Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can God create another God?
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 199 of 224 (482554)
09-17-2008 12:48 AM
Reply to: Message 198 by Blue Jay
09-16-2008 10:52 PM


Re: Good and Evil
First of all, since most religions in the world are completely false, it is expected that you would find a pattern among religions. Before you hit the true religion you will find a false trend. If you read what I wrote in my posts to Straggler you will see why I believe a religion must be mentally stimulating. G-d gave us a brain, He must want us to use it. Also, the world is so complicated, and it would make no sense for religion to be so simple.
You mention problems with science and religion. Does the advances in mathematics, computers, and economics challenge your faith? Science should be no different. All scientists are doing is finding patterns in nature, making assumptions, and giving names to certain patterns. Religion should not conflict with the physics of the universe. Most conflicts involve wild extrapolations billions of years into the past. This is absurd since the evidence has only been studied for the past 1000 years at most. To make such wild extrapolations would never due when trying to get a loan.
Edited by Open MInd, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Blue Jay, posted 09-16-2008 10:52 PM Blue Jay has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-17-2008 2:43 AM Open MInd has replied
 Message 212 by obvious Child, posted 09-24-2008 10:24 PM Open MInd has replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 202 of 224 (482699)
09-17-2008 3:07 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by New Cat's Eye
09-17-2008 2:43 AM


Re: Good and Evil
I seriously have no clue what you are trying to say. You are just praising the inventors of the internet and you think this will have something to do with the debate. I have already told you exactly what science is. After scientists find certain patterns in the universe, smart engineers figure out how to manipulate these patterns to create sophisticated equipment. That is a credit to the engineers for their creativity. But, I have already told you that this has nothing to do with religion. I understand you are a scientist and you would like to think highly of yourself. However, all science does is find patterns and give them names. Then they find ways of manipulating these patterns to do what they want. This is no different than saying: Since everything falls to the ground, I will attack the enemy from a highpoint in order to have an advantage. The scientists came along and found the pattern and they called it gravity. They never explain what actually causes any of the patterns. If they happen to find other patterns, they may explain the previous patterns in terms of other patterns. ALL YOU ARE DOING IS FINDING PATTERNS AND GIVING NAMES TO THOSE PATTERNS. This has nothing to do with religion.
Just on a side note, what great technology has come about because of the scientific extrapolations into the past?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-17-2008 2:43 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 203 of 224 (482700)
09-17-2008 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 201 by Straggler
09-17-2008 2:58 PM


Re: Good and Evil
Adam was immortal when he was created. On that day he became mortal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by Straggler, posted 09-17-2008 2:58 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by Straggler, posted 09-17-2008 3:15 PM Open MInd has replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 206 of 224 (482731)
09-17-2008 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 204 by Straggler
09-17-2008 3:15 PM


Re: Good and Evil
I told you, there is a very fine line to be drawn between apologetics and interpretation. It depends purely on whether one believes in the religion or not. If the religion is truth, it is obvious that it is a complicated text made for interpretation. However, if one does not believe in the religion, he will look at all the things that are made for interpretation, and consider them to be refutations. You would want a book that was actually written by the Creator of infinite wisdom to be readily understandable on a 4th graders reading level. This makes no sense, and only irrational heretics would bring such refutations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Straggler, posted 09-17-2008 3:15 PM Straggler has not replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 207 of 224 (482788)
09-18-2008 12:39 AM
Reply to: Message 205 by Blue Jay
09-17-2008 4:32 PM


Re: Good and Evil
This is one of the clever arguments that I have come up with on my own. When atheists discredit the Torah, they are actually claiming that a human being wrote it. The motive would have to be some sort of hoax. Then they prove that the Torah does not make sense by bringing what look like blatant problems. One of these is the global flood. Many atheists would say that such a thing did not happen, and therefore, they claim that the Torah may not actually be correct. The problem is that this logic will contradict any logical hoax explanation for the founding of Judaism. This is because it would be stupid for a person (or persons) who is trying to sell a religion, to add unnecessary doubtful stories, that seemingly add nothing to the text. A crafty liar would never add such things into a new religion. Therefore, I think that these stories prove that the Torah was not written as a hoax.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by Blue Jay, posted 09-17-2008 4:32 PM Blue Jay has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by rueh, posted 09-24-2008 3:05 PM Open MInd has replied
 Message 210 by Blue Jay, posted 09-24-2008 5:16 PM Open MInd has replied
 Message 211 by Straggler, posted 09-24-2008 6:33 PM Open MInd has replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 213 of 224 (483986)
09-25-2008 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by obvious Child
09-24-2008 10:24 PM


Re: Good and Evil
I have come to the conclusion that most religions are false from the fact that most religions are mutually exclusive. Polytheism and Monotheism for example cannot both be correct because they are mutually exclusive. This is only one small example. Most religions teach themselves as truth and all others as false. Therefore, most religions must be false. Since most religions are false, most religions will look false. This look of falsehood is the pattern that can be picked up in most religions. Therefore, it is not logical to extrapolate from most religions to all religions because most religions are false.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by obvious Child, posted 09-24-2008 10:24 PM obvious Child has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 216 by Huntard, posted 09-25-2008 4:13 PM Open MInd has replied
 Message 223 by obvious Child, posted 09-26-2008 5:35 PM Open MInd has not replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 214 of 224 (483987)
09-25-2008 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 211 by Straggler
09-24-2008 6:33 PM


Re: Good and Evil
That is a possibility of course. However, I think it is not very probable. I would like you to try to give me a detailed explanation of exactly how you think these deluded people started this religion for deluded people. Just saying that they were deluded and the books were a collection of stories from previous generations, is not sufficient. You have not given a mechanism for the beginning of the religion. You have already ruled out the hoax hypothesis. Please explain how the religion started and who wrote the texts that are around today.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by Straggler, posted 09-24-2008 6:33 PM Straggler has not replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 215 of 224 (483988)
09-25-2008 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by rueh
09-24-2008 3:05 PM


Re: Good and Evil
The advances in science have nothing to do with human logic. I am saying that the flood story would have been completely useless in a religion that was a complete hoax. Remember, most people today do not even believe that the great flood ever happened. Why would an ancient religion add such a thing into the text if it did not happen? They were not trying to explain any natural occurrence. They were merely adding a story that would have been completely useless. I think this would have been completely useless in any sort of hoax, and it would only be detrimental to the crafty artists of the religion. My argument has nothing to do with the advances in science, but with basic human logic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by rueh, posted 09-24-2008 3:05 PM rueh has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by rueh, posted 09-26-2008 7:50 AM Open MInd has not replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 217 of 224 (484031)
09-25-2008 7:49 PM
Reply to: Message 216 by Huntard
09-25-2008 4:13 PM


Re: Good and Evil
Huntard writes:
Or they are all wrong.
This is always a possibility. However, I was pointing out that you cannot make this conclusion from extrapolating from most religions. In fact, it is expected that most religions would be wrong.
Huntard writes:
Here's my attempt:
There were these rulers see, and they were all going about their business like they always do, ruling their peoples and all that. When suddenly, one of them had a great idea! "What if we got these people more under our control." He said. "Well blimey, that'd be nice wouldn't it" Another one responded. "But how would we go about doing that?" a third asked. "Well, look here" said the first one again "how about, we make up these stories see, about how there's this guy right, and he created everything. We'll call him God, and make him a right , so the people will be scared of him. Then, we tell them that when they don't follow this guys rules, then after they die, they'll be d for all eternity. But when they do follow his rules, they'll be happy ever after". "How's that gonna give us any more control?" the second one inquired. The first one sighed and said: "Because WE will make those rules see, and then we write these silly stories for them, and tell them all this is true, and we'll make them all vague and stuff, so we can always interpret them to whatever the situation requires. That should put a lid on any rebellion or anything these dumb peasants want to start. And since we are the only ones who can read or write, they'll just have to take our word for it, or face the wrath of God!" And then they all laughed an evil laugh and were very smug and content with themselves.
How's that for a nice little story? And even better, it's plausible.
This a very nice story, and I can see it working for other religions. However, this story is not indicated through Judaism. First of all, the Torah says nothing about a punishment in an afterlife. Second of all, the Torah does not say anything about giving money s or listening to all of their decrees. In fact, one is not supposed to listen to anyone who contradicts the Torah. Furthermore, some commandments are counterintuitive for a normal king. One example is the resting of the land every seven years. Considering the idea that most societies were based on agriculture, this decree would potentially be detrimental to the kingdom. In fact most of the laws in the Torah seem to be of no benefit to any king.
Now having given you some problems with your attempt, what happened after these kings devised this beautiful plan. Please give me their next step, and try to tie it all together with Judaism.
Huntard writes:
As by my explanation above, these stories served to keep them under control. Tell them that if they don't listen God will come down and can be a rather effective way, especially when you got people who don't understand the slightest thing about the natural world. To us today such stories are completely ridiculous because we understand the natural world quite well, and therefore know a global flood could never have happened.
I assume that you are trying to say that the story of the global flood was inserted into the text in order to show how G-d can destroy people who disobey him. Unfortunately, just by making up a story about what G-d has done in the past does not add any fear into the people because they were not aware of such a story in the first place. Also, why did they have to make such a far fetched story? It would have been fine to just give a story about how G-d killed people by bringing disease(something that they would believe easier, be able to relate to , and be more scared of). If the people were skeptical they would not have believed the flood story, and this would make their whole plan look stupid. And if the people were just dumb, it would be sufficient to just warn about future misfortunes that would befall sinners. Just as a side note, after the flood G-d promised never to bring a flood of that nature ever again. What was the meaning of this? Also, since the king hypothesis seems to describe the kings as sort of intelligent, how is it possible that these people were the only intelligent ones in the whole country? Think about these questions, and get back to me on your further explanations.
Edited by Open MInd, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by Huntard, posted 09-25-2008 4:13 PM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by Huntard, posted 09-26-2008 12:40 PM Open MInd has not replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 218 of 224 (484033)
09-25-2008 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 210 by Blue Jay
09-24-2008 5:16 PM


Re: Good and Evil
I merely point out that the flood story seemingly adds nothing to the religion, and it is therefore not written there as an intended false statement. It does not take a genius to realize that this story would not be accepted by anyone. Advances in science are not required to show that this story is far fetched. Even a really dumb person would not insert this seemingly useless story into a hoax. Therefore, I conclude that the Torah could not have been written as a hoax, that was intended to start a false religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by Blue Jay, posted 09-24-2008 5:16 PM Blue Jay has not replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 219 of 224 (484034)
09-25-2008 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by Agobot
09-24-2008 8:21 AM


Re: A war against God - do we stand a chance?
Agobot writes:
We've earlier come to the logical conclusion that God is not and can not be omnipotent.
According to your definition this is correct because G-d cannot in any way limit Himself.
Agobot writes:
So what does he have in his arsenal?
One thing in this world that is not physical is the human mind. G-d can easily take control of all the minds in the world and cause everyone to stop the war on their own. You would not even realize that G-d has intervened. Just as a side note the world only exist every single instant because of the will of G-d. If you would go to war so to speak, all G-d has to do is will the world to no longer exist. This is not physical either.
Agobot writes:
Do we stand a chance?
Not even close! You are nothing but a creation that can't even fight the common cold.
Edited by Open MInd, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by Agobot, posted 09-24-2008 8:21 AM Agobot 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