Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

alastairthegreat

ultimate proof!

Recommended Posts

Let's not forget the Catholic church during the Dark Ages up through the Renaissance, who completely ignored the concept of free will--killing any nonbelievers, mounting crusades, killing Galileo because he discovered that the earth is not the center of the universe, etc.

 

And I think some sects of Catholisicm worship the "virgin" Mary, which if I'm not mistaken is idolatry.

 

...and molestation of young boys....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do you think God has an unchangeable plan?

Also, if you do not dispute what I have said, then how can God have an unchangeable plan if humans have free will?  For example:

 

God - "THAT DANG ELEPHANT WILL DIE ON THE 28th JUNE 2007, I WANT A NEW PET IN HEAVEN!"

Human - "I'm gonna shoot that dang elephant on the 27th June 2007, it's eating all my maize!"

 

The 27th of June 2007 comes, and the farmer shoots the elephant because he has free will.

 

God - "BUGGER!"

 

Wouldn't that depend on what time zone God is in at the time the elephant is shot? And, even if the elephant is shot on the 27th, might the elephant not die dead until the 28th?

 

One thing that I've always wondered about: If god created us, then why did he also create this huge universe with millions of galaxies, stars, black holes, etc.?

 

Why is it that so many natural things can kill us?

 

Because beautiful things are temporal. Do we not, afterall, give each other flowers that will die in a matter of days? Keep pets that cannot possibly out-live us? Do we not marvel at the beauty of the stars in the night sky, many of which may already be extinct as we speak? Did not the last Ashikaga shogun spend his entire wealth on Sakura viewing part-... oh, wait. Different thing.

 

Anyhue. Fragile things are beautiful things. Flowers, glass, snow flakes, &c., &c.

 

My opinion? To know the face of God is to know madness. Every religion on earth and every activity on earth of a pseudo-religious nature is simply an attempt to grasp that which cannot be grasped. To comprehend the incomprehensible. To form materially that which is immaterial.

 

As for freewill versus omniscience/omnipotence: One does not mean that the other does not exist. Just because God knows what you're going to do it does not mean that God can or will force you to do that thing. It's similar to the prophecy versus free-will arguement... that if a prophecy is correct that there cannot be freewill. This is not necessarily true. A prophecy may be correct because someone, or many people, choose to commit the actions that lead to the prophecy's fulfillment.

 

That being said, IMHO, the only way God can have a plan and free will can co-exist with that plan is if all things are God. If all things are God, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cobaltsky:

I do not believe in alternate dimensions - but it is a nice theory.

 

I understand evolution and alternate dimensions, thanks.  If you want to insult my mental capacity - go ahead; I am understanding of my own mental abilities more than you could imagine.  It could be similar, but no more "proof" exists of evolution than of alternate dimensions.

I didn't mean to insult your mental capacity (except as a humours undertone) but my point is that you shouldn't try to refute a scientific theory that you cleary don't fully understand. Again I say that I don't want to insult you there because most people don't fully comprehend it.

 

In this case the dimension of time isn't an "alternate" dimension as you put it. But one that we actually exist in. The point sekiryu was making is that of a technicality. If God is omnipresent/omniscient in our 4-dimensional world, then he knows everything that is happening at this moment in time, and everything that happens in any moment in the past/future because time is as much a dimension as the xyz axis of spacial dimensions. Therefore there is no point in praying because God already knows our intentions and desires and is fully capable of acting as he sees fit regardless of prayer. Assuming that, there is no need for prayer to prove your devotion to God if he knows the truth anyway. (Talking in general terms here, I know there I a lot of atheists who use scientific arguments falsely as well)

 

 

 

This illustrates my main problem with a theist trying to use scientific arguments. If that theist has the knowledge to back it up then fine, but therein lies the problem. Many scientists are atheists so the only people capable of bringing scientific arguments to atheists are the atheists. Obviously this is unfair and it is an issue which as an atheist I wish could be addressed. We ask for a scientific proof from a source that doesn't have a background capable of that: an obvious bias against the theists.

 

On the other hand when science is brought into the discussion by the theists it is often based on a flawed understanding of the concepts. The classic example is "Evolution is only a theory, therefore creationism has equal merit" ignoring the fact that creationism is barely a hypothesis (a pre-theory if you will). Evolution has a lot of evidence to back it up but no definitive proof, while creationism is an idea with no actual evidence at all. Intelligent design is another matter altogether so I won't go into that but note that it is still compatible with evolution.

 

In the end most advanced modern physics is still just theory because they deal with concepts so vast that it is impossible at our current level of technology to even begin to test them. For example gravity is still a theory but it is unlikely that it is false. Still, the possibility remains that a single observation could disprove it.

 

 

 

My personal beliefs in the non-existence of a god are not based on science at all. Rather though personal experience of the world around me I have decided that a god has no visible influence over us or our environment. Our creation is still largely a mystery if you look at either sides arguments but if god's only purpose was to create us then leave us then what is the point in worshipping him/her? Personally I don't see the need for an afterlife either, so the idea that after I die I am dead doesn't scare me. I am already insignificant enough in the universe that my objectively small lifespan is irrelevant. So I only concentrate of the subjectively long time it takes. From that point of view I will be witness to many amazing developments by the human race and the purely technological achievements I have seen so far are fantastic.

 

I've lost will to type after a 2 minute coughing fit(damned cold :() so I'll stop here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that web page was an incredibly boring read, and now when I come to read what interesting insights people might have had on it, I find a load of circle-jerkers obsessed with the sound of their own keyboards.

 

Where is the love guys, really...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God invents logic, endows to man.

 

Man uses given tool of logic to prove/disprove existence of God.

 

Hillslam laughs at man.

 

The end.

 

 

-----

EDIT: added crucial comma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This illustrates my main problem with a theist trying to use scientific arguments. If that theist has the knowledge to back it up then fine, but therein lies the problem. Many scientists are atheists so the only people capable of bringing scientific arguments to atheists are the atheists. Obviously this is unfair and it is an issue which as an atheist I wish could be addressed. We ask for a scientific proof from a source that doesn't have a background capable of that: an obvious bias against the theists.

 

What an over-generalization. Did you know that TIME Magazine recently hosted a debate between an atheist scientist who believes that the sooner we get rid of religion the better and a scientist who happens to be Christian? It was moderately interesting, if pointless. Neither of them argued very well. Neither of them convinced the other. Neither of them could possibly have convinced an outside observer. And it was rather obvious that both of them were being dogmatic and hadn't subjected their beliefs to any sort of serious interrogation.

 

But, then, that's why they're scientists, not philosophers or theologians.

 

Personally I don't see the need for an afterlife either, so the idea that after I die I am dead doesn't scare me.

 

:huh:

 

What does need have to do with it?

 

God invents logic, endows to man.

 

Man uses given tool of logic to prove/disprove existence of God.

 

Hillslam laughs at man.

 

The end.

 

Whoever said Man was logical?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, bear with me :P

 

Sledge: But if God is timeless, then he wouldn't be constrained by the locking aspects of time, and so he could still be in the future without it being fixed.

 

Sekiryu: If God exists, then he could alter the Bible to say his word through humans, no matter what - as he is omnipotent.

 

There is no point in mentioning the acts of violent "christians" as we are discussing the presecence of God, not of people's interpretation of his word. They were acting under free-will, but acting, possibly wrongly, in God's name.

 

Jagdraben: Hey, I've got a bunch of hair here, I kind of need it in two piles - could you help me split it up? :P

 

Cobaltsky: Yeah, I kind of sounded too confrontational there. Sorry.

 

The point of prayer is to show that you need God to help you to accomplish things, such as healing, help, or in fact anything at all. Prayer serves to notify God of our trust in him, and symbolises your belief.

 

Yes, I agree that creationism could be seen as a theory - but if you take the Bible as Gods word, then the word in the Bible is true - so to others it can be a truth.

 

Samm: Hey, I have love. I respect all your beliefs, but I know that some people in this world will go to hell (possibly me included - who knows?)

 

Hope I'm not boring anyone :P

 

CC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sekiryu: If God exists, then he could alter the Bible to say his word through humans, no matter what - as he is omnipotent.

 

Except God cannot do that without violating free well.

 

Jagdraben: Hey, I've got a bunch of hair here, I kind of need it in two piles - could you help me split it up? :P

 

Sure. I might find God in there. If I start babelling in tongues, you can be sure I found Him.

 

:pirate:®

 

casey:

do christians believe in heaven for animals or is it just us humans??

 

(daft question i know, im just interested)

 

In Catholic dogma, animals do not have souls. Many non-Catholic Christians believe the same but not all of them do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jagdraben:

Whoops - good point :P

 

Though I do not agree with the people saying the even through God - people cannot write the word of God.

 

Maybe they think I mean "People working through God". I mean, "God working through people". That is, letting people choose to allow God to channel through their bodies - which is what you do if you pray to heal people, if you ask God to forgive your sins, if you ask him for help etc.

 

 

Hey, a little humour never hurt anyone - and if your tone on the "tongues" is mocking; it happens, and it's powerful.

 

Alastairthegreat:

I don't.

 

CC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if god is so powerful, and he "works through people" to author the Bible, the translation theory still stands. Just how the Japanese words sumimasen and desu can't be exactly translated into English, the almighty word of god can't be exactly translated into the inferior word of man.

 

do christians believe in heaven for animals or is it just us humans??

 

First the question "do animals have souls?" must be answered. But then in order to answer that question, you have answer the question "what is a soul?"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What is the sound of one hand clapping?

:ph34r:®

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If all things are God, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent.

 

Well yeah the God of classical Theism is defined as meeting that criteria, so its a given.

 

casey:

do christians believe in heaven for animals or is it just us humans??

 

(daft question i know, im just interested)

 

Heaven is supposed to be a spiritual place, I can only imagine it as being somewhat like what people feel like when they meditate deeply, so I don't think there would be an animal heaven, I don't think there is a heaven anyway so meh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.