|
Author
|
Topic: What evidence absolutely rules out a Creator
|
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: 10-06-2001
|
Interesting. I do have a fondness for that period (1900-1950). The period I have actually lived in I find rather boring. I always wanted one of those hats the men wore back then. I wonder why hats went out. This is off topic but I do know the answer: JFK didn't wear one. Ended the fashion right there. Except my father went on wearing his fedora through the 60s. It was too much a part of him to give it up. I think we may have a different understanding of what Modernism refers to, your frame of reference being largely literary, right? I'll do a little research and get back to you on that.
|
Phat
Member Posts: 18354 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: 12-30-2003 Member Rating: 1.0
|
|
Message 107 of 300 (295014)
03-13-2006 7:49 PM
|
Reply to: Message 3 by robinrohan
03-12-2006 8:56 PM
|
|
>>>>>Judge Judy vs the Almighty<<<<<<<
It appears that the transitionals eliminate creationism yet I can't see them eliminating God as evidence...Come on, now. Itslike that far-side comic where the professor writing on a chalkboard "proves" that he does not exist...and then....*POOF* he dissappears! 
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 3 by robinrohan, posted 03-12-2006 8:56 PM | | robinrohan has replied |
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 108 of 300 (295015)
03-13-2006 7:53 PM
|
Reply to: Message 107 by Phat
03-13-2006 7:49 PM
|
|
Re: >>>>>Judge Judy vs the Almighty<<<<<<<
It appears that the transitionals eliminate creationism yet I can't see them eliminating God as evidence...Come on, now. See message 23. Also, the one entitled "my view."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 107 by Phat, posted 03-13-2006 7:49 PM | | Phat has not replied |
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1498 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
Re: My view
I don't see anything too terribly wrong with the Christian idea that God gave man free will and man screwed up. If man screwed up, then man was flawed. A creation that contains something flawed is not perfect. The idea of the Fall - that a perfect creation manifested a flaw anyway - is self-contradictory.
God knows what he's going to do but that's not the same thing as making him do it. Oh? Excuse me? God is not the creator of Man in your religion? Well, the Bible says that he is, of course. And if God did indeed create Adam, then he created all parts of Adam, including his future. Adam was created to do exactly what he did; God did make him do it because God made him to do it.
And then there's the Fortunate Fall idea. The Fall, though bad, yields a greater glory. That's a pretty standard rationale for abuse. "I'm abusing you now to bring us closer together." It's the standard treatment at military school and boot camp. You'll pardon me if the moral calculus doesn't quite add up. 6 thousand years (we'll use the YEC timeline) of death and horror just for the "privlege" of having 1.5 billion Christians tell me how great they are, and how I should be just like them, except if I'm gay or a woman who needs to have an abortion. Yeah, that's some "greater glory."
I don't think that's too logical. I don't think any of them are too logical. That's why I'm an atheist, remember? I didn't say that any of the religions handled it logically; Christianity certainly doesn't. But they're nontheless there, and they handle it to the satisfaction of their adherents. So clearly the Fall is merely one of several competing nonsense explanations of the problem of evil.
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1498 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
|
|
Message 110 of 300 (295018)
03-13-2006 8:20 PM
|
Reply to: Message 102 by iano
03-13-2006 6:28 PM
|
|
Re: My view
I've said it before Robin but it is worth repeating: for a non-Christian you make a surprisingly good Christian apologist. Cribbing Mere Christianity and the like doesn't a compelling apologetics make. This message has been edited by crashfrog, 03-13-2006 08:20 PM
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 102 by iano, posted 03-13-2006 6:28 PM | | iano has not replied |
|
Hawkins
Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 150 From: Hong Kong Joined: 08-25-2005
|
|
|
Message 111 of 300 (295019)
03-13-2006 8:43 PM
|
|
|
What is "perfect"? A design is perfect when it suits its purpose. A mirror is perfect as a mirror, not something can flight you from California to London, not something knows your feeling and gives your comfort via a chat. So you cant be sure what's perfect or not unless you know the design and its purpose. The "perfect" you are asking for is non-existence in the world, as nothing will be eternal here. Freewill is perfect in a sense that it allows freewill, you screwed it up, admit that. You desire a perfect world in the bottom of your heart, admit that. You need God deep inside your soul, admit that. Then repent and you'll be in the perfect world as you desire, which is eternal, where you no longer abuse your freewill to its every bit, with God's direct guidance. This message has been edited by Hawkins, 03-13-2006 08:10 PM
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 112 of 300 (295035)
03-13-2006 10:54 PM
|
Reply to: Message 110 by crashfrog
03-13-2006 8:20 PM
|
|
Re: My view
Cribbing Mere Christianity and the like doesn't a compelling apologetics make. Lewis' idea, if I remember correctly, is this notion of God being "outside of time." He cribbed that from Boethius. And later Calvin.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 110 by crashfrog, posted 03-13-2006 8:20 PM | | crashfrog has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 113 by robinrohan, posted 03-13-2006 11:01 PM | | robinrohan has not replied |
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
Re: My view
Actually, the idea of looking at predestination from the point of view of both parties (God and man) came from Faith in some discussion we had months ago. There is one sentence that echoes Lewis, however. I'm constantly plagiarizing. This message has been edited by robinrohan, 03-13-2006 10:01 PM
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 112 by robinrohan, posted 03-13-2006 10:54 PM | | robinrohan has not replied |
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 114 of 300 (295037)
03-13-2006 11:04 PM
|
Reply to: Message 109 by crashfrog
03-13-2006 8:18 PM
|
|
Re: My view
But they're nontheless there, and they handle it to the satisfaction of their adherents. So clearly the Fall is merely one of several competing nonsense explanations of the problem of evil. I don't see how these religions directly address the problem of human sufffering, but then I don't know that much about the Eastern religions.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 109 by crashfrog, posted 03-13-2006 8:18 PM | | crashfrog has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 134 by nator, posted 03-14-2006 8:54 AM | | robinrohan has not replied |
|
robinrohan
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 115 of 300 (295040)
03-13-2006 11:13 PM
|
Reply to: Message 109 by crashfrog
03-13-2006 8:18 PM
|
|
Re: My view
God did make him do it because God made him to do it. I think a plausible argument can be made for free will, if we forget about evolution (which eliminates it).
That's a pretty standard rationale for abuse. "I'm abusing you now to bring us closer together." It's the standard treatment at military school and boot camp. Not quite the same thing, compared to eternity.
You'll pardon me if the moral calculus doesn't quite add up. 6 thousand years (we'll use the YEC timeline) of death and horror just for the "privlege" of having 1.5 billion Christians tell me how great they are, and how I should be just like them, except if I'm gay or a woman who needs to have an abortion. Yeah, that's some "greater glory." Maybe these Christians who have this belief are real up-to-date and politically correct. It's such a pleasant way to be.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 109 by crashfrog, posted 03-13-2006 8:18 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 116 by crashfrog, posted 03-13-2006 11:29 PM | | robinrohan has replied |
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1498 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
Re: My view
I think a plausible argument can be made for free will, if we forget about evolution (which eliminates it). I guess I don't know what is meant by "free will."
Maybe these Christians who have this belief are real up-to-date and politically correct. It's such a pleasant way to be. I haven't had the same experience, I guess.
|
veiledvirtue
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 117 of 300 (295063)
03-14-2006 12:43 AM
|
Reply to: Message 116 by crashfrog
03-13-2006 11:29 PM
|
|
quote:
I guess I don't know what is meant by "free will."
if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!  This message has been edited by veiledvirtue, 03-13-2006 11:43 PM
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 116 by crashfrog, posted 03-13-2006 11:29 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 118 by crashfrog, posted 03-14-2006 12:45 AM | | veiledvirtue has replied |
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1498 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice! If no one tells me what it means, I have no choice but to be ignorant. 
|
veiledvirtue
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 119 of 300 (295066)
03-14-2006 12:48 AM
|
Reply to: Message 118 by crashfrog
03-14-2006 12:45 AM
|
|
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 118 by crashfrog, posted 03-14-2006 12:45 AM | | crashfrog has not replied |
|
veiledvirtue
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 120 of 300 (295070)
03-14-2006 1:13 AM
|
Reply to: Message 118 by crashfrog
03-14-2006 12:45 AM
|
|
quote:
If no one tells me what it means,
im sure you have the unabridged definition somewhere under those 11,141 posts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 118 by crashfrog, posted 03-14-2006 12:45 AM | | crashfrog has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2