Godular wrote: Nah, I'm just not sugarcoating the fact that everything you've been saying has been bloody ludicrous. Your argument rather literally hinges on going 'boop! There's god and it somehow makes everything better!' and that just strikes me as making things more complicated than it has any particular need to be.
If that causes you issue, well... comfort zones are made to be left.
I don't care about you not sugarcoating it, I care that you're trying to make this philosophical argument personal by angrily belittling me.
I don't know how much I view it as a philosophical argument over a clear and logical point of view on one side and a need for a god to make one feel special on the other.
And the need for a god is a need to feel special, as though there's a unique purpose to our lives ordained by a higher power that went through all the trouble and purposeless aspects of guiding all of history, nature and more for what reason.. that we should worship that god?
It means a selfish creator at inception, which suggests a selfish need in believing in such a god.
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:57 pm
by Upper Pacifica
Although I'm struggling with my faith at the moment, I've seen auras and I know souls and demons exist (all thanks to my alter), and I've always believed in a higher power. I'm going to look into Buddhism and Hinduism soon.
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:59 pm
by VoVoDoCo
Anybody have a counter for the following argument? I don't believe God exists. He punishes us for our disbelief, despite the fact that disbelief is only a thing that happens (in the long run) because of the fall. The fall, like all human action, is orchestrated by god. The following three arguments summarize why.
1. Imagine you are abstract, objective, and all knowing. You know everything that has been, is, and will be, but you cannot change a single thing. You would see every individual actor go from A (birth) to Z (death) and all the choices, big and small, that happened in between. You would see all this, and nothing could possibly change. All events would happen in an unbreakable chronological design. These events will happen, and there's nothing anyone can do that can stop it. The only way to for those predetermined footsteps to change would be through classic time travel shenanigans. And even then, the event leading to the creation of time travel were predetermined, unalterable, and inevitable. Casual Determinism argues that the inevitability of action means that free will cannot exist, I agree with that.
Even if Casual Determinism is somehow wrong, the bible ITSELF doesn't do a convincing job of establishing free will as absolute. There are two kinds of religious determinism: Soft and Hard.
2. Soft Determinism is best described as the belief that God plays with dominoes. God is omnipotent. God is omnipresent. God is omniscient. That means that everything that has happened, was known by God to happen, allowed by God to happen, and empowered by God to happen. Take the fall of man for instance.
God created Lucifer
God did this knowing that Lucifer had a prideful streak
God did this knowing that character trait of his would lead him to the fall
God created the heavens and the earth
God created Adam and Eve
God created Adam and Eve with knowledge that if they were tempted, they'd disobey him
God also knew that Satan would tempt them
God knew that an angel guarding the garden BEFORE Satan got there would preemptively take care of that mess
God chose not to guard the garden
God allowed the snake to talk to Eve
God allowed Eve to bite the fruit
God knew (with his omniscience)that due to the character traits he gave the originating actors (Lucifer, Adam,Eve) that those events (he could've prevented with his omnipotence and omnipresence) would never have happened.
Therefore, the fall of man was obviously a part of God's plan
Therefore, sin, and as a a result, evil, were planned by God.
For example, it is through this kind of planning that he was able to predict the crucifixion of the Christ. He didn't FORCE the soldiers to cast lots for his clothes, but because of the domino affect and because he was able to put the pieces into play at the beginning, that the action perpetrated by the soldiers and by the Jews were 100% predictable, they were ordained, unavoidable, predetermined, NO FREE WILL.
3. Hard Determinism is best described as the belief that God plays with puppets. This is less prevalent than Soft Determinism, but works side by side IMO.
For example, God hardened Pharaoh's heart multiple times. Also, if at anytime an unaccountable God can force you to think thoughts and do things you wouldn't otherwise do, than I gotta say that there is NO FREE WILL.
Then there's also Biological Determinism, and since supposedly God created us, was also planned by God. But I don't feel like going into it.
BUT WAIT! Wouldn't that mean God orchestrated evil? Doesn't that contradict the character trait of his supposed benevolence?
Yes. And wouldn't that contradiction hint to the possibility he doesn't exist?[/quote]
United Muscovite Nations wrote:I don't care about you not sugarcoating it, I care that you're trying to make this philosophical argument personal by angrily belittling me.
I don't know how much I view it as a philosophical argument over a clear and logical point of view on one side and a need for a god to make one feel special on the other.
And the need for a god is a need to feel special, as though there's a unique purpose to our lives ordained by a higher power that went through all the trouble and purposeless aspects of guiding all of history, nature and more for what reason.. that we should worship that god?
It means a selfish creator at inception, which suggests a selfish need in believing in such a god.
I don't care about feeling special, when you guys say this, I get the feeling that I shouldn't even bother with such threads because it doesn't even seem like you read what I wrote.
Bombadil wrote: I don't know how much I view it as a philosophical argument over a clear and logical point of view on one side and a need for a god to make one feel special on the other.
And the need for a god is a need to feel special, as though there's a unique purpose to our lives ordained by a higher power that went through all the trouble and purposeless aspects of guiding all of history, nature and more for what reason.. that we should worship that god?
It means a selfish creator at inception, which suggests a selfish need in believing in such a god.
I don't care about feeling special, when you guys say this, I get the feeling that I shouldn't even bother with such threads because it doesn't even seem like you read what I wrote.
I hope you don't feel that way about me. I try to... try.
You are just making yourself look like someone with bad reading comprehension. Where did I say that "We must purge the infidels" or anything related? Nowhere but in your imagination.
Your biased extraction of what I said is dumber than all of the heresies of the last 2,000 years combined.
Eliminating the Canaanites and the others -ites is akin to purging cancer cells from a human body.
It's literally what you said.
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:01 pm
by Kowani
Upper Pacifica wrote:Although I'm struggling with my faith at the moment, I've seen auras and I know souls and demons exist (all thanks to my alter), and I've always believed in a higher power. I'm going to look into Buddhism and Hinduism soon.
I believe seeing auras requires an optometrist, not a priest. As for Demons and Souls...yeah, no.
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:02 pm
by United Muscovite Nations
VoVoDoCo wrote:Anybody have a counter for the following argument? I don't believe God exists. He punishes us for our disbelief, despite the fact that disbelief is only a thing that happens (in the long run) because of the fall. The fall, like all human action, is orchestrated by god. The following three arguments summarize why.
1. Imagine you are abstract, objective, and all knowing. You know everything that has been, is, and will be, but you cannot change a single thing. You would see every individual actor go from A (birth) to Z (death) and all the choices, big and small, that happened in between. You would see all this, and nothing could possibly change. All events would happen in an unbreakable chronological design. These events will happen, and there's nothing anyone can do that can stop it. The only way to for those predetermined footsteps to change would be through classic time travel shenanigans. And even then, the event leading to the creation of time travel were predetermined, unalterable, and inevitable. Casual Determinism argues that the inevitability of action means that free will cannot exist, I agree with that.
Even if Casual Determinism is somehow wrong, the bible ITSELF doesn't do a convincing job of establishing free will as absolute. There are two kinds of religious determinism: Soft and Hard.
2. Soft Determinism is best described as the belief that God plays with dominoes. God is omnipotent. God is omnipresent. God is omniscient. That means that everything that has happened, was known by God to happen, allowed by God to happen, and empowered by God to happen. Take the fall of man for instance.
God created Lucifer
God did this knowing that Lucifer had a prideful streak
God did this knowing that character trait of his would lead him to the fall
God created the heavens and the earth
God created Adam and Eve
God created Adam and Eve with knowledge that if they were tempted, they'd disobey him
God also knew that Satan would tempt them
God knew that an angel guarding the garden BEFORE Satan got there would preemptively take care of that mess
God chose not to guard the garden
God allowed the snake to talk to Eve
God allowed Eve to bite the fruit
God knew (with his omniscience)that due to the character traits he gave the originating actors (Lucifer, Adam,Eve) that those events (he could've prevented with his omnipotence and omnipresence) would never have happened.
Therefore, the fall of man was obviously a part of God's plan
Therefore, sin, and as a a result, evil, were planned by God.
For example, it is through this kind of planning that he was able to predict the crucifixion of the Christ. He didn't FORCE the soldiers to cast lots for his clothes, but because of the domino affect and because he was able to put the pieces into play at the beginning, that the action perpetrated by the soldiers and by the Jews were 100% predictable, they were ordained, unavoidable, predetermined, NO FREE WILL.
3. Hard Determinism is best described as the belief that God plays with puppets. This is less prevalent than Soft Determinism, but works side by side IMO.
For example, God hardened Pharaoh's heart multiple times. Also, if at anytime an unaccountable God can force you to think thoughts and do things you wouldn't otherwise do, than I gotta say that there is NO FREE WILL.
Then there's also Biological Determinism, and since supposedly God created us, was also planned by God. But I don't feel like going into it.
BUT WAIT! Wouldn't that mean God orchestrated evil? Doesn't that contradict the character trait of his supposed benevolence?
Yes. And wouldn't that contradiction hint to the possibility he doesn't exist?
[/quote] As an Orthodox, I don't believe that we are punished. We believe that hell is not a place, but a state of mind which exists in the individual, who, through rejection of God, places himself in pain when encountering God's presence. But moreover, I am also leaning towards a form of universalism, which can be accommodated in both Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism with the idea that deceased people can still be saved after death.
United Muscovite Nations wrote:I don't care about feeling special, when you guys say this, I get the feeling that I shouldn't even bother with such threads because it doesn't even seem like you read what I wrote.
I hope you don't feel that way about me. I try to... try.
Upper Pacifica wrote:Although I'm struggling with my faith at the moment, I've seen auras and I know souls and demons exist (all thanks to my alter), and I've always believed in a higher power. I'm going to look into Buddhism and Hinduism soon.
I believe seeing auras requires an optometrist, not a priest. As for Demons and Souls...yeah, no.
Bombadil wrote: I don't know how much I view it as a philosophical argument over a clear and logical point of view on one side and a need for a god to make one feel special on the other.
And the need for a god is a need to feel special, as though there's a unique purpose to our lives ordained by a higher power that went through all the trouble and purposeless aspects of guiding all of history, nature and more for what reason.. that we should worship that god?
It means a selfish creator at inception, which suggests a selfish need in believing in such a god.
I don't care about feeling special, when you guys say this, I get the feeling that I shouldn't even bother with such threads because it doesn't even seem like you read what I wrote.
I don't necessarily mean it on an individual level, more the human need to feel special and having purpose resulting in believing that a single tribe on the continent of a tiny planet circling a sun on the arm of a milky way in a vast universe is the specific focus of a creator because he wanted to love something..
..and for all the deaths, wars, diseases, misery, famine and more that was, for some reason, required for all this to transpire.
One has to feel extraordinarily special to believe this is true.
United Muscovite Nations wrote:As an Orthodox, I don't believe that we are punished. We believe that hell is not a place, but a state of mind which exists in the individual, who, through rejection of God, places himself in pain when encountering God's presence. But moreover, I am also leaning towards a form of universalism, which can be accommodated in both Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism with the idea that deceased people can still be saved after death.
Biblical justification?
The justification is based on the theological view that Sheol (abode of the dead in Judaism) was destroyed when Christ was resurrected, granting all souls eternal life in the presence of God. It's not really a Biblical justification, so much as an inference. It is the view that was traditional in Eastern Christianity, but was less common in the Latin West. As far as the deceased people can be saved, there are many exhortations in the Bible to pray for the dead, which implies that there is a reason to pray for them.
Minzerland II wrote:No, they had plenty enough evidence, just evidence you find insufficient.
No, no they didn’t. They had no cause to speak about the universe’s origin, and assumed their conclusion from the get go, to the point of applying an overly broad definition of what constitutes ‘God’. It was a miserable argument relying on the ignorance of others, and it still does.
The justification is based on the theological view that Sheol (abode of the dead in Judaism) was destroyed when Christ was resurrected, granting all souls eternal life in the presence of God. It's not really a Biblical justification, so much as an inference. It is the view that was traditional in Eastern Christianity, but was less common in the Latin West. As far as the deceased people can be saved, there are many exhortations in the Bible to pray for the dead, which implies that there is a reason to pray for them.
I always learned Sheol as Abbadon. Just a translation thing you think? I think one's hebrew and one's greek, tho I'm not sure (and not that it matters.
Anyway, to suggest that Sheol was destroyed at the resurrection would take more than an inference. That's an actual event, and would require more than inference.
Regarding prayer for the dead, I hadn't thought of that. Though I focus more on the blatant contradiction with other parts of scripture, rather than its significance by itself.
The Christian Research Institute said it best:"In fact, these passages clearly say that everyone will die and be judged (Heb.9:27) and that each person’s eternal destiny, either reward or condemnation, will be based on what was done in this life (Matt.7:21–23;13:36–43; John5:28–29). Jesus, moreover, taught that each human’s destiny is fixed at death; for example, in His story of Lazarus, who was eternally in paradise, and the rich man, who was eternally in torment (Luke16:19–31)."
The Caleshan Valkyrie wrote: No, no they didn’t. They had no cause to speak about the universe’s origin, and assumed their conclusion from the get go, to the point of applying an overly broad definition of what constitutes ‘God’. It was a miserable argument relying on the ignorance of others, and it still does.
This post is cancer.
When you can’t rebut the arguments, attack!
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:16 pm
by VoVoDoCo
Not to mention God would've explicitly told us about this. If he's willing to grant an entire book of the bible (Revelations) to us, going into great detail the end of times, why wouldn't he explain that we'd have a second chance after death unless we didn't?
The Caleshan Valkyrie wrote: No, no they didn’t. They had no cause to speak about the universe’s origin, and assumed their conclusion from the get go, to the point of applying an overly broad definition of what constitutes ‘God’. It was a miserable argument relying on the ignorance of others, and it still does.
United Muscovite Nations wrote:The justification is based on the theological view that Sheol (abode of the dead in Judaism) was destroyed when Christ was resurrected, granting all souls eternal life in the presence of God. It's not really a Biblical justification, so much as an inference. It is the view that was traditional in Eastern Christianity, but was less common in the Latin West. As far as the deceased people can be saved, there are many exhortations in the Bible to pray for the dead, which implies that there is a reason to pray for them.
I always learned Sheol as Abbadon. Just a translation thing you think? I think one's hebrew and one's greek, tho I'm not sure (and not that it matters.
Anyway, to suggest that Sheol was destroyed at the resurrection would take more than an inference. That's an actual event, and would require more than inference.
Regarding prayer for the dead, I hadn't thought of that. Though I focus more on the blatant contradiction with other parts of scripture, rather than its significance by itself.
The Christian Research Institute said it best:"In fact, these passages clearly say that everyone will die and be judged (Heb.9:27) and that each person’s eternal destiny, either reward or condemnation, will be based on what was done in this life (Matt.7:21–23;13:36–43; John5:28–29). Jesus, moreover, taught that each human’s destiny is fixed at death; for example, in His story of Lazarus, who was eternally in paradise, and the rich man, who was eternally in torment (Luke16:19–31)."
^How does the bible square those two things up?
All Christian traditions agree that Sheol was destroyed, but I confess I don't know where that belief originates, only that it is very ancient.
As for that last part, the Christian Research Institute is no consequence to me. Secondly, its examples refer to a state of being which we believe was destroyed, namely, Sheol. As some scholars point out, the first time an eternal hell is referenced in Christian usage is from a mistranslation of the Greek "aeion" into the Latin "aeternam", but older Christian texts refer to Hell as being temporary.
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:22 pm
by United Muscovite Nations
VoVoDoCo wrote:Not to mention God would've explicitly told us about this. If he's willing to grant an entire book of the bible (Revelations) to us, going into great detail the end of times, why wouldn't he explain that we'd have a second chance after death unless we didn't?
That's a curious take, as traditionally most have viewed revelations as proof that we'll have a second chance after death. Given that it mentions that the dead will be judged again at the end of time.
Upper Pacifica wrote:Although I'm struggling with my faith at the moment, I've seen auras and I know souls and demons exist (all thanks to my alter), and I've always believed in a higher power. I'm going to look into Buddhism and Hinduism soon.
I believe seeing auras requires an optometrist, not a priest. As for Demons and Souls...yeah, no.
Opening your 3rd eye simply requires faith. Faith in a God or Gods.
VoVoDoCo wrote:Not to mention God would've explicitly told us about this. If he's willing to grant an entire book of the bible (Revelations) to us, going into great detail the end of times, why wouldn't he explain that we'd have a second chance after death unless we didn't?
That's a curious take, as traditionally most have viewed revelations as proof that we'll have a second chance after death. Given that it mentions that the dead will be judged again at the end of time.
A 2nd chance before revelations I mean. Good catch though.
I'm aware of THAT book's references to it. My bigger concern is that, to my knowledge, only in the end times will a second chance be given. You propose that it's given all the time.
VoVoDoCo wrote: I always learned Sheol as Abbadon. Just a translation thing you think? I think one's hebrew and one's greek, tho I'm not sure (and not that it matters.
Anyway, to suggest that Sheol was destroyed at the resurrection would take more than an inference. That's an actual event, and would require more than inference.
Regarding prayer for the dead, I hadn't thought of that. Though I focus more on the blatant contradiction with other parts of scripture, rather than its significance by itself.
The Christian Research Institute said it best:"In fact, these passages clearly say that everyone will die and be judged (Heb.9:27) and that each person’s eternal destiny, either reward or condemnation, will be based on what was done in this life (Matt.7:21–23;13:36–43; John5:28–29). Jesus, moreover, taught that each human’s destiny is fixed at death; for example, in His story of Lazarus, who was eternally in paradise, and the rich man, who was eternally in torment (Luke16:19–31)."
^How does the bible square those two things up?
All Christian traditions agree that Sheol was destroyed, but I confess I don't know where that belief originates, only that it is very ancient.
As for that last part, the Christian Research Institute is no consequence to me. Secondly, its examples refer to a state of being which we believe was destroyed, namely, Sheol. As some scholars point out, the first time an eternal hell is referenced in Christian usage is from a mistranslation of the Greek "aeion" into the Latin "aeternam", but older Christian texts refer to Hell as being temporary.
I can't find it anywhere. I've searched. Neither inference nor narrative. It's ancient predominance doesn't concern me.
United Muscovite Nations wrote:That's a curious take, as traditionally most have viewed revelations as proof that we'll have a second chance after death. Given that it mentions that the dead will be judged again at the end of time.
A 2nd chance before revelations I mean. Good catch though.
I'm aware of THAT book's references to it. My bigger concern is that, to my knowledge, only in the end times will a second chance be given. You propose that it's given all the time.
That's more tradition that's been past down since the first century.
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:53 pm