Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-26-2019 5:51 PM
30 online now:
DrJones*, dwise1, edge, GDR, JonF, kjsimons, Percy (Admin), Tangle, Tanypteryx (9 members, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 854,836 Year: 9,872/19,786 Month: 2,294/2,119 Week: 330/724 Day: 55/114 Hour: 1/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
3Next
Author Topic:   God's motivation
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 16 of 33 (633569)
09-14-2011 7:04 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by rueh
09-14-2011 3:41 PM


How would we know? Can we, from our limited perspective of the universe really rule out that the universe has no function? Would a quark that is part of a toaster know that it is not part of a toaster?

Well, my hypothesis is provisional, and I shall change my mind if I ever see a slice of bread the size of the Local Group.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by rueh, posted 09-14-2011 3:41 PM rueh has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by rueh, posted 09-15-2011 7:26 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
rueh
Member (Idle past 1834 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


(1)
Message 17 of 33 (633630)
09-15-2011 7:26 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Dr Adequate
09-14-2011 7:04 PM


dr Adequate writes:

I shall change my mind if I ever see a slice of bread the size of the Local Group.

That's a good one. Seriously though. How can we rule out function for the universe, if we cannot view it from a total perspective. To me it seems that most examples of a thing with function takes an outside perspective to see what it is that it functions as. For the universe, if it did have a function, you would also need an "outside" perspective through space and time. I just don't think we can arbitrarily rule out function for the universe, even if we could never know what that function is.

Edited by rueh, : No reason given.

Edited by rueh, : No reason given.


'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-14-2011 7:04 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Butterflytyrant, posted 09-21-2011 11:06 AM rueh has responded

  
rueh
Member (Idle past 1834 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


Message 18 of 33 (633634)
09-15-2011 8:26 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by New Cat's Eye
09-14-2011 4:14 PM


Well to be fair, he did say an obvious function...

True he did say that. I just don't think that we can rule out that God's motivation for creation could be to create a universe with a function, just because that function is not obvious. It's not obvious to the cog in a machine that it is part of the machine.

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-14-2011 4:14 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-15-2011 10:02 AM rueh has responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 33 (633649)
09-15-2011 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by rueh
09-15-2011 8:26 AM


True he did say that. I just don't think that we can rule out that God's motivation for creation could be to create a universe with a function, just because that function is not obvious. It's not obvious to the cog in a machine that it is part of the machine.

That's a fair point, but I haven't seen anyone saying otherwise.

DA even went on to speculate some possibilities:

quote:
(1) It's an experiment...
(2) It's an ornament...
(3) It's a form of reality TV...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by rueh, posted 09-15-2011 8:26 AM rueh has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by rueh, posted 09-15-2011 11:41 AM New Cat's Eye has acknowledged this reply

  
iano
Member (Idle past 114 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 20 of 33 (633651)
09-15-2011 10:15 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Butterflytyrant
09-12-2011 11:22 AM


Butterflytyrant writes:

I really enjoyed reading your response. I think you have captured quite a special part of Christianity.

'Initial conditions' is an interesting topic to focus on - given how much flows from it. How many objections to Christianity find their root in jumping in part-way along, and so, suffer from poor foundations.

-

Not only is it a particularly admirable and becoming sentiment but it very neatly deals with the issue of free will puts the blame of all sin on man.

It's the saving function of sin that I find neat. Yes, there is condemnation attaching to sin but until 'the fat lady sings', a man's sin is utilized as a lever by God to try to him free him away from the clutches of his sin.

Man breaks God's law (the laws restraint is exercised through conscience) and suffers consequences (pain, distress, guilt, shame). But it's the build up this pain, the pressure it exerts on man, which is utilized by God in his attempt to bring man to salvation. Fighting fire with fire, as it were.

-

If I were not an atheist, I believe that this sort of idea would sit very well with me. It would give me quite a sense of satisfaction. It would make it easier to relate to God.

I wonder what a person does when all their objections have been neutralized?

-

Is this your personal interpretation or is this based on scripture? Is it a particular denominations position?

It's based on my own, first-hand experience of relationship God and when I glean from the pages of the bible. I don't think I'd be unique in holding to something approaching this view.

Note that I'm stripping the story clear of the harsh realities I experience in my life as a believer, in order to give the distilled, helicopter-view of what I think God's motivation is. The very last line of the U2 song, "In God's country" sums up the day-to-day reality well. It tells us of Bono experiencing being "burned by the fire of love". Sign up with God and burned you most certainly will be by the experience. It will hurt.

-

I dont have a choice about whether I believe or not. I have never had any faith. From what I understand, I will never have the chance of entry into heaven. I will never be able to seriously attempt to communicate with God. I was made this way. my hearts desire is to live as a good man. I dont break any serious laws. I love my family. I am a good citizen. But, regardless of how good my life is, if I cannot manage to make a serious attempt at talking to God. I am hellbound. This may not be how your particular variant of the church works though. Many are more flexible. Faith seems to be a requirement though.

My variant would see faith (as you appear to understand it) as something granted to you by God after you have been saved. In other words, after you are saved, God would supply you with the evidence you need to believe that, e.g. he exists / Christ is your saviour / the bible is the word of God / etc. Clearly that kind of faith isn't saving faith since the above is something given to you after you have been saved.

Saving faith - the type you should be interested in - would appear to involve something that you can form beliefs about - quite aside from your having to believe anything with a 'religious' element to it. For example:

Some people will maintain the view you currently have of yourself ("not perfect but all told, not such a bad chap - a 7 or 8 out of 10 perhaps") to the very end. An alternative is to be persuaded that the pride and selfishness that motivates so many of your thoughts and actions is a constant companion - a rabid dog that demands being fed by you all day every day. The only difference between the two types of person is that the one suppresses truths that God attempts to bring to light (and in so doing, evades the very conclusion of the rabid dog within) and the other one has given up suppressing. Stop suppressing truth and a life of shit will surely rise to the surface. Nothing is guaranteed to bring you to your knees faster than being swamped in a sea of truth about yourself

Then there's the response you form to an emptiness 'installed in you' by God. An emptiness that can't be filled with anything the world has to offer. You can attempt to fill it and pretend you are satisfied. You can try say that such emptiness is just a part of life and that you just need to grin and bear it. You can create any number of purposes and meanings for a life that insists there is meaning .. or go the nihilistic route and say there is no ultimate meaning.

Those are but two of the ways in which a person can construct their ultimate response to Gods inquiry of them. They can believe him or disbelieve him on these matters - without a requirement that they've even heard of Him.

Neat, huh?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Butterflytyrant, posted 09-12-2011 11:22 AM Butterflytyrant has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Butterflytyrant, posted 09-21-2011 11:44 AM iano has responded
 Message 25 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-21-2011 12:25 PM iano has not yet responded

  
rueh
Member (Idle past 1834 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


(1)
Message 21 of 33 (633659)
09-15-2011 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by New Cat's Eye
09-15-2011 10:02 AM


Yes I see how I misread what Dr. Adequate was saying. When I read his first sentence it seemed like he was suggesting since the function wasn't obvious that it did not have a function. The possibilities he provides following that though would be examples of a universe with function. So I see how he is still suggesting a functional universe. My apologies to Dr. Adequate for not understanding his point.

Edited by rueh, : No reason given.


'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-15-2011 10:02 AM New Cat's Eye has acknowledged this reply

  
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 2595 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 22 of 33 (634411)
09-21-2011 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by rueh
09-15-2011 7:26 AM


Hello Rueh,

How can we rule out function for the universe, if we cannot view it from a total perspective.

This is an interesting idea.

I wonder how humanity would handle itself if we were to discover that we were actually created for some rather mundane function. Dr A's suggestions would probably leave us fairly deflated.

Here we are, thinking we are pretty grand, then we find out that we are in fact, just an ornament. Or a reality TV show. We would probably find out if we were cancelled.

In general, we seem to think we are pretty damn important. Many believe that we may be unique in this universe. Many believe that we were created for a special purpose. That we are loved and cared for by a higher power.

It would certainly deflate some egos if we were the equivelant of a high school science project. And that we were actually just one of twenty treatements in that experiment.

What effect would this have on athiests I wonder?

If athiests discovered that the big bang was actually the start of an experiment and that there was someone (something?) watching us with mild interest, what would we do with that information?

What would the religious people of the world do?


I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong

Butterfly, AKA, mallethead - Dawn Bertot

"Superstitions and nonsense from the past should not prevent us from making progress. If we hold ourselves back, we admit that our fears are more powerful than our abilities." Hunters of Dune Herbert & Anderson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by rueh, posted 09-15-2011 7:26 AM rueh has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by rueh, posted 09-21-2011 11:56 AM Butterflytyrant has acknowledged this reply

    
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 2595 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 23 of 33 (634421)
09-21-2011 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by iano
09-15-2011 10:15 AM


Hello Iano,

I wonder what a person does when all their objections have been neutralized?

a rational person would capitulate.

An irrational person would continue to object without seeing or believing that their objections had been neutralized.

Some people will maintain the view you currently have of yourself ("not perfect but all told, not such a bad chap - a 7 or 8 out of 10 perhaps") to the very end.

Depending upon whose method of measurement is being used my 'score' could range from 0 to 10. My support of gay marriage could reduce my score to 0 by some even if I was devoutly religious and given a 10 by others. Personally, I would give myself a stout 7.

An alternative is to be persuaded that the pride and selfishness that motivates so many of your thoughts and actions is a constant companion - a rabid dog that demands being fed by you all day every day. The only difference between the two types of person is that the one suppresses truths that God attempts to bring to light (and in so doing, evades the very conclusion of the rabid dog within) and the other one has given up suppressing. Stop suppressing truth and a life of shit will surely rise to the surface. Nothing is guaranteed to bring you to your knees faster than being swamped in a sea of truth about yourself

Thats the thing. I own my 'sins'. I am fully aware of and accept all of my selfish desires and am comfortable with my sense of pride. My sins are mine to carry and mine alone. I know what they are better than anyone. They do not bring me to my knees. I accept them. I do not hoist my sins onto anyone elses shoulders. No one can take my sins away from me. I would not allow it even if I beleived the offers from various religions to be true. I believe it would be immoral of me to pass my sins off onto anyone. So I would not accept the offer for Jesus to take my sins from me. I dont need or want a whipping boy.

Then there's the response you form to an emptiness 'installed in you' by God. An emptiness that can't be filled with anything the world has to offer. You can attempt to fill it and pretend you are satisfied. You can try say that such emptiness is just a part of life and that you just need to grin and bear it. You can create any number of purposes and meanings for a life that insists there is meaning .. or go the nihilistic route and say there is no ultimate meaning.

I dont feel this emptiness. I feel stuffed to the brim and often annoyed that I cant jam more in. The universe around me, the people I know, the life I lead etc all fill me completely. I am not pretending I am satisfied. I dont know if satisfied is the right word. I dont think I will ever be satiated because there is always more to experience, more to see, stronger love, joy and amusement to feel. I think it would be a great pity if I ever feel satisfied. Satisfied seems rather bland. I want to be hungry for more.

I also dont beleive that we are all entitled to a life of meaning. We have to work to have a life of meaning.

Those are but two of the ways in which a person can construct their ultimate response to Gods inquiry of them. They can believe him or disbelieve him on these matters - without a requirement that they've even heard of Him.

So from my responses, would I get a shot at heaven?


I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong

Butterfly, AKA, mallethead - Dawn Bertot

"Superstitions and nonsense from the past should not prevent us from making progress. If we hold ourselves back, we admit that our fears are more powerful than our abilities." Hunters of Dune Herbert & Anderson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by iano, posted 09-15-2011 10:15 AM iano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by iano, posted 09-21-2011 12:26 PM Butterflytyrant has responded
 Message 32 by Dawn Bertot, posted 09-27-2011 5:16 PM Butterflytyrant has acknowledged this reply
 Message 33 by 1.61803, posted 09-27-2011 5:48 PM Butterflytyrant has acknowledged this reply

    
rueh
Member (Idle past 1834 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


Message 24 of 33 (634423)
09-21-2011 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Butterflytyrant
09-21-2011 11:06 AM


Hello Butterflytyrant,

Butterflytyrant writes:

I wonder how humanity would handle itself if we were to discover that we were actually created for some rather mundane function. Dr A's suggestions would probably leave us fairly deflated


Mundane functions can have a larger impact when viewed in totality I guess.
Butterflytyrant writes:

Here we are, thinking we are pretty grand, then we find out that we are in fact, just an ornament. Or a reality TV show. We would probably find out if we were cancelled.

I think most people have a humble view of humanity whether they are atheistic or theistic. For the atheist it is hard to view the totality of the universe and place any special connection to a tiny planet in one backwoods section of one galaxy. For the theist it is humility placed in respect to God. Either one leaves humanity as a very small piece to a very big puzzle. Of course there are exceptions to everything. That is just how I view it.
Butterflytyrant writes:

It would certainly deflate some egos if we were the equivelant of a high school science project.

I guess that depends on what grade we receive for the experiment

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX
Opening your mind to imagination shouldn't close it to reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Butterflytyrant, posted 09-21-2011 11:06 AM Butterflytyrant has acknowledged this reply

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 25 of 33 (634425)
09-21-2011 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by iano
09-15-2011 10:15 AM


It's the saving function of sin that I find neat. Yes, there is condemnation attaching to sin but until 'the fat lady sings', a man's sin is utilized as a lever by God to try to him free him away from the clutches of his sin.

Neat idea. I think I'll copy it. I think I'll let my best friend get addicted to heroin and then utilize her attachment to heroin as a lever to break her away from heroin.

Now some people might find this scheme rather convoluted, but then I'm copying the method of an omniscient being and they're not.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by iano, posted 09-15-2011 10:15 AM iano has not yet responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 114 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 26 of 33 (634426)
09-21-2011 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Butterflytyrant
09-21-2011 11:44 AM


Butterflytyrant writes:

a rational person would capitulate.

You sound rational. Stick around so..

-

Personally, I would give myself a stout 7.

Like I say, it's a pretty typical self-assessment that folk arrive at (even amongst serious criminals like rapists and murderers). Those that come to belief in the Christian God will in so coming (the Christian God indicates) have a somewhat dimmer view of themselves. The question is, whose self-assessment is objectively the correct one.

"Blessed are the poor in spirit (or 'have a very dim view of their moral worth') for theirs is the kingdom of God"

-

Thats the thing. I own my 'sins'. I am fully aware of and accept all of my selfish desires and am comfortable with my sense of pride. My sins are mine to carry and mine alone. I know what they are better than anyone. They do not bring me to my knees. I accept them. I do not hoist my sins onto anyone elses shoulders. No one can take my sins away from me. I would not allow it even if I beleived the offers from various religions to be true. I believe it would be immoral of me to pass my sins off onto anyone. So I would not accept the offer for Jesus to take my sins from me. I dont need or want a whipping boy.

You are comfortable with your sin and selfishness and the burden of your sin appears to weigh lightly on your shoulders. As mentioned, the technical term for the means whereby you maintain this position is called "suppression of truth".

The word 'suppression' and 'truth' are not accidental words. If sin truly is an ugly, stinking thing and you suppress it out of view then of course you won't recoil from it. Of course you'll live in harmony with it. Of course you won't see any problem with it.

The outcome of the truth about your sin rising to the surface and into (your) full view isn't that you'll deign to accept Jesus' offer. Instead, the horror of it will have you run headlong and in desparation into his arms. All that has to happen is that

a) your sin be tremendously ugly and smelly

b) your sin become completely visible to you.

Both of the above are eminently possible so I wouldn't be too dogmatic on what can or cannot occur.

-

I dont feel this emptiness. I feel stuffed to the brim and often annoyed that I cant jam more in.

If you don't feel you can do enough to fill yourself to satisfaction then you're agreeing exactly with what I'm saying. If there always is a hunger that can't quite be filled then you are singing from the same hymnsheet as me.

Now I'll grant that this hunger isn't necessarily one that drives you to the distraction that has you kneel at the Lords feet. Not all will be saved and not all will be saved this minute. But you are testifying to the presence of the basic elements involved in salvation:

I think it would be a great pity if I ever feel satisfied. Satisfied seems rather bland. I want to be hungry for more.

With God there is plenty more to find out, plenty more to hunger for. But it's a different kind of appetite and a different kind of filling. The things of the world aren't designed to fill in the way the Lord does.

-

So from my responses, would I get a shot at heaven?

Your responses are those of a lost person - there's nothing particularly unusual in their general thrust. All lost people get a chance of salvation.

Although I wouldn't have the temerity to suggest where you might be along the path, I'd wager that someone who scored themselves a good degree less that you do and who found the worlds treasures didn't fill an ache inside ... was further down it than you yourself. That's the territory I occupied shortly before I fell to my knees and my story would sound a common resonance with those who are found.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Butterflytyrant, posted 09-21-2011 11:44 AM Butterflytyrant has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Butterflytyrant, posted 09-27-2011 3:10 AM iano has not yet responded

  
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 2595 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


(1)
Message 27 of 33 (635130)
09-27-2011 3:10 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by iano
09-21-2011 12:26 PM


Sorry about the slow reply
Hello again Iano,

Even if God were proven to exist. I am not sure I would want to worship him anyway. If he were proven to exist, there would still be just as many interpretations as to which way he is to be worshipped and what exactly consitutes sin.

my comment - Personally, I would give myself a stout 7.

your reply - Like I say, it's a pretty typical self-assessment that folk arrive at (even amongst serious criminals like rapists and murderers). Those that come to belief in the Christian God will in so coming (the Christian God indicates) have a somewhat dimmer view of themselves. The question is, whose self-assessment is objectively the correct one.

"Blessed are the poor in spirit (or 'have a very dim view of their moral worth') for theirs is the kingdom of God"

I would agree with this. I know a murderer and he still believes he is a good person. I happen to agree with him. He is a good person. He did one terrible thing. But he is still a good person. He will be in jail for the next 10 or so years before he even gets a chance to get out. He is a good person. I wont go into the detail but if I was in his particular situation, I would probably have commited murder as well. Does it make me a bad person knowing this? Am I a bad person because I would do the same thing or do I only become a bad person if I actually do it?

If Gods motivation was to put us to some sort of a test, then I have not passed this test. If, in this specific instance, I was to be tested, I am pretty sure I would fail. So is God purposfully allowing me to avoid this test in order to pass? Is God giving me a get out of hell free card?

I think it is pretty rough that in order to be blessed you have to have a dim view of your own moral worth. That seems a little masochistic to me.

You are comfortable with your sin and selfishness and the burden of your sin appears to weigh lightly on your shoulders. As mentioned, the technical term for the means whereby you maintain this position is called "suppression of truth".

This is not true. I am not comfortable with my sins. Also, the burden of my sins does not weigh lightly on my shoulders. It is important to note that they are squarely on my shoulders. I will not and would not want to have someone else carry my sins. I am not suppressing anything. I carry my sins because they are mine to carry. They are neither light nor comfortable. But bear them I must.

The word 'suppression' and 'truth' are not accidental words. If sin truly is an ugly, stinking thing and you suppress it out of view then of course you won't recoil from it. Of course you'll live in harmony with it. Of course you won't see any problem with it.

Wouldnt handing your sins over to someone else and carrying on guilt free be considered to be suppressing them out of view? I do not live in harmony with my sins. I attempt to atone for them. I will not pass my sins onto another to deal with them for me. That is suppression. That is passing the buck.

The outcome of the truth about your sin rising to the surface and into (your) full view isn't that you'll deign to accept Jesus' offer. Instead, the horror of it will have you run headlong and in desparation into his arms. All that has to happen is that

a) your sin be tremendously ugly and smelly

b) your sin become completely visible to you.

Both of the above are eminently possible so I wouldn't be too dogmatic on what can or cannot occur.

If the Earth was created in order for us all to go through this big trail then it would be a pretty cruel deal. A region is created, where individuals who are predisposed to sin are placed. Then commanded not to follow their own desires. Desires that were part of our design. When we do sin, we get to happily pass these sins of onto another. Never having to actually pay for them ourselves. Only if we do these things do we get rewarded. Thats a pretty terrible game.

If you don't feel you can do enough to fill yourself to satisfaction then you're agreeing exactly with what I'm saying. If there always is a hunger that can't quite be filled then you are singing from the same hymnsheet as me.

Now I'll grant that this hunger isn't necessarily one that drives you to the distraction that has you kneel at the Lords feet. Not all will be saved and not all will be saved this minute. But you are testifying to the presence of the basic elements involved in salvation:

Why would god fill me with an inate sense of curiosity and an above average brain, then tell me that that exact curiosity is a sign that I need god? Why make me a certain way if that is not going to be acceptable? I would never approach God if I new that I would never feel the desire to expore and know more. It is one of the greatest parts of my life.

With God there is plenty more to find out, plenty more to hunger for. But it's a different kind of appetite and a different kind of filling. The things of the world aren't designed to fill in the way the Lord does.

What if I have no interest in what he is selling? I currently have no desire to explore the Christian religion. What if the desire never comes?

Your responses are those of a lost person - there's nothing particularly unusual in their general thrust. All lost people get a chance of salvation.

I dont feel lost. If I dont feel lost, why would I look to be found? If part of Gods motivation for creation was to put us in situations that we would like to be found, then this is also unnappealing. This would mean that God has created an environment that is so shit that we run to him for help. Would it not be better to create a good environment and put the offer on the table. It seems like Gods motivation is to sell us a dubious product at gunpoint.

Although I wouldn't have the temerity to suggest where you might be along the path, I'd wager that someone who scored themselves a good degree less that you do and who found the worlds treasures didn't fill an ache inside ... was further down it than you yourself. That's the territory I occupied shortly before I fell to my knees and my story would sound a common resonance with those who are found.

I may well be on the path. Who knows. I doubt it personally but from what I have read of God, he is a complicated chap. If I had been around for all eternity, I would probably want to liven things up a bit as well. It seems a pity that my own labours to atone for my sins, labours that have improved my sense of self worth, would actually lead me away from God. My attempts to deal with my sins, rather than hoist them unceremoniously onto a 200 years dead prophet, have improved my sense of pesonal worth and dignity. Because I feel better about myself for trying to right my own wrongs, I am actually distancing myself from God. This seems a bit wrong.

I also dont think I will live long enough to see all of the things I want to see in this world. I have a list and I will be very lucky to see it all done before the reaper taps me on the shoulder.

So it appears that because I have big dreams and that I have taken personal responsibility for my sins and actively work to atone for them, I will never get a chance at heaven.

If the opportunity to get into heaven was Gods motivation for making the world, it looks like the deck was stacked against people like me. When he made me, he would have been aware that I was detined to fail. Thats a bit rough wouldnt you say?

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

Edited by AdminPD, : Removed warning


I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong

Butterfly, AKA, mallethead - Dawn Bertot

"Superstitions and nonsense from the past should not prevent us from making progress. If we hold ourselves back, we admit that our fears are more powerful than our abilities." Hunters of Dune Herbert & Anderson


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by iano, posted 09-21-2011 12:26 PM iano has not yet responded

    
1.61803
Member
Posts: 2841
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 28 of 33 (635181)
09-27-2011 3:13 PM


I am that I am.
I go with Reality TV.

God being omnicient and perfect would be perfect in of himself and not need anything. As Captain Kirk said, "What does God need with a starship?"

Love and expression and sharing of love is of course a way for a omnipotent entity to transfer that love on. However again to what end if the end result is pain and suffering enveloped in love.

Does God need love? If God is omnipotent and perfect then God needs nothing. So If God does in someway share humanistic conditions of boredom or loneliness then he is not perfect and all powerful.

The reason de entre is that best given in the bible. "I am that I am. Pretty much says it all.

OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by hooah212002, posted 09-27-2011 3:17 PM 1.61803 has responded

  
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 29 of 33 (635182)
09-27-2011 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by 1.61803
09-27-2011 3:13 PM


Re: I am that I am.
"I am that I am. Pretty much says it all.

It actually says nothing at all. Didn't Popeye say the same thing?

OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by 1.61803, posted 09-27-2011 3:13 PM 1.61803 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by 1.61803, posted 09-27-2011 3:29 PM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply
 Message 31 by Dawn Bertot, posted 09-27-2011 4:36 PM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

    
1.61803
Member
Posts: 2841
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 30 of 33 (635185)
09-27-2011 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by hooah212002
09-27-2011 3:17 PM


Re: I am that I am.
hooah212002 writes:

It actually says nothing at all. Didn't Popeye say the same thing?

Hee. Being cryptically evasive is the cornerstone of politics and religion. Ambiguity is sublime.

Saying "I am that I am." Is basically God telling you to STFU. God need not explain.

OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message by continuing in this vein.
AdminPD

Edited by AdminPD, : Warning


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by hooah212002, posted 09-27-2011 3:17 PM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

  
Prev1
2
3Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019