islam,there doesn't seem to be that much anomosity toward their believers. The Muslems I kind of understand though I do not agree with it. Nothing for the Budists, The Hindu sights are clear. I see the cows in the streets and the Gangies poluted with rats reveling in grain sacrifices while their children starve in the "City of Joy". I don't even see anything in the scores of cults we have in the U.S. alone. Some going back to the beginning of the 20 Century.
Why the Christians? Because Buda and Mohamid are dead and we serve a rissen savior? Is that why when the TV or Radio awakes us to music,cartoons or even porn we are content to let it be.But let it be the "Word Of God", That two-edged sword that cuts assunder even the soul. And just see how fast it can be turned off.
Why the Christians?
Because Christians forcible push their religion on others? This isn't true of most Christians, but when was the last time someone gave you a flier about Buddhism or Hinduism or interrupted a nice lunch or a good book or tried to get some law passed based on religion (well there are some pretty strict Muslim countries)?
Stop interrupting my lunch dammit! |
 |
|
|
chaloobi
SFN Regular
1620 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 06:14:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Um, Adam and Eve? Satan? That's why I always call shenanigans on this "explanation" for god's absence to begin with. Clearly being in his presence doesn't serve as an impediment to free will. You can still reject god on principle.
Except that Adam and Eve and Satan are fictional characters in contrived stories designed to explain some thing or other that frankly nobody really recalls anymore. If god appeared to you and laid down the law in no uncertain terms you would obey.
quote:
The problem is christians cannot conceive of anyone willingly rejecting god to his face. But if he is anything like the monster they worship, I'd do just that. Obviously I won't be the first.
Sure you would.  |
-Chaloobi
|
| Edited by - chaloobi on 04/14/2005 06:16:27 |
|
|
|
bloody_peasant
Skeptic Friend
USA
139 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 07:03:56 [Permalink]
|
Timgraysr
quote:
You Bloody peasant? Sorry, I just had to. Obviously you know little about Christions or Christ for that matter.Don't think so much of yourself. You are not unique. You are not even accuratly informed. Most of the world hates God. They hate his Word because it convicts. They hate the Name of Jesus because they have to deal with it some day for better or for worse and they hate the living God because he cannot be molded into their immage. They hate it all with the same passion you now have for what I have written. There are many that tell the tell of what they would do when they met him. I gullable and I don't think so.
Wow somehow Timgraysr knows so much about me from two words. Must have been a divine revelation. Let's see I'm married to a fundamentalist evangelical Christian, but maybe you can try and enlightening me more than my wife can on these issues.
Who is thinking more of them self? I who simply agreed he would not follow a monstrous description of a God or you, who presumes to know everything about my understanding of your religion? He who presumes to have absolute truth from his magical book? I never am ceased to be amazed by the blind hypocrisy of people like Timgraysr.
Funny I thought we were all unique individuals. Maybe you can accurately inform me.
I can't help what most of the world does, I am me, and despite your claims I am unique and quite well informed. I do not hate God anymore than I hate Santa Claus. I find it hard to hate that which I consider fictional. Sadly I find the Bible does just the opposite of conviction. Instead of convicting with guilt, it relieves people of guilt and justifies much, including acts of genocide, slavery, inferiority of women, and the list goes on. I've heard many a preacher preach that your guilt is washed away along with your sins. So much for conviction, more like escapism.
However what I do hate is when it is used as a tool of evil and inhumanity or a tool of bigotry as you are doing, but other than that, I like it no less than any other fairly boring fictional book.
And what wonderful message from a person such as Timgraysr, that wouldn't be complete without the insidious threats of hell. Sorry Timgraysr I call your bluff, I'm not scared. I'm not worried about rewards or punishments after I'm dead for which there is no evidence for just like I'm not worried that Santa will not bring me any presents for Xmas if I'm a bad boy.
So Timgraysr I'm waiting to be enlightened on your interpretation of your Christ?
Edited to add:
I wanted to add that Timgraysr I am far too busy enjoying life and trying to live it to its fullest to spend any time hating your fictional characters or your magic book or worrying about your fictional afterlife with its punishments and rewards. Sadly I do have to spend some time watching out and trying to prevent the political take over of our American govt. by theocrats, but beyond that I really don't care.
I love to spend time with my family everyday. I love to play with my kids and especially to teach them something new. I love to have a romantic evening or a thoughtful discussion with my wife. I love to help others and care for my family.
I love to travel and see new places. I love to think of things far and wide to have new thoughts and think new things. I love to study and learn and maybe someday I will be lucky enough to discover something new unbeknownst to anyone. I can't imagine the wonder I would feel upon such a discovery, probably a billion times more than the wonder I feel as I study things already known.
I love changes and something new. I love challenges and savor victories. Heck I even like the eventual experience that comes with defeat. I love things old and sentimental. I love to play in the sand at the beach or to hike in the mountains or walk my dogs with my family in our neighborhood.
Heck there are way too many things I love and too little time to spend anytime hating your fictional characters. If one of your loves is believing in your God then by all means carry one, I have no desire to stop you, I'm too busy enjoying my life. However try and stop me from enjoying my life, try and strip me of my liberty, then you and your God will have a fight on their hands. Enjoy  |
| Edited by - bloody_peasant on 04/14/2005 07:35:29 |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 07:29:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Timgraysr
quote:
For "Those seeking enlightenment"
The second question developed from the first..
What will you do when you find enlightenment, as you will be just another crackpot who has it all figured out?
What if enlightenment was not what you expected, if in fact the information was essentially useless in a practical sense?
Hello Again, I thought I would take a stab at some of these questions.After, I hoped I could get a reply from one of my own. I will start with the easy ones. These are personal and as I am sure to be reminded, subject to interpretation.:
The beginning of enlightenment is the first time you become aware that you are doing wrong, sinning against God. We say we are enlightened now, So smart. But remember as a young man or woman perhaps as a teen when guilt came. When you knew you were wrong.
That was the beginning of enlightenment. For me the completeion was when I realized the wages of sin was death. A spititual death. Eternal seperation from God and that he loved ME enough to give his only begotten son. Short version, I got saved 8/8/82 and have not lost my enlightenment. Factually it could not be torn from me not even at my own request.
I'm glad that you have found a fulfilling spiritual path.
quote:
My question is this. I look at sights for other beliefs. Save for Islam,there doesn't seem to be that much anomosity toward their believers. The Muslems I kind of understand though I do not agree with it. Nothing for the Budists, The Hindu sights are clear. I see the cows in the streets and the Gangies poluted with rats reveling in grain sacrifices while their children starve in the "City of Joy". I don't even see anything in the scores of cults we have in the U.S. alone. Some going back to the beginning of the 20 Century.
What "cults" are you referring to? I'm afraid you've lost me with the talk of "sights" and "animosity" towards believers. Religions necessarily have to be inviting towards their believers. How do you mean this particular phrase?
quote:
Why the Christians? Because Buda and Mohamid are dead and we serve a rissen savior? Is that why when the TV or Radio awakes us to music,cartoons or even porn we are content to let it be.But let it be the "Word Of God", That two-edged sword that cuts assunder even the soul. And just see how fast it can be turned off.
Why the Christians?
Oh, it's the "poor persecuted Christian" bit. What a crock. There was a case in Florida where a zoning board specifically targeted a Wiccan temple to try to drive it out of town. Baptists saw the clear and present danger to the right to gather together to worship in a private home. Even they said that although they deeply disagreed with Wicca, their rights could not be abridged. Wiccan and other religions have banded together to condemn terrorism (including Islam), to fight to protect the right to assemble peacefully, and in some cases to reach out and try to understand their fellow travelers of spiritual paths.
Extremism of any religion breeds intolerance and violence. Whether it be Christian, Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 07:32:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boron10
quote:
Originally posted by Timgraysr
I don't even see anything in the scores of cults we have in the U.S. alone. Some going back to the beginning of the 20 Century.
What don't you see about the cults? What does the beginning of the 20th century have to do with anything
I'm beginning to believe he is talking about Wicca based on ignorance of the religion which actually started in the 1890's, not in the 1950's. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 09:25:58 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by chaloobi
Except that Adam and Eve and Satan are fictional characters in contrived stories designed to explain some thing or other that frankly nobody really recalls anymore. If god appeared to you and laid down the law in no uncertain terms you would obey.
They are ficticious characters in the same book that introduces the god we are discussing. If god appeared, what reason would I have to doubt Satan exists as well?
If you wish to argue that contact with god forever destroys free will, I'd like to see the biblical references that support that assertion. If you think god's awesomeness would be that distracting, he could always leave the room while one's deciding.
quote:
quote:
The problem is christians cannot conceive of anyone willingly rejecting god to his face. But if he is anything like the monster they worship, I'd do just that. Obviously I won't be the first.
Sure you would.
Well, so you would fall down and grovel before a supernatural tyrant, an A-one asshole? I'm guessing god would see through any fakery anways, so I could hardly conceal my opinion of him even if I tried.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 04/14/2005 10:32:24 |
|
|
|
chaloobi
SFN Regular
1620 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 10:43:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
<snip>
If you wish to argue that contact with god destroys free will, I'd like to see the biblical references that support that assertion.
You need a biblical reference to see the truth of that? Please. Anyway, if you're an agnostic deist, like myself, then you still have to assume that the reason God stays away (beyond the possibility God doesn't exist) is the maintenance of free will. I'm not about to give you bible quotes because I don't believe the Bible has much to do with any real God out there, if it exists at all. But faith is required by any God because no God has yet revealed itself, so the free will argument still applies. How else, beyond nonexistance, is one to explain God's absence?
quote:
Well, so you would fall down and grovel before a supernatural tyrant, an A-one asshole? I'm guessing god would see through any fakery anways, so I could hardly conceal my opinion of him if I tried.
It's entirely possible you might fall in love with God on the spot and drop to your knees in abject sorrow for all the nasty thoughts you've harbored over the years. Who the hell knows? Consider it from the perspective that no revealed religion is much correct about God and that all the evil you attribute to it is false accusation. Would you still reject God outright knowing nothing at all about it other than it created the universe? You're not pissed about that are you? Whatever God's nature I seriously doubt if God revealed itself to you in a way to impress upon you the truth of it's existance that you would be a cocky beyotch and tell it to go get fucked.
|
-Chaloobi
|
| Edited by - chaloobi on 04/14/2005 10:47:04 |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 12:44:37 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by chaloobi
It's entirely possible you might fall in love with God on the spot and drop to your knees in abject sorrow for all the nasty thoughts you've harbored over the years. Who the hell knows? Consider it from the perspective that no revealed religion is much correct about God and that all the evil you attribute to it is false accusation. Would you still reject God outright knowing nothing at all about it other than it created the universe? You're not pissed about that are you?
No, which is why I specifically stated that I was speaking of the christian god as described by the bible. If you wish to find fault with my argument you need to narrow your scope accordingly. Right now you are raising concerns that have nothing to do with the statement I made.
I also said that the whole point of requiring a meeting with god is to determine what sort of god he is. I never ruled out deciding to follow god after learning of his existence and purpose directly. I only said that without such a meeting, one cannot make an informed, and thus truly free, decision.
quote:
How else, beyond nonexistance, is one to explain God's absence?
Nonexistence is the only sensible explanation apart from malevolence.
quote:
Whatever God's nature I seriously doubt if God revealed itself to you in a way to impress upon you the truth of it's existance that you would be a cocky beyotch and tell it to go get fucked.
It entirely depends upon the nature of the god that reveals itself, as I can only restate so many times. If Hitler were god, then I wouldn't follow god. Is that clear enough for you? And since when does having principles make one a cocky bitch? Or are you simply one of those agnostics who doesn't like it when someone challenges the authority of the god you don't believe in?
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 04/14/2005 13:49:21 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 16:15:50 [Permalink]
|
I'm definitely with H. on this one, chaloobi. Not only did you shift the goalposts several miles by switching the God described in the Christian Bible for one of your own imagining which you're not even sure exists, you rolled your eyes at H. while doing so. Good grief. If there was ever a time for that icon, now is it:
And for the record, if the God the fundamentalists believe in showed up on my doorstep, if I've got any control of myself at that time, I'll definitely be giving Him the finger, too. If it turns out to be some other god (or that the fundies are all wrong), with any luck He (or it) will accept my apology. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
chaloobi
SFN Regular
1620 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 17:58:28 [Permalink]
|
H. and Dave -
Summing up what's been said, originally I repeated the logic that certain knowledge of god destroys free will, hence the need for faith. H. followed up with Satan and Adam and Eve as proof that such logic is faulty. In the context of US catholocism in which I was raised, these characters are not accepted as real. I was taught that Genesis is metaphorical at best and Satan, at least in the US catholic church, is not accepted as a real figure. In this context H's argument is without merit as it uses what amounts to the behavior of unrealistic mythological beings as a measure of what a real-life encounter with god would be like. It's like saying you'd expect a rabbit in the forest to walk up to a hunter and say 'what's up doc' because that's what you saw bugs bunny do in a cartoon. It's absurd.
And if God is what he's supposed to be - even in the context of Christianity - I think your bravado of telling him to kiss off in a real meeting is nonsense too. More likely the two of you would wind up holding hands, singing halleluja, and thanking god for blessing your imperfect eyes with his wonder and glory. And for the rest of your life you'd remember it fondly as by far the best thing that ever happened to you while spending all your spare moments picketting abortion clinics and stem cell labs. Not by any real choice of course. You'd have lost that when you met god. |
-Chaloobi
|
| Edited by - chaloobi on 04/14/2005 18:00:43 |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 18:48:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by chaloobi
H. and Dave -
Summing up what's been said, originally I repeated the logic that certain knowledge of god destroys free will, hence the need for faith. H. followed up with Satan and Adam and Eve as proof that such logic is faulty. In the context of US catholocism in which I was raised, these characters are not accepted as real. I was taught that Genesis is metaphorical at best and Satan, at least in the US catholic church, is not accepted as a real figure. In this context H's argument is without merit as it uses what amounts to the behavior of unrealistic mythological beings as a measure of what a real-life encounter with god would be like. It's like saying you'd expect a rabbit in the forest to walk up to a hunter and say 'what's up doc' because that's what you saw bugs bunny do in a cartoon. It's absurd.
And if God is what he's supposed to be - even in the context of Christianity - I think your bravado of telling him to kiss off in a real meeting is nonsense too. More likely the two of you would wind up holding hands, singing halleluja, and thanking god for blessing your imperfect eyes with his wonder and glory. And for the rest of your life you'd remember it fondly as by far the best thing that ever happened to you while spending all your spare moments picketting abortion clinics and stem cell labs. Not by any real choice of course. You'd have lost that when you met god.
I have never heard that the official stance of the U.S. Catholic church is that Satan "isn't real," and I would appreciate anything you could provide to back up that assertion.
But I do know that Jesus Christ is considered to be god incarnate by that same church, so let's use him. Are you saying that it was impossible to reject Christ? Peter never denied Christ? Judas never turned him in for some silver coins? According to you, every person who ever came into contact with Jesus should have fallen on their knees and forever been changed. Look, if coming into contact with god's nature is such that it would cause the radical behavioral changes as you describe, then almighty god could certainly takes measures to avoid it that do not entail his complete and total absence. That's a failed argument.
In no way can you argue that a choice based on zero information is better than an informed choice. Right now we can't even say whether there is a choice to follow god because we don't even know he exists! How does that in any way engage your free will? It doesn't.
Basically you're argument is like asking a person whether they like a food they've never tasted or a person they've never met. Obviously they can't know until they've tried the food or met the person. "Oh, but I don't want to influence you at all" you'd say. "I just know the food is so delicious that you won't be able to stop yourself from loving it. Therefore, you have to give me your opinion before you are allowed to taste the food. That's the only way your opinion won't be clouded by the knowledge of how good the food is." It's utter nonsense.
But the free-will argument for god's absence goes even one step further. "The food is so good that you aren't allowed to see the food. In fact, you can never know the food even exists, as if you knew it existed you would know that it tasted good and couldn't help but love it. Therefore, you must give me an opinion on the food that you cannot change or revise for all eternity before ever even knowing if the food is real or good."
Only concerning god you have to make a decision that will determine whether you spend all eternity in hell or paradise based on an opinion you were never given a direct opportunity to form!
And if you don't believe that god would damn a good person to hell simply for never having believed in him--that upon your death you will be judged on the merits of how good a life you've lived--then the whole idea of god needing to shield us from his existence becomes even more absurd, because why would god choose to make us to believe in him blindly if belief in him isn't a requirement of his at all?
Any way you spin it, the idea that god fails to make his existence known in order to protect our free will is an embarassingly stupid concept.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 04/14/2005 18:59:14 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 18:50:54 [Permalink]
|
Oh, I see what the problem was. I apologize. You said, if God were to show Himself,quote:
...then who would choose to reject Him? Who would dare?
The problem here is that God granted people "free will" to have faith in Him. Adam and Eve knew God was real (even if they were fictional), but they chose to reject His Word. There's a difference being acknowledging God's reality, and acknowledging God's divinity. I don't think there's anyone in the Bible who actually questions God's very existence (otherwise, the first Commandment would be worded differently), but there were plenty who denied His authority. That's what the Biblical "free will" seems to be about.
(And when it comes to the Christian God, the Bible is the only source text we've got, really. The stories may be fiction, but how are we supposed to learn how to behave for God if the characters can be rejected because they're allegorical? Smokey the Bear - as seen in the ads - is fictional, but we reject his words at our peril. The same holds true for Mr. Yuck. Christians contend that the Bible is our method of getting to know God. If it has no basis in reality - if its God is real - then it is complete garbage. I don't think you'll find many Christians agreeing with your cartoon analogy.)
If God showed up on my doorstep, I would believe in God. But I'd still try my hardest to tell him he's a jerk-off. (Just like if Bush were to show up at my house, I'd try to get in a "you're a complete phallocephalic" in between whatever the hell he showed up to do.) If God's very presence prevented me from telling Him he's a jerk, that would simply confirm my suspicions. And if it made me sing His praises, then He would be an insecure and underhanded jerk. Such "faith" is worthless. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 19:04:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
I have never heard that the official stance of the U.S. Catholic church is that Satan "isn't real," and I would appreciate anything you could provide to back up that assertion.
Well, the Catechism of the Catholic Church seems to say otherwise (see "THE FALL OF THE ANGELS"). But, that's the real Catholic Church, not the U.S. Catholic Church (whatever differences there may be in teachings, I dunno).
I also ran across The Characteristics of Faith, which includes the teaching that faith in God cannot be coerced. It "is of its very nature a free act." The idea that if God shakes my hand, I won't be able to reject Him, is contradictory to the teachings of the Catholic Church. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
chaloobi
SFN Regular
1620 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 19:24:10 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
quote:
Originally posted by chaloobi
H. and Dave -
Summing up what's been said, originally I repeated the logic that certain knowledge of god destroys free will, hence the need for faith. H. followed up with Satan and Adam and Eve as proof that such logic is faulty. In the context of US catholocism in which I was raised, these characters are not accepted as real. I was taught that Genesis is metaphorical at best and Satan, at least in the US catholic church, is not accepted as a real figure. In this context H's argument is without merit as it uses what amounts to the behavior of unrealistic mythological beings as a measure of what a real-life encounter with god would be like. It's like saying you'd expect a rabbit in the forest to walk up to a hunter and say 'what's up doc' because that's what you saw bugs bunny do in a cartoon. It's absurd.
And if God is what he's supposed to be - even in the context of Christianity - I think your bravado of telling him to kiss off in a real meeting is nonsense too. More likely the two of you would wind up holding hands, singing halleluja, and thanking god for blessing your imperfect eyes with his wonder and glory. And for the rest of your life you'd remember it fondly as by far the best thing that ever happened to you while spending all your spare moments picketting abortion clinics and stem cell labs. Not by any real choice of course. You'd have lost that when you met god.
I have never heard that the official stance of the U.S. Catholic church is that Satan "isn't real," and I would appreciate anything you could provide to back up that assertion.
All I've got is what my Highschool religion teachers said in class discussions about 18 years ago. In response to the question of how an all loving, all powerful god can allow satan and hell to exist, the answer is that hell isn't a place so much as eternity never knowing the presence of god. And supposedly that's bad enough. Satan is just a symbol for how bad it would be to be denied god's presence for eternity. Or something like that. I don't doubt that for most of the church's history satan was taken quite literally, but today, in modern Western civilization, when intelligent people are allowed to ask questions, that sort of thinking isn't holding water anymore. Either that or I went to a particularly liberal school. Which I did not afaik. If you go to the vatican web site, it says that satan is considered real. I'm sure any bishop or cardinal in the US would tow that line. |
-Chaloobi
|
|
|
|
chaloobi
SFN Regular
1620 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2005 : 19:26:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
<snip>
But I do know that Jesus Christ is considered to be god incarnate by that same church, so let's use him. Are you saying that it was impossible to reject Christ? Peter never denied Christ? Judas never turned him in for some silver coins? According to you, every person who ever came into contact with Jesus should have fallen on their knees and forever been changed.
You're rusty in your christian mythology . . . . Jesus was God incarnated as a human, not God in all his might and glory. Rejecting Jesus would be the same as rejecting any other human being. |
-Chaloobi
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
