Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Jesus and his sacrifice is Satan’s test of man’s morality.
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

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


Message 92 of 478 (775202)
12-29-2015 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Tanypteryx
12-29-2015 1:32 PM


Tanypteryx writes:
Well, the hypotheses I am familiar with all have very simple chemistry initially that slowly gets more and more complex.
Fine but why does that simple chemistry exist in the first place?
Tanypteryx writes:
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?
Well, I would contend that our all life and particularly the fact that we are sentient is evidence. We may come to different conclusions but I obviously believe that that sways the argument towards there be a pre-existing intelligence.
Of course particles don't have minds. That is the point. All that we are aware of is made up of particles that we both agree are mindless and yet here we are, a collection of mindless particles and yet we have minds.

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 85 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-29-2015 1:32 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-30-2015 12:33 AM GDR has replied

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


Message 93 of 478 (775203)
12-29-2015 9:19 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Omnivorous
12-29-2015 9:00 PM


Omni writes:
Quite aside from the context of this thread's debate, I just want to point out that this is hogwash.
Many people--spiritual teachers, philosophers, kings, slaves, poets, generals, artists, dramatists, religion founders, even fictional characters, courtesans and gods neither of us believe in--have managed to be remembered and have influence without the extra pizzazz of resurrection.
So curb your enthusiasm.
Jesus contended that he was the Jewish messiah. As I understand it we know of about 15 other messianic movements of that era and with some of them having accomplished significant, although brief, military victories. Who, other than the odd historian knows about them today, let alone worship them?
We don't have anything he wrote, his followers were at the bottom of the social order in a small oppressed nation and had no influence in his life time outside of the Jewish world which had rejected Him.

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 91 by Omnivorous, posted 12-29-2015 9:00 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by Omnivorous, posted 12-30-2015 4:31 PM GDR has replied

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


Message 111 of 478 (775272)
12-30-2015 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by kbertsche
12-29-2015 11:07 PM


kbertsche writes:
Denis' view of inspiration is quite conservative. He holds to the verbal, plenary inspiration of Scripture. His view is that the writers DID get it all correct. But he distinguishes between the timeless "message" of Scripture and the temporal and cultural "incidental" details which were used to communicate the message to the original audience.
That is what I remember from his book. I still don't understand how people can understand that the God, whose word and wisdom is incarnate Jesus, with his message of love your enemy, could also having commended genocide and public stoning even for minor offences. The two positions can't be harmonized.

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 94 by kbertsche, posted 12-29-2015 11:07 PM kbertsche has not replied

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


Message 112 of 478 (775277)
12-30-2015 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Tanypteryx
12-30-2015 12:33 AM


Tanypteryx writes:
What if Elenor Roosevelt had wings? I take it you really don't expect an answer from me.
Sure, because there is no answer that can be proven to be correct. We just form our beliefs based on what we can know, with the point being that this universe as we perceive exists, and either we are here because of an intelligence outside of our perceivable universe or we are here by mindless natural processes.
Tanypteryx writes:
No, that isn't the point. The point is that there is no reason we should in any context expect particles to have minds so it is ridiculous to keep referring to them as mindless.
They are just particles period, and we are made up more of electromagnetic fields between electrons than particles themselves.
Of course, but I just want to make it clear that when I use that expression I am emphasizing that what I am referring to is the belief that all of the processes leading to the world we perceive today were mindless.
If the theistic position is correct then evolution, even if it all happens naturally without mindful intervention, is still at its root the result of a mindful entity.
Tanypteryx writes:
I agree we are alive in this Universe, but that doesn't suggest an overmind to me. If such an entity exists it has left no trace that would convince everyone. There is no discernable difference between an overmind entity that leaves no trace and no overmind entity at all.
My point is still that we are alive in this universe which prompts the question of why is that so. All of us would consider our computers or any other human product as evidence that somebody with intelligence assembled it. It is my belief that we can look upon our own bodies the same way. Yes it is belief but I don't accept that it is an irrational belief.
Also of course as a Christian I contend that God left more than a "trace" in Jesus which didn't convince everyone but has convinced many.

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 95 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-30-2015 12:33 AM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-30-2015 6:34 PM GDR has not replied

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


Message 113 of 478 (775278)
12-30-2015 6:16 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by PaulK
12-30-2015 2:58 AM


PaulK writes:
Since evolution is the inevitable consequence of a population of imperfect replicators the only thing to be explained is the existence of said replicators. Once the population exists it will evolve and no pre-existing intelligence is required.
I am very careful not to discuss evolution in any detail as a am highly unqualified to do so. However, I understand that the process that evolutionary changes have been caused by random mutations. If I have this right we would be unable to perceive whether any specific mutation was externally interfered with or not, which is not to say that it is required.
From a naturalist POV we would also require some process to bring about the existence of the replicators, and a process for that process and so on.
PaulK writes:
No. I responded because you dishonestly attacked the atheist position. Indeed your only defence is that you find your views more plausible - a purely personal opinion. Attacking opposing views while not putting your own up for examination is no honest defence.
I have put up my own position numerous times and if I have to keep repeating it in every thread I'll run out of time to participate. A while back I started a thread on my beliefs which sounds egotistical but I did it in an attempt to not have to keep repeating things over and over for which I didn't have the time.
Here is a link to that thread. My Beliefs- GDR Good luck as it wound up with 1324 posts.
But yes, I do contend that my views are more plausible, and yes, I agree that is simply my belief, and that others, like yourself, disagree and have different beliefs.
The good news for me if that if I'm right I'll be able to say I told you so in the next life, but if you're right you just won't have that opportunity.
Cheers and have a great 2016.
Edited by GDR, : No reason given.

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 96 by PaulK, posted 12-30-2015 2:58 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by PaulK, posted 12-31-2015 4:01 AM GDR has replied

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


Message 114 of 478 (775279)
12-30-2015 6:26 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by Tangle
12-30-2015 3:14 AM


Tangle writes:
God is a very big deal in your life so you can't understand how for others it is not. For most people in northern Europe and particularly Scandanavia, belief in God is simply not a 'normal' thing. It's just not a consideration. If you asked them whether they believe in god they'd find it a weird thing - it's just not any part of their lives and never has been. If you imagined a world where god hadn't been invented, no-one would believe in God and the term atheist wouldn't make much sense even though it would describe that populations lack of belief. That's as close as I can get to it for you - it's simply an absense that is not substituted by a belief in something else. We don't have a word for a lack of belief in pixies and by not believing in pixies we don't believe in something else instead - it's the same idea.
I can understand as I wasn't always a Christian and I didn't think about it a lot. I would have considered my self a cultural Christian I suppose but if pressed I would have said I was agnostic.
I still don't buy your point about belief. It isn't a lack of belief in pixies, it is my belief that they don't exist. Presumably the atheistic belief is that God doesn't exist. If an individual hasn't considered the notion of god(s) then presumably they wouldn't call themselves atheistic. When someone says, "I am an atheist", they are making a considered statement that they have come to the conclusion or belief that there is no god(s).
You call yourself an atheist, (correct me if I'm wrong), because you have put thought into it and come to a specific conclusion. Both of us hold differing but thoughtful conclusions with, (I assume you would agree), the full knowledge that we could be wrong.

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 97 by Tangle, posted 12-30-2015 3:14 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Tangle, posted 12-31-2015 4:04 AM GDR has replied

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


Message 116 of 478 (775281)
12-30-2015 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Tangle
12-30-2015 3:35 AM


Tangle writes:
You keep telling me what you believe as though this is some kind of evidence or explanation or argument. You must know that it's not. And you don't seem to get the arguments being made because you find it impossible to step outside your beliefs to fully understand the argument. I'll try again.
I get that as quite honestly I feel the same way so I'll try again as well.
Tangle writes:
God knew that Jesus would be murdered because he's all knowing. So, in fact, it was all just a script. God sent Jesus to be murdered, he was murdered because that was in the script. There was no option for him not to be murdered because if he wasn't, there could be no resurrection and therefore no redemption for the human race which was god's intent.
That is not consistent with my belief. I believe that God has established a world where the future is unknown to both God and us. I would contend that either Jesus and God would have been able to predict the crucifixion, or murder if you like, based on the circumstances but that is not the same as knowing what would happen.
We only know what happened because Jesus was crucified, we don't know what would have happened if He hadn't been.
Tangle writes:
ps I know all about Polkinhorne, and Lewis and etc etc. These people - like you - present their beliefs as evidence. They're not. Just because they're celebrities (even notable scientists, which I know you think should impress me, but does not) does not mean they have any special knowledge of god. They don't. They just make stuff up to fit like every other believer.
Actually I didn't bring up Polkinghorne to impress. I brought him up to show that I am not alone in my belief that God has left the future open and could only have believed, as did Jesus that they would crucify Him. Belief is not the same as absolute knowledge.
You call it making stuff up. I don't think that is fair. Yes I change my views when I gain new information, and I respond to what I'm presented with, just as you do. In that thread about my belief for example, Straggler, (haven't seen him around for a while and I'll really miss his posts), caused my look at the question of causation of the universe in a very different way. My theological and political views have changed in the last few years by reading people like N T Wright, Alister McGrath, Polkinghorne and believe it or not by Dawkins and Hitchens.

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 98 by Tangle, posted 12-30-2015 3:35 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Tangle, posted 12-31-2015 3:34 AM GDR has replied
 Message 134 by Hyroglyphx, posted 01-01-2016 2:16 AM GDR has replied

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


Message 117 of 478 (775287)
12-30-2015 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Greatest I am
12-30-2015 11:20 AM


Re: Moderator Provided Information
GIA writes:
But Jesus did not think he was to die in any permanent way.
Yes, I believe that He believed that His life as he knew it would end but that He saw Himself as the one to be presented to the "Ancient of Days" as per Daniel 7. I contend that through prayer and His understanding of the Hebrew scriptures that He believed that He would be resurrected in some fashion into the next life. At any rate His going to the cross was an act of faith not of absolute knowledge.
GIA writes:
The messiah myth stated that the messiah would live and rule over the Jews. Not die and not return. That is why most Jews still wait for their messiah.
It was a lot more than that. The general belief was that the messiah would not only rule over the Jews but that he would lead them in battle against their enemies and vanquish them. Jesus was in line with that except that He said that the enemy wasn't the Romans but evil itself and the the weapon against evil is love. As the embodiment of the Word of God He also embodied Yahweh's return to His people.
Jesus how ever said that it wasn't all about the Jews, but that it went back to the original Abrahamic covenant that Yahweh, and by extension Himself, were there for the world. The point then was that He came to establish a Kingdom for the world that was there for the purpose of influencing the world by reflecting God's love, peace, justice etc into it.

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 102 by Greatest I am, posted 12-30-2015 11:20 AM Greatest I am has not replied

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


Message 118 of 478 (775313)
12-31-2015 2:35 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by Omnivorous
12-30-2015 4:31 PM


Omnivorous writes:
Jesus' personal history prior to crucifixion was already replete with signs and wonders, prophecies and miracles. He healed the sick and raised the dead; he cast out demons and fed a multitude with a few basketsful. He did these things much more publicly than he rose. He gathered a following passionate enough to alarm both the Jewish and the Roman authorities.
Omnivorous writes:
I initially responded to your post on this not because I reject your beliefs about Jesus' resurrection, but because I cannot believe that anyone capable of the pre-crucifixion miracles, performed before many witnesses, would be forgotten unless he rose from the dead to a few.
Here is a list of OT miracles. Old Testament Miracles. I point these out as the the Jews at the time believed in miracles whether or not any of these miracles are accurately reported or not. Jesus seems to have been revered as a prophet. Even the Qu'ran refers to Jesus as a prophet born of a virgin. They, as would I, see these miracles as being done by God the Father through Jesus. John 10:32
quote:
but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many great miracles from the Father.
The Jews had any number of prophets before Jesus with many of them being executed as well. The Gospel stories tell of the disciples deserting Jesus at the time of the crucifixion. It is obvious that they had come to the conclusion that they had backed a losing horse and simply went back to their previous lives dissociating themselves from Jesus as they did not want to suffer a similar fate. So the Jews themselves could see Jesus as a prophet and see God doing miraculous things through Him but not as the messiah, let alone as the embodiment of Yahweh's return to His people, the miracles wouldn't have done it. Crucifixion was considered to be a shameful death and certainly the messiah couldn't possibly suffer such a fate at the hands of the Romans.
So, as we can see from the Gospels the miracles themselves were enough to keep the disciples onside prior to the crucifixion but not at all after the crucifixion until the resurrection. The resurrection meant that death itself no longer had a hold on them and that God's Kingdom had been launched although in a very different manner than what they had anticipated. Also in spite of His shameful death it meant that God had vindicated Jesus and affirmed His life and message.
Also, the miracles themselves would not have been sufficient to cause them to take Jesus' life and message out to the world. If they were going to carry on as followers of Jesus, (which is fairly obvious not the case anyway), it would have been a strictly Jewish thing. They had always felt that Yahweh was there for the Jews and now all of a sudden they are taking this message to Jews and Gentiles alike.
As I pointed out the Gospels tell about the disciples pretty much abandoning Jesus went things went south. They aren't likely to write an account concerning the closest followers of Jesus that show them in a bad light unless those accounts are accurate.
I think that you make a good well thought out point but I contend that the Gospel accounts don't support your position.

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 109 by Omnivorous, posted 12-30-2015 4:31 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Bob Bobber, posted 12-31-2015 2:42 AM GDR has replied
 Message 121 by Bob Bobber, posted 12-31-2015 3:48 AM GDR has not replied
 Message 126 by Omnivorous, posted 12-31-2015 12:50 PM GDR has replied

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


(1)
Message 142 of 478 (775419)
01-01-2016 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by Bob Bobber
12-31-2015 2:42 AM


Bob Bobber writes:
If i am off topic sorry, but remember Leviticus 26, beginning with verse 40, is the confession Israel would be called upon to make. Israel would also have to accept the remainder of her punishment, that failure under the contract would call for and that would be the seven year tribulation. When John the Baptizer came along, had anything new begun? He simply called upon Israel to change their minds about their righteousness. 

John the Baptizer came in connection with Yahweh’s earthly nation Israel and in accordance with an offer to confess their failure under the contract in order to gain their promised land. That confession itself would be considered a fruit of righteousness in the eyes of Yahweh. The focus during John the Baptizer’s ministry was still Israel and the issue continued to be the land. Nothing had changed except that Israel was being offered the opportunity to confess their failure under the contract. Israel continued to be the focus and the land continued to be the issue.
Israel was singled out not because they were special, but because they had been given a job to do which goes back to the Abrahamic covenant where the Jews were to be a blessing for all.
The message was of course that they were chosen, and again, it wasn't because they were special, it was because they were to spread God's love to the world so that the whole world would be blessed.
Instead the early Jews made it about them and the land with Yahweh being exclusively their god. They then set about attempting to control Yahweh through their military and other means.
I think that as Christians we have the same lesson to learn. God is god of all and not just Christians. Christians aren't special. The more we focus on personal salvation making it all about us, the further we are removed from the mission that we have been given, through the Word of God as embodied in Jesus, which is to lovingly serve God's good creation. It is again like the early Jews who believed that if they strictly followed all the laws that Yahweh would return and give them victory.
This is the problem with inerrancy. In order to maintain that doctrine one winds up focusing on minor or temporary details, and missing the big picture that can be found by reading the Bible as a the human account of the narrative of God working through humans from our earliest accounts to that part of the narrative that climaxes in Jesus.

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 119 by Bob Bobber, posted 12-31-2015 2:42 AM Bob Bobber has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by Bob Bobber, posted 01-01-2016 3:13 PM GDR has not replied
 Message 197 by Faith, posted 01-04-2016 9:24 AM GDR has replied

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


Message 144 of 478 (775423)
01-01-2016 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by Tangle
12-31-2015 3:34 AM


Tangle writes:
There! You've done it again! Make something up - your belief - and present it as evidence.
Not at all. I clearly state that it is my belief with which obviously infers that it is not evidence.
Tangle writes:
You've also done away with one of the major characteristics of a god - omniscience.
Omniscience is about knowing everything there is to know. It is my belief, (which for your benefit is not evidence), that the future is open and unknowable even to God.
If the future is knowable then all of history is pre-ordained. There would be no free will and everything becomes purposeless. This is not the message of the Bible, where we see in the OT Yahweh negotiating with the Jews, nor do we see it in the NT where Jesus exhorts people to change their ways. The whole point of Jesus doing what He did becomes pointless if all history is pre-ordained.
Tangle writes:
But there is no new information possible about either your god or your religion. All there is is new information about the natural not the supernatural. What that's doing is chipping away at the things you believed as science makes some of them look rather daft to make it continue to fit what you want to believe. So now god is no longer all knowing.... What next? Is omnipresence up for grabs?
As I have said, religions are mankind's attempt to understand the nature of god or gods and then working out how that should influence our lives. As a Christian, as I have said before, I have two things that are essential to calling myself a Christian. The first is that God is always good and the second is that He resurrected Jesus from which we can gain a much clearer picture of how we are to interact with His creation and to also give us a glimpse of the final chapter in human history.
With that in mind I view science as a natural theology so that as we learn new things we can gain additional insights of how God is working and has worked in the world.
As far as theology is concerned I learn new things all the time, I change my views and adapt to new information. I gained understanding of God working through us by reading Polkinghorne. N T Wright is a theologian, and a first century historian who is extremely knowledgeable when it comes to understanding what an early Jew would have understood of the books of the Bible within that culture. The additional knowledge I have gained form him has had a large impact on what it is I believe.
So yes, our views should be adjusted as we continue to gain knowledge which is true of the narrative that is the Bible. We can see a progression of the understanding of Yahweh from the rule bound dictatorial god of Leviticus, to the more compassionate god that we see in Isaiah, to the full revelation of God that we see in Jesus.
Tangle writes:
If you keep whittling away at this you'll be an atheist in a few years. Welcome :-)
That's not likely to happen but I actually have learned a lot by listening to atheists. Actually, thinking about Dawkins memes, or social replicators if you like, has given me a clearer understanding of how God's love is spread. People are not just influenced by what we say but by how we interact with others and for that matter the world, which by extension changes the world and lives well into the future or even forever if you like.
I listened to debates between Hitchens and Christians and I some times thought that Hitchens had a better understanding of the nature of God without believing in Him than the people he was debating.
Edited by GDR, : I had missed the last sentence of Tangle's post.

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 120 by Tangle, posted 12-31-2015 3:34 AM Tangle has not replied

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


Message 145 of 478 (775425)
01-01-2016 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by PaulK
12-31-2015 4:01 AM


PaulK writes:
Evolution requires that the replication process does not always make exact copies, and that those differences are at least sometimes inheritable. This is what I mean by "imperfect replicators". Given this, evolution will occur in the absence of any external interference.
Sure, no problem with that, but just as humans are learning to do, it is possible that the process can be interfered with. Possibly God intervened or possibly God simply works with whatever came out of the process. If we had evolved with three eyes and walking on all fours presumably God could have worked through our hearts and minds in the same way I believe He does now.
PaulK writes:
Naturalism does not require an infinite regress.
Sure it does right back to the big bang and that presumably required processes to cause that to happen. (Although in fairness Straggler in another thread had me think differently about the origins of the big bang by pointing out to me the relationship between cause and effect.)
PaulK writes:
Science, in the other hand, is (rightly) reluctant to conclude that we have reached the end of explanation and will continue to look until it is certain we can go no further.
No problem with that.
PaulK writes:
The pint is, of course, that while you claimed to be "only defending" your own views you were in fact only attacking an opposing view. And doing so dishonestly.
Dishonesty denotes a lie. Frankly I don't lie. I am expressing a POV. Very little that we have discussed is based on empirical evidence. We are both expressing our own POV. If you believe I am wrong then correct me but I'd appreciate not being accused of dishonesty.

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 124 by PaulK, posted 12-31-2015 4:01 AM PaulK has not replied

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


Message 148 of 478 (775428)
01-01-2016 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by Tangle
12-31-2015 4:04 AM


Tangle writes:
An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in god. That's it, nothing else. Nothing more complicated than that. No-one knows whether god exists or not, but some people are pretty convinced that he doesn't - I'm one of them - but most atheists will say that they don't know if god exists or not. Nevertheless, they don't have a belief that he does.
Here is what wiki says.
quote:
Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Most inclusively, atheism is the absence of belief that any deities exist. Atheism is contrasted with theism, which, in its most general form, is the belief that at least one deity exists
This pretty much agrees with your position, although frankly I don't get it. Can you explain to me why it is that atheists are so vehemently opposed to saying that they believe that there is nothing but natural processes and that no deity exists. I could just as easily say that I don't believe that humans along with the rest of the world are strictly the result of natural mindless processes.
I would have thought that if you can't make the I believe statement that you would be considered an agnostic. However, this is a matter of interest and in the end we both know where you stand on the subject.
Tangle writes:
Almost all atheists accept that there may be a god. A god can not be ruled out because we have incomplete knowledge of the universe. Most atheists - like me - that actively research and discuss these things have come to the conclusion that there is also no god(s), but in Scandanavia where most people are atheists, it's just a deafault position. Similar to the situation here 500 years ago where Christianity was the default position and to not believe in god would have been nearly impossible. It's just programming. Not something that requires the taking of a position or making a statement for - just life.
Yes, they may believe that religion and church does not have a place in their life and don't really think about it, but that doesn't mean that, in the Scandanvian case, religion doesn't play a role in their life.There are still active religious people that have a voice along with everyone else in our societies and in this case they do have a Judeo/Christian heritage which still has an impact.
Tangle writes:
But I doubt that most church attending Christians have put much thought into it either - that is, thought outside their belief - they just believe because they've been taught to believe. Similarly people who were never taught to believe, mostly don't. If asked they probably wouldn't claim to be atheists, they'd probably say they don't know. Nevertheless, they don't believe in god and are therefore default atheists.
I partially agree. When I was young it was considered the norm to go to church and I agree that it was more by social convention than anything else. Now, it is pretty much the social convention to not attend church, so I think that your statement is not nearly as true as it was in the past.
In the case of the church I also would contend that people are being put in the position where they have to think more and more about why and what they believe. There are a variety of reasons and one of them is the existence of evangelical atheists such as Dawkins and Hitchens. Personally I view this as a good thing.
Edited by GDR, : Percy pointed out that I had missed the letter "a" and atheist became theist. Maybe it could have worked as a subliminal message but it appears that didn't happen.

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 125 by Tangle, posted 12-31-2015 4:04 AM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by Admin, posted 01-01-2016 5:19 PM GDR has replied
 Message 155 by kbertsche, posted 01-01-2016 8:12 PM GDR has replied

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


Message 149 of 478 (775430)
01-01-2016 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by Omnivorous
12-31-2015 12:50 PM


Omnivorous writes:
Yet the founding of other faiths and their persistence over time do support it.
Perhaps, if Yahweh hardened Pharoah's heart, he also made Jesus' Jewish disciples remarkably fickle, despite the miracles they witnessed.
If I shared your faith in the Gospels, no doubt I would agree with your position.
Well I'm not an inerrantist so the idea that God specifically hardened Pharoah's is not consistent with how we see God who's Word and wisdom is embodied by Jesus. Again though, just because God performed miracles through the man Jesus does not make Jesus any more than a prophet, let alone the messiah and particularly not part of the god-head.
Omnivorous writes:
If I shared your faith in the Gospels, no doubt I would agree with your position.
Pity. One thing about the Gospels is that it really is clear that they weren't making it up for some obscure reasons. Nobody really expected anyone to be resurrected into a new form of bodily life in the middle of human history. There was a belief that there would be a general resurrection at the end of time but that was as far as it went. They wouldn't have had women as the first ones at the tomb. There wouldn't be so many minor discrepancies in the accounts which would point to collusion. There is nothing really to be gained and in fact there is much to lose including their lives.
I suggest then that the question is whether or not they got it right or wrong. At that point we just form our own conclusions.
Omnivorous writes:
Have a great New Year, GDR. It's always a pleasure to disagree at length with a calm Christian.
...and a great 2016 to you as well. One of the reasons I like this forum is it gives me the ability to discuss my beliefs calmly with people like yourself who, disagree with me. I have my views on many things changed by this forum and I have learned to better understand how others think and why they believe as they do. Positive forums such as this can be such a great tool for bringing people of different beliefs together. It is so Christian that way.
At any rate thank you for that statement.

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 126 by Omnivorous, posted 12-31-2015 12:50 PM Omnivorous 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