Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Jesus and his sacrifice is Satan’s test of man’s morality.
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 76 of 478 (775156)
12-29-2015 2:59 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by GDR
12-28-2015 4:28 PM


quote:
There is the belief that a single cell and ultimately sentient moral life evolved without any intelligent or moral input from the endless chance combinations of mindless particles. That is without answering the question of why those particles existed in the first place.
I don't know anyone who believes that. Most sensible and informed people believe that evolution is responsible. And if you don't know that by no, what have you been doing here all these years ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by GDR, posted 12-28-2015 4:28 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 12:17 PM PaulK has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 77 of 478 (775157)
12-29-2015 3:41 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by GDR
12-29-2015 2:12 AM


GDR writes:
atheistic beliefs require far more faith than do Christian beliefs IMHO.
It's illuminating how you keep saying this. It's like you need to believe that this is true for you to be able to believe the other things that you believe. How many times have you been told that this is nonsense, yet you carry on saying it as though you've never heard it?
Atheists don't necessarily 'believe' anything about anything, they just don't believe in god. That's it, they don't have to have any alternative thing in place of it. It's obviously an impossible thing for believers to get their heads round. I can only assume that they and you can't imagine that it's possible not to go through life thinking and worrying about such things.
See my post #37 in this thread. I have already covered that.
That's a post by Faith. When you find it, I really hope it doesn't include CS bloody Lewis's imaginings. You quote him like he has some special information about god and his thoughts. He doesn't. What he does have is a good mind for fantasy writing.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 2:12 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 12:22 PM Tangle has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 78 of 478 (775175)
12-29-2015 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by PaulK
12-29-2015 2:59 AM


PaulK writes:
I don't know anyone who believes that. Most sensible and informed people believe that evolution is responsible. And if you don't know that by no, what have you been doing here all these years ?
I have no problem believing in evolution. I do have a problem believing in an evolutionary process that is a result of endless mindless processes from mindless particles.
What then do atheists believe about abiogenesis or the ultimate basis for the evolutionary process?

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by PaulK, posted 12-29-2015 2:59 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-29-2015 12:39 PM GDR has replied
 Message 83 by PaulK, posted 12-29-2015 12:53 PM GDR has replied
 Message 86 by kbertsche, posted 12-29-2015 5:45 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 79 of 478 (775176)
12-29-2015 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Tangle
12-29-2015 3:41 AM


Tangle writes:
Atheists don't necessarily 'believe' anything about anything, they just don't believe in god. That's it, they don't have to have any alternative thing in place of it. It's obviously an impossible thing for believers to get their heads round. I can only assume that they and you can't imagine that it's possible not to go through life thinking and worrying about such things.
Why discuss it then. You have no position to defend and yet you denounce as ridiculous the views of those who have come to a conclusion about the why's of our existence. Actually your view sounds a great deal more agnostic to me than atheistic. Presumably to be an atheistic one has to believe in our existence being the result of purely materialistic origins.
Tangle writes:
That's a post by Faith. When you find it, I really hope it doesn't include CS bloody Lewis's imaginings. You quote him like he has some special information about god and his thoughts. He doesn't. What he does have is a good mind for fantasy writing.
Sorry. Post 48 in this thread

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Tangle, posted 12-29-2015 3:41 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Tangle, posted 12-29-2015 12:47 PM GDR has replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 80 of 478 (775177)
12-29-2015 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by GDR
12-29-2015 12:17 PM


I do have a problem believing in an evolutionary process that is a result of endless mindless processes from mindless particles.
I have to ask, what do you consider to be "mindful" processes or "mindful" particles? Are hurricanes god exhaling really hard or what?
Do you think chemical reactions are either mindless or mindful?

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 12:17 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 12:47 PM Tanypteryx has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 81 of 478 (775178)
12-29-2015 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by Tanypteryx
12-29-2015 12:39 PM


Tanypteryx writes:
I have to ask, what do you consider to be "mindful" processes or "mindful" particles? Are hurricanes god exhaling really hard or what?
Do you think chemical reactions are either mindless or mindful?
Certainly there are natural processes that result in hurricanes or even evolution. The question is the origin of the natural processes. Look at evolution. Here is a process the required incredibly complex cells initially. and that then wound up in a process where life reproduces itself and with the myriad of life forms we see today including creatures with sentience and an understanding of morality.
I contend that all of this is far more likely to resulted from a pre-existing intelligence as opposed to the chance combination of mindless particles. That again is without even asking why those particles existed in the first place.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-29-2015 12:39 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-29-2015 1:32 PM GDR has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 82 of 478 (775179)
12-29-2015 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by GDR
12-29-2015 12:22 PM


GDR writes:
Why discuss it then. You have no position to defend and yet you denounce as ridiculous the views of those who have come to a conclusion about the why's of our existence. Actually your view sounds a great deal more agnostic to me than atheistic. Presumably to be an atheistic one has to believe in our existence being the result of purely materialistic origins.
You're terribly confused about this non-belief stuff. Have you ever met an atheist or someone who just doesn't care about religion? If you go to northern European countries like Sweden, 70% of them are atheists. In the UK I think it's around 40%.
I'm not a typical atheist, I AM interested in discussing belief and alternative ideas of origins - do you imagine that 70% of Swedes are on forums arguing about it? The vast majority of atheists just don't care about this stuff, they just don't believe that there's a god. End. They get on with their lives without ever really considering it. In other words it's just normal.
I'm trying to explain to you that it's not a defence of your beliefs to point out (incorrectly) my 'belief' in something else. I'm also trying to get you to understand that people can and do have no beliefs and manage to have fulfilling, useful and moral lives without giving a thought to all this stuff.
I'll go find your other post.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 12:22 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 8:10 PM Tangle has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 83 of 478 (775180)
12-29-2015 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by GDR
12-29-2015 12:17 PM


quote:
I have no problem believing in evolution. I do have a problem believing in an evolutionary process that is a result of endless mindless processes from mindless particles.
Your problem is that many atheists accept evolution which is a process which provides guidance and goes well beyond the capabilities of random combinations. And, f course, evolution is a mindless process which naturally follows from the existence of imperfect self-replicators.
quote:
What then do atheists believe about abiogenesis or the ultimate basis for the evolutionary process?
As I pointed out above evolution is an inevitable consequence of the existence of imperfect self-replicators. And only creationists believe that conscious moral beings were produced by anything that could be called abiogenesis. How abiogenesis really occurred on Earth is up for grabs (if it happened on Earth, which is only the more likely possibility) but there does not seem to be any reason why self-replicating chemicals could not form and acquire elaborations through evolutionary processes. Where you put abiogenesis in that process depends on where you draw the line between life and non-life, but that is a fine point of no real importance here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 12:17 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 8:20 PM PaulK has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 84 of 478 (775181)
12-29-2015 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by GDR
12-29-2015 2:12 AM


GDR writes:
The Gospel of John tells about the Word or Wisdom of God which existed before all things and brought about all things. He goes on to say that this Word or Wisdom became flesh. In other words Jesus perfectly embodied the true nature and will of God. This is quite different than the idea of stating simply that Jesus is God, as obviously it begs the question of just who He was praying to. Praying to oneself doesn't make a lot of sense.
You stated that supposedly Jesus knew He wasn't going to die. I suggest that when He went into Jerusalem He did it knowing that He would die because He knew full well what the response of those in power would be with those who did what He was about to do. His message angered every power group in the country. His allies were the the weak and helpless, the prostitutes, the hated tax collectors etc. He prayed that it wouldn't be the Father's will for Him to have to go through with it.
However, through prayer and through His understanding of the Hebrew scriptures he believed that this is what He had to do and that somehow God would in the end use this sacrifice for the good of the world. The point is that He went to His death as an act of faith, not with any certainty of His resurrection. Any other belief denies His humanity and belittles the enormity of what He was doing.
His divinity comes through His embodiment of the Word of God and by extension the embodiment of the return of Yahweh to His people. It was the resurrection of Jesus by the Father that affirmed and vindicated the life and message of Jesus and it was God the Father, the Ancient if Days that enthroned Jesus.
This doesn't answer my question which was
Tangle writes:
Now that IS interesting. If god didn't know he was going to be murdered what kind of god was he and if he hadn't been murdered what kind of prophet would his son have been?
I'm ignoring the entire logical mess of whether Jesus was god and whether he knew he was going to die, I'm talking about god himself. He must have known that he would be and if that is correct, then it was inevitable. If it was inevitable, people had no choice - they were acting out the script to God's play.
And if it it wasn't inevitable that he would be killed and in fact had nobody took any notice of him strange storytelling he could not have been the prophet.
So the whole thing was rigged from the start wasn't it?

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 2:12 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 8:51 PM Tangle has replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 85 of 478 (775182)
12-29-2015 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by GDR
12-29-2015 12:47 PM


The question is the origin of the natural processes. Look at evolution. Here is a process the required incredibly complex cells initially
Well, the hypotheses I am familiar with all have very simple chemistry initially that slowly gets more and more complex.
and that then wound up in a process where life reproduces itself
Well, that is kind of what you would expect; self-replicating molecules leading to reproduction in living organisms.
with the myriad of life forms we see today including creatures with sentience and an understanding of morality.
Yes, life has done well. There are a lot of species and today one is self-aware and thinks. As far as understanding morality, there seems to be little agreement what it is.
I contend that all of this is far more likely to resulted from a pre-existing intelligence as opposed to the chance combination of mindless particles.
That sounds like an easy answer, but it isn't good enough. There are no details of how or why. There is no evidence, no signature, no way to even study it.
What is the deal with always referring to "mindless particles?" Do you have any example of particles with minds? Or any reason to think particles could have minds?
That again is without even asking why those particles existed in the first place.
OK, are you asking why particles exist or not?
I suppose instead of particles there could be continuous stuff or force fields or something else. Are they particles or are they waves........
Edited by Tanypteryx, : No reason given.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 12:47 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 9:07 PM Tanypteryx has replied

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2131 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 86 of 478 (775193)
12-29-2015 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by GDR
12-29-2015 12:17 PM


GDR writes:
I have no problem believing in evolution. I do have a problem believing in an evolutionary process that is a result of endless mindless processes from mindless particles.
What then do atheists believe about abiogenesis or the ultimate basis for the evolutionary process?
On this topic, I recommend the lecture "Beyond the 'Evolution' vs. 'Creation' Debate" by Denis Lamoureux. Denis argues that the big divide between theists and atheists is not creation vs evolution, but teleology vs dysteleology. (You can find more of Denis' lectures here.)

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert Einstein
I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 12:17 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by GDR, posted 12-29-2015 8:06 PM kbertsche has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 87 of 478 (775197)
12-29-2015 8:06 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by kbertsche
12-29-2015 5:45 PM


kbertsche writes:
On this topic, I recommend the lecture "Beyond the 'Evolution' vs. 'Creation' Debate" by Denis Lamoureux. Denis argues that the big divide between theists and atheists is not creation vs evolution, but teleology vs dysteleology. (You can find more of Denis' lectures here.)
I listened to that and I also own and have read his book "I Love Jesus and I Accept Evolution". The only question that i would have with him is on his Biblical view. What does he mean when he calls the Bible inspired by God. I have probably differ with him somewhat on that as yes I believe that God does communicate wisdom to people, but in the case of the Bible, I would agree that God inspired writers to write but which in my view does not mean that they always got it correct.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by kbertsche, posted 12-29-2015 5:45 PM kbertsche has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by kbertsche, posted 12-29-2015 11:07 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 88 of 478 (775198)
12-29-2015 8:10 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Tangle
12-29-2015 12:47 PM


Tangle writes:
I'm trying to explain to you that it's not a defence of your beliefs to point out (incorrectly) my 'belief' in something else. I'm also trying to get you to understand that people can and do have no beliefs and manage to have fulfilling, useful and moral lives without giving a thought to all this stuff.
I fully agree with all of that, but if someone calls them self an atheist then i would have to assume that he/she has given a thought to all this stuff.
Tangle writes:
I'm not a typical atheist, I AM interested in discussing belief and alternative ideas of origins - do you imagine that 70% of Swedes are on forums arguing about it? The vast majority of atheists just don't care about this stuff, they just don't believe that there's a god. End. They get on with their lives without ever really considering it. In other words it's just normal.
Again, if they call themselves atheistic then they must have considered it and then gotten on with their lives.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Tangle, posted 12-29-2015 12:47 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Tangle, posted 12-30-2015 3:14 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 89 of 478 (775199)
12-29-2015 8:20 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by PaulK
12-29-2015 12:53 PM


PaulK writes:
Your problem is that many atheists accept evolution which is a process which provides guidance and goes well beyond the capabilities of random combinations. And, f course, evolution is a mindless process which naturally follows from the existence of imperfect self-replicators.
OK so evolution occurs without any intervention. That still does not answer the question of why it exists or whether it is the result of a pre-existing intelligence or not.
PaulK writes:
As I pointed out above evolution is an inevitable consequence of the existence of imperfect self-replicators. And only creationists believe that conscious moral beings were produced by anything that could be called abiogenesis. How abiogenesis really occurred on Earth is up for grabs (if it happened on Earth, which is only the more likely possibility) but there does not seem to be any reason why self-replicating chemicals could not form and acquire elaborations through evolutionary processes. Where you put abiogenesis in that process depends on where you draw the line between life and non-life, but that is a fine point of no real importance here.
As you say the answer is up for grabs. As a theist I believe that it was caused by a pre-existing intelligence I and others call God. An agnostic presumably would claim that we can't know so why bother worrying about it and an atheist would presumably say that it is all the result of mindless natural processes.
I have been simply attempting to defend my position. The only defence that I have seen from atheists is that is what they believe. We both have looked at the evidence and have come to very different conclusions.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by PaulK, posted 12-29-2015 12:53 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by PaulK, posted 12-30-2015 2:58 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 90 of 478 (775200)
12-29-2015 8:51 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Tangle
12-29-2015 1:05 PM


Tangle writes:
Now that IS interesting. If god didn't know he was going to be murdered what kind of god was he and if he hadn't been murdered what kind of prophet would his son have been?
I believe that God has created a world where the future is open to us and to God. We have the free will to act as we choose and I believe that Pilate and others exercised free will in choosing to have Jesus crucified. One of my favourite writers is John Polkinghorne, a Brit, who was one of the physicists responsible for finding the quark and who then went into theology in his 40's. This is his position as well.
John Polkinghorne
I believe that God interacts with the world which is different than intervening. We are influenced but not controlled. I believe, as I said before that Jesus believed he would be crucified as that is what happened to those who did what he had done and was about to do in Jerusalem.
Tangle writes:
And if it it wasn't inevitable that he would be killed and in fact had nobody took any notice of him strange storytelling he could not have been the prophet.
It isn't the crucifixion that is at issue. I know that if I murder someone, and presumably get caught, that there is a consequence for that. I believe that Jesus knew He would be crucified in the same way and went into Jerusalem as an act of faith.
If He had simply been crucified and that was the end of the story we would know nothing of Him today. It is the resurrection that is essential to Christian belief. If there was no resurrection then Jesus is simply another failed messiah and not a particularly noteworthy one at that. He didn't build up an army, didn't win any battles and didn't rebuild the temple in the manner that a Jew at that time would expect. Yet, 2000 years later virtually the whole world knows about Him.
Edited by GDR, : to add link

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Tangle, posted 12-29-2015 1:05 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Omnivorous, posted 12-29-2015 9:00 PM GDR has replied
 Message 98 by Tangle, posted 12-30-2015 3:35 AM GDR has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024