Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,387 Year: 3,644/9,624 Month: 515/974 Week: 128/276 Day: 2/23 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Nature and the fall of man
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 262 of 300 (275851)
01-04-2006 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by ramoss
01-04-2006 5:31 PM


Re: God would be to blame if we were automatons
Even an omniscient omnipotent God can't violate the logic of His own being and His own universe. That was Robin's point. I've been waiting for him to make the point again with his usual precision, but now I'm making it more klutzily instead. You claim God would have to make a man who both has free will and doesn't have free will, in other words to do something impossible, and if He didn't that means He's not omniscient or omnipotent according to you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by ramoss, posted 01-04-2006 5:31 PM ramoss has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 263 of 300 (275875)
01-04-2006 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by iano
01-04-2006 3:26 PM


Re: God would be to blame if we were automatons
It seems to me that God had to find an absolutely perfect balance between drawing a free-willed man to obey him and allowing a free-willed man to disobey him. And the scene had to be perfectly tuned in order for free-will to be the very free-est of wills. Anything shy of perfect balance means that God would have stacked the deck.
Thinking about this some more, I think I disagree after all. I don't think it was a matter of fine-tuning and careful balancing. Seems to me that would have been more like stacking the deck. I think God made man in His own image, with His own moral characteristics, a man who would naturally be oriented toward the God who made him, and yet with a completely free will that could act independently of God.
P.S. You were gone a while. Nice to have you back.
This message has been edited by Faith, 01-04-2006 08:00 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by iano, posted 01-04-2006 3:26 PM iano has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by LinearAq, posted 01-04-2006 10:14 PM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 267 of 300 (275924)
01-04-2006 11:10 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by LinearAq
01-04-2006 10:14 PM


Re: God would be to blame if we were automatons
Sure doesn't seem like we are "naturally" oriented toward God.
We aren't. The Fall, remember? Adam originally was, then he disobeyed -- that was the Fall -- and ever since the human race tends to sin.
This message has been edited by Faith, 01-04-2006 11:43 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by LinearAq, posted 01-04-2006 10:14 PM LinearAq has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 279 of 300 (303140)
04-11-2006 8:50 AM
Reply to: Message 278 by jar
04-11-2006 8:10 AM


Re: Robin outlines HIS god.
Kind of looks to me like he made some reasonable inferences about what your God is really like, and that you are just refusing to recognize those inferences.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by jar, posted 04-11-2006 8:10 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by jar, posted 04-11-2006 9:06 AM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 285 of 300 (303284)
04-11-2006 4:03 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by jar
04-11-2006 9:06 AM


No it's YOUR God jar
It isn't about belief. It's about the nature of your God. He's obviously weak or incompetent -- isn't in charge of the meteor that wreaked so much damage, or apparently in charge of the suffering of his creatures either. Pretty weak and stupid. And uncompassionate about all those suffering creatures apparently too. Gives us some remedies, rather too little and late it seems to me. And they don't cure everything, and people and animals still die in awful misery. Some live in awful misery too.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by jar, posted 04-11-2006 9:06 AM jar has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 287 of 300 (303286)
04-11-2006 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 284 by jar
04-11-2006 3:59 PM


Re: Robin outlines HIS jar's god.
jar writes:
Good and Bad are but a human construct and depends totally on the particular circumstances.
Robin writes:
That's certainly true if there is no God.
True if there is a GOD too.
No, the God who actually exists determines good and bad. They are absolutes because they derive from His very nature.
YOUR God on the other hand obviously has no notion of good and bad as well as being too incompetent to control a meteor he supposedly brought into existence. He lets his creatures suffer until he manages to provide a few weak remedies in modern times to help just a tad to alleviate the suffering.
He/she is an idiot and apparently thinks we're all idiots to consider him/her worthy of worship.
jar writes:
That's why we were given the great gift of the ability to tell right from wrong, the ability to make those subjective decisions.
We do as lousy a job of it as your weak and incompetent and morally challenged god.
This message has been edited by Faith, 04-11-2006 04:15 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by jar, posted 04-11-2006 3:59 PM jar has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 298 of 300 (303479)
04-12-2006 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 297 by robinrohan
04-12-2006 8:09 AM


The Bible is an objective basis for morality
pro-life: Thou shalt not kill an embryo which is a human being.
pro-choice: Thou shalt not interfere with a woman's right to choose.
Can either of these moral statements be proved? Of course not.
How do we decide? We rely on our feelings. That's all we have to rely on when it comes to morals.
For a Bible believing Christian, morality is objective because it is given by the Creator God, and we are not going by feelings. It is spelled out in the Bible. There is a Biblical basis for the pro-life position; there is not for the pro-choice position. The Biblical basis for the pro-life position is the references to God's forming us in the womb and knowing us from the womb.
This message has been edited by Faith, 04-12-2006 09:39 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by robinrohan, posted 04-12-2006 8:09 AM robinrohan has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024