Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 115 (8796 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-19-2017 11:23 PM
323 online now:
DC85, DrJones* (2 members, 321 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Upcoming Birthdays: Astrophile, Flyer75
Post Volume:
Total: 820,880 Year: 25,486/21,208 Month: 1,113/2,338 Week: 234/450 Day: 54/52 Hour: 1/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2425
26
2728
...
32Next
Author Topic:   The Marketing Of Christianity
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5101
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 376 of 477 (792458)
10-10-2016 3:00 AM
Reply to: Message 372 by GDR
10-09-2016 6:06 PM


Re: God and suffering
GDR writes:

Yes, I believe in a loving God. I understand His loving nature as we see it embodied in Jesus. So yes, I take on faith that the world has to be the way it is and that ultimately things will be put right.

So you are forced to admit that your god made things wrong and you are hoping he'll eventually put them right. Don't you see the problem with that? He's god, he's not supposed to make mistakes. Don't you think a more obvious conclusion is that this god of your is malicious? How else can you interpret the way the world is set up - kill or be killed; a short, brutal, survival game? Isn't 4.3 billion years time enough to fix this error?

(That's putting aside science's explanation which is now well understood and accepted by you.)

If I am wrong I would choose to serve a God of love and be wrong, as opposed to one that wants me to annihilate those whom I deem to be enemies and be right. In the end it is about worshiping the nature of God as we understand Him.

I think you've just admitted that it's about worshipping the god you would prefer to 'understand', whilst ignoring the only evidence you have of him - his cruel creation.

Tangle writes:

It's a fatal flaw in the core argument that's just shoved to one side so that the business of belief can be gone on with.


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 372 by GDR, posted 10-09-2016 6:06 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 377 by GDR, posted 10-10-2016 3:34 PM Tangle has responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4310
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 377 of 477 (792485)
10-10-2016 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 376 by Tangle
10-10-2016 3:00 AM


Re: God and suffering
GDR writes:

Yes, I believe in a loving God. I understand His loving nature as we see it embodied in Jesus. So yes, I take on faith that the world has to be the way it is and that ultimately things will be put right.

Tangle writes:

So you are forced to admit that your god made things wrong and you are hoping he'll eventually put them right. Don't you see the problem with that? He's god, he's not supposed to make mistakes. Don't you think a more obvious conclusion is that this god of your is malicious? How else can you interpret the way the world is set up - kill or be killed; a short, brutal, survival game? Isn't 4.3 billion years time enough to fix this error?

I accept on faith that things have to be the way they are, which is not as brutal as you claim. In general life isn't about kill or be killed. I think that both of us live very comfortable lives. Wild life still abounds and you find altruistic behaviour in people and even in the animal world.

Also we are stuck in an entropic world where time only flows in one direction. If the greater reality of all that is seen and unseen involves multiple time dimensions then 4.3 billion years is a meaningless term. Time is the only way we know of experiencing change. Maybe even science itself will find more.

As for the more brutal aspects of our existence, I believe that we as humans are charged with reversing that brutality where we can, and we are to use our God given ability to love in order to do that.

Tangle writes:

I think you've just admitted that it's about worshipping the god you would prefer to 'understand', whilst ignoring the only evidence you have of him - his cruel creation.

No. I worship the god that I see perfectly embodied or represented by Jesus. I can't have absolute knowledge that I am right. I was only pointing out that I wouldn't worship a god that hates even if I believed that that was the true nature of whatever deity you want to name.


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 376 by Tangle, posted 10-10-2016 3:00 AM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 379 by Tangle, posted 10-10-2016 5:41 PM GDR has not yet responded

    
GDR
Member
Posts: 4310
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 378 of 477 (792486)
10-10-2016 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 374 by Phat
10-09-2016 8:39 PM


Re: Objectivity and Subjectivity
Phat writes:

Based on that definition, belief should only be subjective.

All religious belief, or even the rejection of religious belief is subjective and it is all individualistic as everyone is uniquely subject to their genes, their upbringing, their culture etc.

So, objectively there can be no group consensus that will lead to a group forming an objective conclusion about beliefs and particularly about religious belief. As far as I know, I'm the only one that has it completely right.


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 374 by Phat, posted 10-09-2016 8:39 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5101
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 379 of 477 (792499)
10-10-2016 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 377 by GDR
10-10-2016 3:34 PM


Re: God and suffering
GDR writes:

I accept on faith that things have to be the way they are,

But why would you do that when you know it's just not true? Is there any reason you can think of why we couldn't all be vegitarians? Why can't all life on earth be either photo synthesisers or plant eaters? Why create preditors? Why does all life have to comptete for survival with other life? We'd still have free will, why create a world of suffering and competition?

....which is not as brutal as you claim. In general life isn't about kill or be killed.

That's simply wrong. In biology it's called the food chain.

I think that both of us live very comfortable lives.

Remind me, why did god feel the need to give me tooth ache last month? Thankfully, modern science created anti-biotics and root canal surgery. This simple infection created enormous harm in the past - it used kill people. There's no reason for this other than the fact that evolution has been set up to work that way. Yet we can all easily imagine a world that could be quite different.

Wild life still abounds

It abounds because it creates enormous quantities of redundancy. Because of competion for survival all life on earth produces vastly more offspring than would be necessary without it. Most of it dies or is killed and eaten before it can reproduce. You only have to watch a couple nature programmes to see that.

and you find altruistic behaviour in people and even in the animal world.

Altruistic behaviour is found amongst members of the same family - it doesn't stop them killing and eating other species or, in human terms, killing other tribes. It's only our social institutions that have stopped us wiping each other out.


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 377 by GDR, posted 10-10-2016 3:34 PM GDR has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 389 by Phat, posted 10-12-2016 9:54 AM Tangle has responded
 Message 391 by Phat, posted 10-12-2016 10:03 AM Tangle has responded

  
Aussie
Member
Posts: 122
From: Sanford, FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 380 of 477 (792540)
10-11-2016 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 369 by Phat
10-08-2016 11:32 AM


Re: God and suffering
Tangle writes:
I HAVE read the gospel and I conclude that it's a total fabrication. What's more I've read history and science so I know the evidence not just the propaganda.

Phat writes:
Then you are without excuse.

Well there it is...I can't get over this, even though I was waiting for it. Phat! He is without excuse? Before your God? When will he be without excuse? I assume when he stands before the Great White Throne on the Day of Judgment? That moment when you as a sheep will be rewarded, and Tangle the goat will be herded into the Lake of Fire to burn and suffer unmitigated torture until the end of...Oh wait, IT WILL NEVER END!

Tangle is having a polite, very civilized dialogue with you. Frankly, he's kicking your ass, but very politely. You have literally no answer for the point he is trying to clarify, and all you have left is to THREATEN HIM WITH ETERNAL TORTURE. This is sad and predictable. I have said this to Faith before. Behind your smiles lurk fangs. You are trying very hard to be polite, but this is nothing less than an oblique reference to his eternal suffering, and you should be horrified at this.

Edited by Aussie, : No reason given.


"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 369 by Phat, posted 10-08-2016 11:32 AM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 381 by jar, posted 10-11-2016 10:23 AM Aussie has not yet responded
 Message 387 by Phat, posted 10-12-2016 9:43 AM Aussie has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 29441
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 381 of 477 (792543)
10-11-2016 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 380 by Aussie
10-11-2016 9:48 AM


Re: God and suffering
Aussie writes:

Well there it is...I can't get over this, even though I was waiting for it. Phat! He is without excuse? Before your God? When will he be without excuse? I assume when he stands before the Great White Throne on the Day of Judgment? That moment when you as a sheep will be rewarded, and Tangle the goat will be herded into the Lake of Fire to burn and suffer unmitigated torture until the end of...Oh wait, IT WILL NEVER END!

Actually if you read the Sheep & Goats parable it is Tangle who would recognized as a Sheep while Phat would be a Goat.

quote:
The Sheep and the Goats

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”


Note that the Sheep never did anything for Jesus while it is the Goats that fall back on the "when didn't we do for YOU?" defense.

The Sheep are those who didn't do for Jesus but did feed the hungry, clothe the naked, comforted the sorrowful, healed the sick; while the Goats are those who did do for Jesus but only for Jesus; the former surprised because they were not followers of Jesus and never did anything for Jesus while the later surprised because they were followers and always did for Jesus.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 380 by Aussie, posted 10-11-2016 9:48 AM Aussie has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 388 by Phat, posted 10-12-2016 9:48 AM jar has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13726
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 382 of 477 (792552)
10-11-2016 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 373 by GDR
10-09-2016 6:23 PM


Re: God and suffering
GDR writes:

Your answer is a cop-out and obviously doesn't answer the question I asked.


You didn't ask a question. You made an assumption and I pointed out why that assumption can only lead to nonsensical conclusions.

GDR writes:

Frankly, I objectively, after reading both the pros and cons, came to the conclusion that the most reasonable conclusion was that Jesus was resurrected.


That isn't objectivity.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 373 by GDR, posted 10-09-2016 6:23 PM GDR has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13726
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 383 of 477 (792553)
10-11-2016 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 374 by Phat
10-09-2016 8:39 PM


Re: Objectivity and Subjectivity
Phat writes:

If a large group of individuals share a subjective belief, however, it would be under consideration as an objective (Object of our Faith=Jesus)


I'm the first one to say that you can't be objective all by yourself - i.e. objectivity requires consensus. But consensus doesn't necessarily add up to objectivity. If you add subjective beliefs, you just get a bigger pile of subjective. And in the case of Christianity, the consensus against is far bigger than the consensus for.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by Phat, posted 10-09-2016 8:39 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 384 by NoNukes, posted 10-11-2016 10:07 PM ringo has responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9997
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 384 of 477 (792601)
10-11-2016 10:07 PM
Reply to: Message 383 by ringo
10-11-2016 11:48 AM


Re: Objectivity and Subjectivity
I'm the first one to say that you can't be objective all by yourself - i.e. objectivity requires consensus.

Please explain. My initial impression is that objectivity is independent of how many people agree, and that even if the majority of folks hold an opinion, a single person understanding to the contrary, if he reaches that position using an appropriate means, may well be objective all by himself.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson

Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith


This message is a reply to:
 Message 383 by ringo, posted 10-11-2016 11:48 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 385 by Pressie, posted 10-12-2016 9:09 AM NoNukes has not yet responded
 Message 396 by ringo, posted 10-12-2016 12:06 PM NoNukes has responded

    
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1802
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 385 of 477 (792626)
10-12-2016 9:09 AM
Reply to: Message 384 by NoNukes
10-11-2016 10:07 PM


Re: Objectivity and Subjectivity
NoNukes writes:

Please explain. My initial impression is that objectivity is independent of how many people agree, and that even if the majority of folks hold an opinion, a single person understanding to the contrary, if he reaches that position using an appropriate means, may well be objective all by himself.

My opinion is that, when an overwhelming majority of specialists on a subject, whether they are green or black or white or brown, whether they live in Antartica or Argentina or the USA or Germany or Zambia or Russia or Japan; whether they are Christian, Islamitic or Jewish or Buddhist or atheist or agnostic; reach similar conclusions after research on a specific subject and publish their data and findings in appropriate scientific journals.

And the findings are accepted by the vast majority of specialists on the subject. Whether they are white or brown or black or green. Whether the live in Canada or Brazil or Australia or Vietnam or Poland. Whether they are Catholic or Protestant or Muslim or Buddhist or New Age or Zorochastrian or atheist or agnostic.

That's an indication of objectivity.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 384 by NoNukes, posted 10-11-2016 10:07 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 386 by jar, posted 10-12-2016 9:20 AM Pressie has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 29441
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 386 of 477 (792627)
10-12-2016 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 385 by Pressie
10-12-2016 9:09 AM


Re: Objectivity and Subjectivity
Pressie writes:

My opinion is that, when an overwhelming majority of specialists on a subject, whether they are green or black or white or brown, whether they live in Antartica or Argentina or the USA or Germany or Zambia or Russia or Japan; whether they are Christian, Islamitic or Jewish or Buddhist or atheist or agnostic; reach similar conclusions after research on a specific subject and publish their data and findings in appropriate scientific journals.

And the findings are accepted by the vast majority of specialists on the subject. Whether they are white or brown or black or green. Whether the live in Canada or Brazil or Australia or Vietnam or Poland. Whether they are Catholic or Protestant or Muslim or Buddhist or New Age or Zorochastrian or atheist or agnostic.

That's an indication of objectivity.

While that is true is it really relevant?

If an individual looks at a pile of coins and then separates the coins into piles based on the features common to all the coins in each pile is that not being objective?

Isn't objectivity the process itself whether done by one individual or a group?

Isn't objectivity simply having an explainable rational for a set of acts?


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 385 by Pressie, posted 10-12-2016 9:09 AM Pressie has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 9891
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 387 of 477 (792628)
10-12-2016 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 380 by Aussie
10-11-2016 9:48 AM


Re: God and suffering
My intention was not to judge or threaten Tangle. Perhaps what I mean to say is that he actually has an excuse. I certainly don't wish to be branded as a goat.

According to jar, goats are actually the ones without an excuse.

However, why would God judge a believer so harshly and simply let an unbeliever in the door?

Is there not or should there not be some standard or is God simply and hypothetically letting everyone in the door?


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered.~Proverbs 28:26

This message is a reply to:
 Message 380 by Aussie, posted 10-11-2016 9:48 AM Aussie has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 394 by Tangle, posted 10-12-2016 10:13 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 9891
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 388 of 477 (792629)
10-12-2016 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 381 by jar
10-11-2016 10:23 AM


Sheep,Goats,and steel cut Oats
jar writes:

... the Goats are those who did do for Jesus but only for Jesus...

Actually wouldn't the goats be doing only for themselves?

It would be my contention that the goats were not putting in work out of obedience to the Spirit but, rather, were only showing off to gain worldly acclaim.

Additionally, if the sheep that got let in the door were actually clueless of Gods existence,nature, and rules...they would have an excuse!

Thus I stand corrected.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered.~Proverbs 28:26

This message is a reply to:
 Message 381 by jar, posted 10-11-2016 10:23 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 390 by jar, posted 10-12-2016 9:56 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 9891
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 389 of 477 (792630)
10-12-2016 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 379 by Tangle
10-10-2016 5:41 PM


Re: God and suffering
Tangle writes:

Altruistic behaviour is found amongst members of the same family - it doesn't stop them killing and eating other species or, in human terms, killing other tribes. It's only our social institutions that have stopped us wiping each other out.

In other words, the U.N. and modern "diplomacy"?

jar writes:

The Sheep are those who didn't do for Jesus but did feed the hungry, clothe the naked, comforted the sorrowful, healed the sick...

Does this mean the hungry,naked, sorrowful, and sick in our own tribe or does it emphasize helping the other tribes?


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered.~Proverbs 28:26

This message is a reply to:
 Message 379 by Tangle, posted 10-10-2016 5:41 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 392 by jar, posted 10-12-2016 10:03 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 393 by Tangle, posted 10-12-2016 10:06 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29441
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 390 of 477 (792631)
10-12-2016 9:56 AM
Reply to: Message 388 by Phat
10-12-2016 9:48 AM


Re: Sheep,Goats,and steel cut Oats
Phat writes:

It would be my contention that the goats were not putting in work out of obedience to the Spirit but, rather, were only showing off to gain worldly acclaim.

But that is not what the story says. The story specifically says "When did we ever not do for YOU?" The story says they were specifically doing FOR Jesus with no mention of worldly gain or any gain whatsoever.

Phat writes:

Additionally, if the sheep that got let in the door were actually clueless of Gods existence,nature, and rules...they would have an excuse!

Again, the story covers that, the sheep are quoted as saying "Wait, we never did anything for YOU!"


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 388 by Phat, posted 10-12-2016 9:48 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
RewPrev1
...
2425
26
2728
...
32Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017