| Author |
Message |
squiggy
Stooge Two
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 3007
Location: Messing with the fabric of Video Game realities. I'll summon Shiva on you! I SWEAR!
|
 Sat Apr 19, 2008 11:49 pm |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: | | Theresa wrote: | | she had virtually no immune system |
What exactly do you mean when you say virtually no immune system.
Do you believe in miracles because you want to believe in them.
I don't consider anecdotal evidence as proof. |
Indeed. It should also be pointed out that the 'placebo effect' works with things other then medicine. People just blame it on god.
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Sun Apr 20, 2008 7:24 am |
|
Squiggy, I should point out that you're not necessarily making a case against faith there. Even if it is the placebo affect, in that case it was better to believe in something rather than nothing, whether or not the belief was 100% true.
I personally believe that some people are gifted and can tap into a spiritual gift, through prayer or otherwise, based on my own personal spiritual experiences. I do not offer those experiences as proof because they are so very personal and would prove nothing to anyone else; the fact remains that there is no objective, scientific evidence of god, elsewise people would be able to agree more universally, akin to the way people feel about evolution. Evolution is not a perfect theory, but in general intellectuals agree that evolution is probably the best one. In general, intellectuals and others do not agree on proof of God. You can't measure it, see it, or touch it. He/she/it did not provide a single, definitive essay on the subject to prove it to everyone--instead there are thousands of religions all thinking different things.
However, certain people would say (Such as William James) that personal proof and belief is not harmful, and if there is a god, then personal proof would have to be the only evidence. Since that is subjective from person to person, not everyone will feel the same way. He said that if faith is not hurting you or preventing you from viewing scientific evidence at hand (I should note, he was a man of faith and also a doctor), then faith can be a good thing, like faith may have been a positive whether or not the placebo affect, genetics, or god was responsible for T's friend surviving. Some people also will not have any, and for them, that is okay too.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Sun Apr 20, 2008 11:09 am |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: | | Puck wrote: | | God imposes restrictions because in fact he does love everyone (as you and the Bible say) |
The concept of 'God loves everyone' is actually a new concept to Christianity. Also God's love is not unconditional. It is conditional based of your faith and beliefs in him. So in actual fact, God does not love everyone. He just loves most Christians.
Isn't it amazing though how a topic that cannot be answered by Christans can get highjacked so quickly to turn away from the original question. |
The concept that God loves everyone is actually not new to Christianity, it's in the Bible.
| Quote: |
For there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave himself as ransom for all. |
-1 Timothy 2:5-6
God's love, mercy, and justice are infinite. For you to say not is false.
The only thing I find amazing is that non-Christians can speak false Christian doctrine so readily. I am only replying to posts already made, and although it may derail the thread, I simply cannot stand for someone who is not Christian (and who seems to know little about the Christian faith) to say blatantly teach false things about it. (It should be noted here that I do not mean to be at all offensive in implying your ignorance of true Christian teaching. Unfortunately many Christians are also highly ignorant of their own faith.)
Furthermore, PS, you will not do away with the Christian religion, or any religion for that matter, with your silly little quips, that you most likely find witty. I myself have researched and have found extremely well thought out and logical reasons not to believe in God (especially the one defined by Christian Dogma), written by people who have incredibly intelligence, and yet also respect for religion. They are certainly better than any reason suggest thus far in this thread.
Finally, I should point out in the future, if people want to have a constructive conversation with a Christian, or any religious person for that matter, you should show as much respect and reverence towards their beliefs and towards their God as you can muster.
Arellia, I thank you for the respect that you show towards what others believe. Although we do not agree, I admire your sincere search for Truth. I pray that you will remain open and sincere as you continue to seek Truth.
Now, I am certainly out of this thread for good. Pax et bonum!
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Sun Apr 20, 2008 12:26 pm |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: | | Theresa wrote: | | she had virtually no immune system |
What exactly do you mean when you say virtually no immune system.
Do you believe in miracles because you want to believe in them.
I don't consider anecdotal evidence as proof. |
I gave further comments on the immune system, which should make it quite obvious what was meant, no? A cold could kill her.
And I never said what it was I believe. I myself happen to be conflicted, but I'm not immediately discounting anything.
And her doctor took her healing as proof (in a God). I guess it was more than an anecdote to him.
You will choose to believe what you will; I, nor anyone else, will have any impact on that. I've stated over and over again that I hate circular conversations, and that's all the hope this ever has of being, which is why I was so hesitant to say anything in the first place.
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:43 am |
|
| Puck wrote: | | The concept that God loves everyone is actually not new to Christianity, it's in the Bible. |
Where in the king james OT is it?
I hope I have not said anything disrespectful thus far besides my 'silly little quips'. If so you should point it out because my intention is for a constructed debate on amputees, which doesn't seem to be happening.
I misunderstood you Theresa thinking that you believed in such miracles. In that case I understand your position and I'm sure you know by now that I take anecdotes with a grain of salt.
BTW doctors are by no means universally professional with their work. How many times have there been when you either get different advise from different doctors, or that the diagnosis of a condition different from doc to doc.
|
|
|
Scapegoat Bob
Commodore
Joined: 02 Sep 2001
Posts: 1198
Location: The Barn
|
| Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:09 pm |
|
becuz when shark bites off your leg god knows not to mess around 
|
|
|
squiggy
Stooge Two
Joined: 09 Mar 2004
Posts: 3007
Location: Messing with the fabric of Video Game realities. I'll summon Shiva on you! I SWEAR!
|
| Thu Apr 24, 2008 4:30 am |
|
You know, I think bob(s) might actually have something here.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Thu Apr 24, 2008 11:02 pm |
|
| Scapegoat Bob wrote: | | becuz when shark bites off your leg god knows not to mess around |
Seems to me that they have either pulled the short straw somewhere along the line, or that God himself is holding aa grudge against the shark victim.
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Wed Jul 16, 2008 12:08 am |
|
To claim any understanding of the way God works, would be the fastiguim of human arrogance. I'm not talking about those who take a leap of faith, that is something I respect and admire (though not able to do myself). Rather, I am talking about those who deny any possibility of the existence of God. Those who say that if he existed, then the universe wouldn't be how it is.
For all we know, God is just a troubled writer, who's trying to craft the story of an entire universe, and can't come up with any creative ending. But then again, he could well be the man in the white beard who loves us all. I don't claim to know. For all I know there is or is not a God who may or may not even care what we do. I'm not willing to state anything as fact, just a lot of funny theories.
Just because something happens that is bad, doesn't mean he's not there, or that he is either. Watch the movie Signs, it summarizes my point pretty well.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Wed Jul 16, 2008 8:19 am |
|
| LightningBoy wrote: | To claim any understanding of the way God works, would be the fastiguim of human arrogance. I'm not talking about those who take a leap of faith, that is something I respect and admire (though not able to do myself). Rather, I am talking about those who deny any possibility of the existence of God. Those who say that if he existed, then the universe wouldn't be how it is.
For all we know, God is just a troubled writer, who's trying to craft the story of an entire universe, and can't come up with any creative ending. But then again, he could well be the man in the white beard who loves us all. I don't claim to know. For all I know there is or is not a God who may or may not even care what we do. I'm not willing to state anything as fact, just a lot of funny theories.
Just because something happens that is bad, doesn't mean he's not there, or that he is either. Watch the movie Signs, it summarizes my point pretty well. |
Never the less, the nature of humanity is to think about these things. If what you are saying is that we must not think about God or religion and take blind faith then I have to disagree.
Go ask a Christian that God can't come up with something (or there is a task beyond his capability)  .
The thing with a God is that if he created the universe with ultimate knowledge (all knowing to put it accurately), he would therefore know the outcome of every induvidual's life during the time of creation, being able to see into the future. It is with this that he knowingly created a violent world where people kill each other every day, including children. This is not arguing against the existance of God, this is the logical reality of the existance of God. This is why there can be no God, or there can only be an evil God.
I understand what you are trying to say and think that it does not reflect what Christians believe to be their God.
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Wed Jul 16, 2008 10:17 pm |
|
I'm not saying we can't guess and wonder about it at all. I have literally hundreds of different theories on existence and God.
That being said, I choose to believe no one of them, since I will never see any scientific proof of them. This does not mean God does not exist, it just means I can never know for sure. Not until I meet the big guy, or until I don't. Like I said, I admire people who can take a leap of faith. That actually makes sense to me: that people can look beyond science and reason, beyond the observable world, and simply open their hearts to their beliefs. For some, that's proof enough, and I wholeheartedly respect that. It's just not for me.
On the other hand, many seem to try to use the world around them to disprove God. I just don't see how that makes any sense. You just can't use science to prove that: either way. At least people who take the leap are doing so because of something more. Because they feel something greater than the world around them. Critical observation and religion are incompatible. If you're going to have beliefs on God or the afterlife, they just can't be based on your observations of the world. It just doesn't make sense, it's arrogant. You cannot possibly claim to understand the vast inner workings of such a being. You can't assume anything beyond that which is assumed from a leap of faith. Maybe God really isn't all-powerful... maybe he's just really powerful, but can't control everything. Maybe God is a being on a higher plain of existence than us, and maybe he has beings on a higher plain of existence than him. Maybe there is no God. I'm open to that, but there is no need to try to prove it, because you just can't.
You could consider me an agnostic, who's sympathetic to the religious cause. I choose not to believe, but I choose not to disbelieve: i'm not smart enough to make the judgment. Nobody is.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Thu Jul 17, 2008 4:57 am |
|
| LightningBoy wrote: | | Maybe God really isn't all-powerful... |
That would go against what Christians believe to be the God that created the universe, and that also goes against the definition of omnipotence.
I guess that he can be beyond our understanding, but discussions can not be focused around illogicalness. If he created everything, that would make him omnipotent. It is interesting that on the surface you seem to take an Agnostic stance of not knowing, but really you do have many hints of Atheism by pointing out what God 'could be', which directly contradicts the Christian level of understanding of their God. Remember that the only information that we have to assume to be true about the Christian God is information in the bible. This cannot be argued against so saying that God may not be all-powerful (omnipotent), goes against their own biblical accounts as well. I don't know but Agnosticism seems too much like a cop out to me.
Besides, he has to be at some level of understanding to humans if he supposedly answers prayers and can communicate with people.
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Fri Jul 18, 2008 4:16 am |
|
I never said Christians were 100% correct. I like a lot of things about the Christian faith, perticularly Catholocism, but I don't subscribe to the dogma of the religion. I see beliefs that I like in a number of religions: including, but not limited to Catholicism, Mormonism, and Judaism.
My views are anti-athiest, pro-agnostic, and understanding toward theists. So yeah, I guess you can say I lean toward believing in God, but only because i'd prefer a universe with something more, but again, i've not any evidence to back that up. That's why i'm agnostic.
I wish to believe in God, but realize that this world will never give me a definitive answer. Therefore, I cannot know, in this life, if or if-not he exists.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:41 am |
|
| LightningBoy wrote: | I never said Christians were 100% correct. I like a lot of things about the Christian faith, perticularly Catholocism, but I don't subscribe to the dogma of the religion. I see beliefs that I like in a number of religions: including, but not limited to Catholicism, Mormonism, and Judaism.
My views are anti-athiest, pro-agnostic, and understanding toward theists. So yeah, I guess you can say I lean toward believing in God, but only because i'd prefer a universe with something more, but again, i've not any evidence to back that up. That's why i'm agnostic.
I wish to believe in God, but realize that this world will never give me a definitive answer. Therefore, I cannot know, in this life, if or if-not he exists. |
The thing about Christianity is it has to be either 100% correct, or 100% wrong. There can be no in between. You can't just decide what to believe in the bible. You have to assume it is all correct and all to be taken literal. You start spinning some of these scriptures around and you contradict the core of the religion.
Given this, and the impossibility of the coexistence of God and Free Will, Christianity cannot hold true.
|
|
|
Omok
Lieutenant
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 170
|
| Sun Jul 20, 2008 10:42 am |
|
I never thought I would see such a controversial topic on this forum.
My opinion.
"God" is a convenient way to explain complex occurances that man has relied too heavily on for far too long.
It is my sincere belief that [organized] religion is an archaic form of social control that has survived because of fear, ignorance and seemingly contageous arrogance.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:16 am |
|
I am on the same page, but please also explain your rationale for believing what you believe.
I have not yet encountered anyone who has sufficiently countered my God and free will argument yet, and my argument not only affects Christianity, but any religion which believes in a God.
Although my argument does not totally dismiss the existence of a God, it does dismiss the existence of a loving (everyone) God.
My argument can be used to explain that God created the holocaust, for example. The lives of those people (amongst everyone else), were created with that fate already set at the time of creation.
I can put a spin on this. God knows you are going to choose option A because during the time of creation his works of creation made your choice predestined to be choice A. God is all knowing and KNOWS 100% that you are going to choose option A.
.....but you choose option B? Now what?
|
|
|
Omok
Lieutenant
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 170
|
| Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:57 pm |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: | | I am on the same page, but please also explain your rationale for believing what you believe. |
If I am correct in assuming you mean me...my response is;
Rationale?
I don't see what relevance rationale for a belief or disbelief really has to do with the topic at hand.
People often believe whatever suits them best, with very little regard for 'rationale'.
Also, I see no point in explaining my reasoning when the most prominent explanation [rationale] for the other side is "I just do / Because I feel him in my heart."
Very little 'rationale/reasoning' involved if you ask me.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Mon Jul 28, 2008 4:04 am |
|
I'm confused. Is it that they believe that irrational bronze age superstitions are okay?
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Mon Jul 28, 2008 10:51 am |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: | I am on the same page, but please also explain your rationale for believing what you believe.
I have not yet encountered anyone who has sufficiently countered my God and free will argument yet, and my argument not only affects Christianity, but any religion which believes in a God.
Although my argument does not totally dismiss the existence of a God, it does dismiss the existence of a loving (everyone) God.
My argument can be used to explain that God created the holocaust, for example. The lives of those people (amongst everyone else), were created with that fate already set at the time of creation.
I can put a spin on this. God knows you are going to choose option A because during the time of creation his works of creation made your choice predestined to be choice A. God is all knowing and KNOWS 100% that you are going to choose option A.
.....but you choose option B? Now what? |
You first have to prove and define "free will."
Some people would say that there really isn't any free will anyway--that one action or circumstance affects you, which causes another circumstance to affect you another way, and another a different way, and you get this domino affect of your circumstances plus your disposition making up your choices. If everything is determined and your circumstances make it enevitable that you will make certain decisions, then basically life is just playing out in a logical, straightforward manner. Even when you are thinking about choosing something else, you were always going to think about it, and you were always going to make the other choice. That said, to further play the devil's advocate, it would mean God set all these things in motion knowing what would happen, letting them play out so he could then give souls the experience of having a so-called "choice" and destroy everyone who opposes Him.
Some people would say that even if things are determined, the ability to choose differently means that no matter why the choice was made, you still had a choice, and experience can still cause you to consider your choices and commit the act of making that choice. It still makes everything determined, and the God argument still stands.
If, however, you want to toss in the chaos theory, then everything in the universe does not proceed logically (I refer to the sudden circumstances that cause, say, a storm that destroys your house that was totally unexpected and a product of randomness). If God wanted to toss in chaos theory to see how things worked out, perhaps God doesn't know what was going to happen. This would be to that argument--could God create a rock he couldn't lift? (Could God create a circumstance where he didn't know everything?)
Traditionally people think of free will without determinism, assuming they always have the ability to chose differently, and perhaps if history replayed itself they could have made a different choice. Sort of like having a personal randomness-factor in your head, letting you do just whatever. However, most people when they reflect on it see some level of determination in what they do. If your decisions are not based solely on past experience which lead you to an inevitable end, then what causes you to make a decisions at all? However, this would seemingly be alongside a God + chaos theory predicament, where God actually does not know what you're going to choose, because it's always possible you will choose something else.
Also, Christianity does say that God will create some people to be doomed. Miscarriages and still births, as some love to say, are just God deciding to keep the baby. Then you might ask, why put a baby through the stress of being born if it's just going to be dead? Many would say that the baby's death can lead to something greater, the idea of "soul-making"--a tragedy can cause others to think differently, making them better (but sometimes worse) people. God's "tough-love" way of stacking the deck.
I had already explained my own personal beliefs, so I don't feel the need to go over them again, but needless to say, I was just tossing in some philosophical points. I don't actually believe anything I just specifically mentioned.
|
|
|
Omok
Lieutenant
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 170
|
| Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:45 pm |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: | | Is it that they believe that irrational bronze age superstitions are okay? |
You're not confused, you've summed up my position quite nicely.
How can one expect to have a "rational" conversation with anyone who remotely believes in an invisible man in the sky that preports to love you but will punish you for all eternity if you eat an extra slice of pizza?
Pardon my flippant style, but I often become excitable when discussing such things.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:36 am |
|
| Arellia wrote: | | PrankishSmart wrote: | I am on the same page, but please also explain your rationale for believing what you believe.
I have not yet encountered anyone who has sufficiently countered my God and free will argument yet, and my argument not only affects Christianity, but any religion which believes in a God.
Although my argument does not totally dismiss the existence of a God, it does dismiss the existence of a loving (everyone) God.
My argument can be used to explain that God created the holocaust, for example. The lives of those people (amongst everyone else), were created with that fate already set at the time of creation.
I can put a spin on this. God knows you are going to choose option A because during the time of creation his works of creation made your choice predestined to be choice A. God is all knowing and KNOWS 100% that you are going to choose option A.
.....but you choose option B? Now what? |
You first have to prove and define "free will."
Some people would say that there really isn't any free will anyway--that one action or circumstance affects you, which causes another circumstance to affect you another way, and another a different way, and you get this domino affect of your circumstances plus your disposition making up your choices. If everything is determined and your circumstances make it enevitable that you will make certain decisions, then basically life is just playing out in a logical, straightforward manner. Even when you are thinking about choosing something else, you were always going to think about it, and you were always going to make the other choice. That said, to further play the devil's advocate, it would mean God set all these things in motion knowing what would happen, letting them play out so he could then give souls the experience of having a so-called "choice" and destroy everyone who opposes Him.
Some people would say that even if things are determined, the ability to choose differently means that no matter why the choice was made, you still had a choice, and experience can still cause you to consider your choices and commit the act of making that choice. It still makes everything determined, and the God argument still stands.
If, however, you want to toss in the chaos theory, then everything in the universe does not proceed logically (I refer to the sudden circumstances that cause, say, a storm that destroys your house that was totally unexpected and a product of randomness). If God wanted to toss in chaos theory to see how things worked out, perhaps God doesn't know what was going to happen. This would be to that argument--could God create a rock he couldn't lift? (Could God create a circumstance where he didn't know everything?)
Traditionally people think of free will without determinism, assuming they always have the ability to chose differently, and perhaps if history replayed itself they could have made a different choice. Sort of like having a personal randomness-factor in your head, letting you do just whatever. However, most people when they reflect on it see some level of determination in what they do. If your decisions are not based solely on past experience which lead you to an inevitable end, then what causes you to make a decisions at all? However, this would seemingly be alongside a God + chaos theory predicament, where God actually does not know what you're going to choose, because it's always possible you will choose something else.
Also, Christianity does say that God will create some people to be doomed. Miscarriages and still births, as some love to say, are just God deciding to keep the baby. Then you might ask, why put a baby through the stress of being born if it's just going to be dead? Many would say that the baby's death can lead to something greater, the idea of "soul-making"--a tragedy can cause others to think differently, making them better (but sometimes worse) people. God's "tough-love" way of stacking the deck.
I had already explained my own personal beliefs, so I don't feel the need to go over them again, but needless to say, I was just tossing in some philosophical points. I don't actually believe anything I just specifically mentioned. |
If the future is yet to be determined then in principal free will would exist although the scenario you explained would add a 'probable' outcome, compared to with a God which is a predetermined outcome.
Free will is a point that Christianity uses a lot so the religion obviously has a positive ideal view on free will. I assume that relates to the induvidual having a 'yet to be determined' future, ignoring the fact that God is all knowing.
The point you showed is the point that does not even consider religion, so I am surprised, especially seeing as I am not specifically advocating free will via atheism.
Also I more like the question of can God create a round square? Or can God create a circle with 4 sides? Or can God create a parallelogram with 4 right angles etc etc. This better demonstrates the logical problem with God.
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:21 am |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: |
If the future is yet to be determined then in principal free will would exist although the scenario you explained would add a 'probable' outcome, compared to with a God which is a predetermined outcome.
Free will is a point that Christianity uses a lot so the religion obviously has a positive ideal view on free will. I assume that relates to the induvidual having a 'yet to be determined' future, ignoring the fact that God is all knowing.
The point you showed is the point that does not even consider religion, so I am surprised, especially seeing as I am not specifically advocating free will via atheism.
Also I more like the question of can God create a round square? Or can God create a circle with 4 sides? Or can God create a parallelogram with 4 right angles etc etc. This better demonstrates the logical problem with God. |
Just to clarify: surprised I mentioned free will without religion, or...? Didn't quite understand that. I delved out those arguments because I feel the definition of free will is important to how people see religion, and how people see life. I don't know that a lot of people spend much time considering what free will is and if they have it.
I have one other interesting question set, to relate back to the amputee question. Starts with: Did God decide what was right and wrong, or are things just naturally right and wrong? The problem is, if God just arbitrarily decided, then there's no real reason to it. Because God says it or does it, that automatically makes it right and good. God's inaction, not healing the amputees, would automatically be the right thing, since God IS the law and makes morality, one would assume all he does is moral and right.
If God just "taught" people morality (presumably through the bible), then that makes it seem like there is something outside God that God did not create. That is supposed to be impossible.
|
|
|
Omok
Lieutenant
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 170
|
| Tue Jul 29, 2008 5:29 pm |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: | | Also I more like the question of can God create a round square? Or can God create a circle with 4 sides? Or can God create a parallelogram with 4 right angles etc etc. This better demonstrates the logical problem with God. |
I'm sorry, but this is a bit silly IMHO.
If you saw a shape with 4 sides, you'd call it a square...the only reason you might be inclined to ask if it was a "circle with 4 sides, created by 'God'", was if you were in serious need of medication and therapy.
Besides, the notions of "circle" and "square" aren't mentioned in any religious texts that I'm aware of, and are mathmatical concepts, which doesn't seem to have anything to do with "God".
1 + 1 = 2 regardless of whether a deity exists or not.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:34 am |
|
| Arellia wrote: | | Did God decide what was right and wrong, or are things just naturally right and wrong? The problem is, if God just arbitrarily decided, then there's no real reason to it. Because God says it or does it, that automatically makes it right and good. God's inaction, not healing the amputees, would automatically be the right thing, since God IS the law and makes morality, one would assume all he does is moral and right. |
You need to address the question of if God can truly create random? I would assume not seeing as he would know the outcome of what he creates as he creates it. Therefore, the issue of if something is arbitrarily created or has a purpose I feel a Christian would better answer this than me.
If we were created in God's image, you would assume that morals would be at least similar between God and humanity.
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Wed Jul 30, 2008 7:39 am |
|
| Omok wrote: | | PrankishSmart wrote: | | Also I more like the question of can God create a round square? Or can God create a circle with 4 sides? Or can God create a parallelogram with 4 right angles etc etc. This better demonstrates the logical problem with God. |
I'm sorry, but this is a bit silly IMHO.
If you saw a shape with 4 sides, you'd call it a square...the only reason you might be inclined to ask if it was a "circle with 4 sides, created by 'God'", was if you were in serious need of medication and therapy.
Besides, the notions of "circle" and "square" aren't mentioned in any religious texts that I'm aware of, and are mathmatical concepts, which doesn't seem to have anything to do with "God".
1 + 1 = 2 regardless of whether a deity exists or not. |
Mathematics exist with or without a God but (going by Christian belief), God gave us the ability to interpret this into useful data.
God created these mathmatical concepts because he created us, so therefore the question I put forth is a logical 'trap' because you cannot have a parallelogram with 4 right angles, but then again God can do anything, right??
Anyway I don't go too much on this particular contradiction because I feel there are more important ones to address.
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
