Umh...right, I get Dee's (and C.S. Lewis's) explanation of why God's omniscience doesn't lead to predestination. As for the unregistered user:
A) of course free will doesn't just mean doing whatever you want. For example: I am now writing my Virginia Woolf essay, I sure as hell don't want to, I weigh the consequences and decide to act against my personal desire; the point is that I'm not doing the essay because I was destined to, even if DRH burnt down tonight (well we can hope) and I didn't finish it, it still wouldn't be because some higher force determined the outcome - free will.
B)But if you're in a relationship with someone who is more intelegent than you....etc....isn't it actually irrational to value your free will over this persons free will?
Well, for starters you're mixing up will (desire) and free will again. And I'd still say no, that's like your parents always telling you they know what's best, comes a time when you have to make your own decisions.
3)I don't know the Bible well enough to point out chapters, but I think what Ten has in mind be hypocrasies are things like God comandind his chosen people "Thou shalt not kill", but then also comanding them to kill lots of his unchosen people - stuff like that can be offputing, you know.
(The sleepy pagan/agnostic wonders why she even cares)
Home
TheSinner.net
Top 10 reasons to believe in God
Re:
by Maleah47 on Tue Oct 29, 2002 10:14 am
[s]Greebo wrote on 01:03, 28th Oct 2002:
A god being all knowing automatically cancels out free will.
An all knowing god knows everything - future included. If the future is known then anything we do is automatically fated. Thus free-will is cancelled.
God does know who will turn to him, who will be with him. It is because he loves us that he gives us free will. He cannot force us all to love him and have faith in him because it would be against his nature.
[hr]
[s]"these ties, like bands around my wrist..secret lies, like sugar to my heart"[/s]
[s]"fire..cutting through your..passions, like morphine to your..heart"[/s]
A god being all knowing automatically cancels out free will.
An all knowing god knows everything - future included. If the future is known then anything we do is automatically fated. Thus free-will is cancelled.
God does know who will turn to him, who will be with him. It is because he loves us that he gives us free will. He cannot force us all to love him and have faith in him because it would be against his nature.
[hr]
[s]"these ties, like bands around my wrist..secret lies, like sugar to my heart"[/s]
[s]"fire..cutting through your..passions, like morphine to your..heart"[/s]
[s][i:3adfjs09]"these ties, like bands around my wrist..secret lies, like sugar to my heart"[/i:3adfjs09][/s]
[s]"fire..cutting through your..passions, like morphine to your..heart"[/s]
[s]"fire..cutting through your..passions, like morphine to your..heart"[/s]
-
Maleah47
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Re:
by Decadence on Tue Oct 29, 2002 3:18 pm
OK, here's one:
"A delusion is an unshakeable belief held, despite evidence to the contrary or no evidence to support it, that is culturally inappropriate."
So, I'm paraphrasing from my Psychiatry text, but does anyone else think that if you removed the last clause from the sentence, then you basically have a description of religion?
D.
[hr]"Yes, I am an agent of Satan,
But my duties are largely ceremonial."
... Thus spake the Cardinal of Decadence
"A delusion is an unshakeable belief held, despite evidence to the contrary or no evidence to support it, that is culturally inappropriate."
So, I'm paraphrasing from my Psychiatry text, but does anyone else think that if you removed the last clause from the sentence, then you basically have a description of religion?
D.
[hr]"Yes, I am an agent of Satan,
But my duties are largely ceremonial."
... Thus spake the Cardinal of Decadence
-
Decadence
wierd
by Splittter on Tue Oct 29, 2002 5:16 pm
my boss today was talking about delusions ... and listed three things delusionals try to do to avoid seeing the obvious problems with their beliefs.
they were:
Generalisations: Not talk about specifics, but general catch all statements. Like, say, ignoring specific facts about individual people having totally shit lives through no fault of their own and saying stuff like 'God loves us all equally'
Deletions: Obvious, but just ignore stuff that doesn't make sense. Like say, evolutionary theory.
Distortions: Try and alter things in ways that doesn't work, but does promote you views. Like the baffling objections to evolution using the second law of thermodynamics.
Although why my boss raised it was nothing to do with religion, it did seem to fit quite well in my mind.
they were:
Generalisations: Not talk about specifics, but general catch all statements. Like, say, ignoring specific facts about individual people having totally shit lives through no fault of their own and saying stuff like 'God loves us all equally'
Deletions: Obvious, but just ignore stuff that doesn't make sense. Like say, evolutionary theory.
Distortions: Try and alter things in ways that doesn't work, but does promote you views. Like the baffling objections to evolution using the second law of thermodynamics.
Although why my boss raised it was nothing to do with religion, it did seem to fit quite well in my mind.
-
Splittter
Lots of q's
by Paul on Fri Nov 01, 2002 5:20 pm
Whoa, there's an awful lot of questions, and that's good. Predestination's a biggie, but the key word in Rom 8:28 is 'forknew', i.e. God didn't just make people to go to hell and some to go to heaven, but He knew who would respond to His call, and of those people He chose. I can see the argument of free-will, but God just knows what our free choices will lead to, we can do whatever we want, but He already knows what we wil freely choose to do.
This is an invite to everyone, come along to CU with us, I'd love to meet you. How many people can say they really know what Christianity is about? I know there was a time when I couldn't, and I'd been to church all my life. If you do have questions or you are interested in coming to meet us, by all means e-mail me at pnd@st-andrews.ac.uk
Hope that you're all well
Paul
This is an invite to everyone, come along to CU with us, I'd love to meet you. How many people can say they really know what Christianity is about? I know there was a time when I couldn't, and I'd been to church all my life. If you do have questions or you are interested in coming to meet us, by all means e-mail me at pnd@st-andrews.ac.uk
Hope that you're all well
Paul
-
Paul
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH...And heres some more...BLAH
by Joy on Sat Nov 02, 2002 12:57 am
OK…Let me start by saying that I didn’t read the entire thread so if someone already pointed any of this out, I’m sorry you are reading it again…
So, to get started I’d like to first say that Jesus’ “so called” miracles were not witnessed by thousands. If you have followed the historical text you would know that Jesus spent his entire life (a whole 33 years) in the country side. He only came to Jerusalem in his last week of life. There for, he was not surrounded by masses of people.
Secondly, In order to understand what Jesus represented at the time he lived you must understand the different sects of Jewish religion at the time. There were four sects that had any power. The first, and most powerful at the time, were the Sadducees. The second, and the sect that later forms of Judaism were formed after, is Pharisees. Then there is Essenes and the Zealots. These two had the least power and were usually of the lower-class. Jesus himself was a Essenes, there for he was kept out of the major religious practices at the time. Hence, his ability to spread his believed has severely limited.
Next, you must understand that Jesus never set out to start a new religion. He was Jewish, and remained Jewish until his dying day. Yes, he was dissatisfied by the structure of Judaism at the time, but had no plans to bring about a new religion or take people away from the religion. Jewish scribes and priests, guardians of the faith, regarded Jesus as a trouble-maker who threatened ancient traditions and undermined respect for the Sabbath.
Also, For those who say there are Authors at the time of this life that kept historical text…YOU COULD NOT BE MORE WRONG! Our earliest text on Jesus is over his execution, and it is only one paragraph. It only mentions his name, the year, his form of death, and the reason why, Treason. That’s it. Any other information recorded was not until the New Testament was written, decades after his death. Very Few people paid attention, or cared about, who Jesus was when he lived, and several decades after his death. Also, there is on author, has of known today, who wrote about seeing of witnessing Jesus after his crucifixion. That means there is no hard evidence to suggest he was resurrected.
Ok, I would write more but I have to go.
To make a quick point here, the evidence suggests that Jesus lived. But when he did, he had few followers and never preached of a Christian faith. He never claimed to be the son of God, he only felt that the structure of the Judaism religion was unacceptable and that the “Kingdom of God” was coming soon (so where is it, hmm).
So, to get started I’d like to first say that Jesus’ “so called” miracles were not witnessed by thousands. If you have followed the historical text you would know that Jesus spent his entire life (a whole 33 years) in the country side. He only came to Jerusalem in his last week of life. There for, he was not surrounded by masses of people.
Secondly, In order to understand what Jesus represented at the time he lived you must understand the different sects of Jewish religion at the time. There were four sects that had any power. The first, and most powerful at the time, were the Sadducees. The second, and the sect that later forms of Judaism were formed after, is Pharisees. Then there is Essenes and the Zealots. These two had the least power and were usually of the lower-class. Jesus himself was a Essenes, there for he was kept out of the major religious practices at the time. Hence, his ability to spread his believed has severely limited.
Next, you must understand that Jesus never set out to start a new religion. He was Jewish, and remained Jewish until his dying day. Yes, he was dissatisfied by the structure of Judaism at the time, but had no plans to bring about a new religion or take people away from the religion. Jewish scribes and priests, guardians of the faith, regarded Jesus as a trouble-maker who threatened ancient traditions and undermined respect for the Sabbath.
Also, For those who say there are Authors at the time of this life that kept historical text…YOU COULD NOT BE MORE WRONG! Our earliest text on Jesus is over his execution, and it is only one paragraph. It only mentions his name, the year, his form of death, and the reason why, Treason. That’s it. Any other information recorded was not until the New Testament was written, decades after his death. Very Few people paid attention, or cared about, who Jesus was when he lived, and several decades after his death. Also, there is on author, has of known today, who wrote about seeing of witnessing Jesus after his crucifixion. That means there is no hard evidence to suggest he was resurrected.
Ok, I would write more but I have to go.
To make a quick point here, the evidence suggests that Jesus lived. But when he did, he had few followers and never preached of a Christian faith. He never claimed to be the son of God, he only felt that the structure of the Judaism religion was unacceptable and that the “Kingdom of God” was coming soon (so where is it, hmm).
-
Joy
Re:
by Prophet Tenebrae on Sat Nov 02, 2002 1:20 am
If medieval history has taught me anything, it's that people seemed to like to sit around for a few decades/ centuries before writing about anything. Not to mention that they like lying/ massive exaggeration.
Why anyone even trusts the various translations of the bible is beyond me, I mean the fact that the christian Church is so divided over it's meaning says a lot. Not to mention the fact that despite claiming that the bible is as relevant today as it was 2000 years ago, a lot of christians gloss over some of the less acceptable aspects. Like president Barlet points out in the West Wing.
Why anyone even trusts the various translations of the bible is beyond me, I mean the fact that the christian Church is so divided over it's meaning says a lot. Not to mention the fact that despite claiming that the bible is as relevant today as it was 2000 years ago, a lot of christians gloss over some of the less acceptable aspects. Like president Barlet points out in the West Wing.
-
Prophet Tenebrae
Jesus is God the bible tells us so
by tfhc on Sun Nov 03, 2002 2:01 am
There is an important bit you missed out, otherwise nice message. The gospels are read nowadays and relied on as evidence of what jesus' life was like and as evidence of his acts because it is assumed that the gospel preachers and writers were trying to keep a big account of everything that was going on with this great dude. NOW, it is pretty much an accepted part of biblical theology across the christian spectrum that this is complete turd de' bull. The gospel writers intention was to convert people to christianity, period, and they made up gospel stories with this in mind. They knew fine well that the gospels were fairy tales. eg: virgin birth (ie mary gave birth but stayed a virgin (technically if you don't have sex, but then have a child, you give up your biological virginity)...she didn't, he kinda floated out). The vb was made up by evangelists to draw in some jews who knew about predictions in the OTestament. 3 wise men? Representative of the non-jews of the time, to draw in that crowd. The list goes on and on. Anyone who believes that xianity is true cos we got the stories in the gospel is following a set of myths. Poor guys. Give it up.
-
tfhc
Re:
by Dee on Mon Nov 04, 2002 2:14 pm
[s]loveridge wrote on 01:05, 4th Nov 2002:
I've got two words to say about this thread.
Babel Fish.
Oh yeah, I remember that.
Man "proves" God does not exist....
' "Hmm, that was easy", says man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white, and gets run down on the next zebra crossing.'
Perhaps I'm reading a little much into it, but I suspect there's an implict message there for atheists. I know Douglas Adams stopped believing in God before he wrote h2g2, but he was never above poking fun at himself - one of the reasons he was such a great writer.
I've got two words to say about this thread.
Babel Fish.
Oh yeah, I remember that.
Man "proves" God does not exist....
' "Hmm, that was easy", says man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white, and gets run down on the next zebra crossing.'
Perhaps I'm reading a little much into it, but I suspect there's an implict message there for atheists. I know Douglas Adams stopped believing in God before he wrote h2g2, but he was never above poking fun at himself - one of the reasons he was such a great writer.
I probably don't like you, but don't take it personally. Nobody likes you.
-
Dee
- Posts: 485
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 5:32 pm
How about this ... ?
by James on Tue Nov 05, 2002 6:40 pm
This whole thread is rather long, so, like others, I've not read it all since I have to go home for Christmas.
My idea in brief:
- Science and much of our education = Analysis of the physical world in terms of the physical world
- Religion, of whatever sort = Stuff to do with the metaphyscial world (beyond the physical) as well as the physical world.
- What most people here are doing, regardless of their opinion = Dealing with arguments based on purely physical evidence for/against whichever religion is in the firing line.
To try to assess something that has both physical and metaphysical branches in purely physical terms seems daft to me.
That's it.
My idea in brief:
- Science and much of our education = Analysis of the physical world in terms of the physical world
- Religion, of whatever sort = Stuff to do with the metaphyscial world (beyond the physical) as well as the physical world.
- What most people here are doing, regardless of their opinion = Dealing with arguments based on purely physical evidence for/against whichever religion is in the firing line.
To try to assess something that has both physical and metaphysical branches in purely physical terms seems daft to me.
That's it.
-
James
Return to The Sinner's Main Board
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests