|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 22,884
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 22,884 |
You've attempted to do a couple things above, so lets walk through them.
You've essentially moved on to a conversational version of the "Cosmological Argument". You begin by stating "You inhabit a creation". What I know is that I live in a Universe. To say it is a "creation" is a fallacy of presupposition, that presupposes a creator that has not been established by evidence.
Next you ask if I have any evidence this Universe came from nothing. Here, you are attempting to shift the burden of proof. If Science is unable to prove a specific model for the creation of the Universe, it gets you no close to your proposition that "God did it". Regardless, we do have evidence, and at this moment the model it seems to best support is the Lawrence Krauss model of "A Universe from Nothing".
Next you ask about the first cause, which has it's own problems. Your assumption that the infinite regress of cause and effect ends with your God is just a case of "special pleading". One argument for the cosmological argument is that the universe is too complex to create itself. However intelligence is extremely complex, and an intelligence that can create the universe, micromanage it, all the lives of all the beings within it, through listening to and answering their prayer, would be exponentially more complex then the universe itself, and hence, to complex to cause itself, which leads to the question, "Who created God". Again, the only way I've seen this question avoided is through more "special pleading", and this special pleading also avoids the question of "which god".
As for logic "demanding I admit to a cause", it does no such thing, since you statement is a based on a fallacy known as a "hasty generalization", pairs of virtual particles pop in and our of existence all the time. Islamic apologist go even further, and reject Augustine;s argument all together, because in thir words, "Observation, however shows simply that the alleged effect happens alongside the cause rather through it ... and accordingly, such a correlation is not logically necessary but is rather the outcome of a correlation is not logically necessary but is rather the outcome of mere psychological disposition or habit."
As for what logic demands of God, it demands evidence that he exists, and a presupposition is not evidence.
Keep blowing smoke! The "arguments" you are using to not believe in a deity with knowable attributes is philosophical baloney. You're going to have to do better than that, as the stuff you're trotting out here isn't even held by philosophical atheists anymore. Here's some good books for you that quite well demonstrate the probability of theism, if you're willing to actually deal with the philosophy: Douglas Groothius "Christian Apologetics" Richard Swinburne "The Coherence of Theism" (to be read vis-a-vis JL Mackie "The Miracle of Theism") Anthony Flew "There is a God" DD, That's a pretty broad statement. Can you please be specific about which of my arguments you consider "baloney", and provide your counter argument. No, I won't be more specific, as you are conflating and running roughshod over many arguments at once. For example, you act as though science is not a philosophy. That's foolishness. But it allows you to make "scientific claims" over against religion without having to deal with the underlying philosophical presuppositions. Read Groothuis for yourself, to start. Epistemology is not your strong suit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7 |
Your implication is incorrect. I said I interpret "Genesis" as both literal and figuratively. There is more in Genesis than just the creation account.
As pertaining to the creation account, where in Genesis does it say that Adam and Eve were forbidden from eating "a single apple?" This type of supposition is very telling.
Secondly, even if it were an apple, which you can provide no scientific of philosophical evidence that it was, your argument would not be furthered.
Eternal punishment was and is the consequence of disobedience to revealed truth from an eternal God.
I'm well aware the Bible just identifies it as fruit. We referring to an apple I was just using common parlance. As for what it says about my presuppositions, it actually says nothing about the way in which I actually interpretation of the Eden narrative. Yet somehow, you still think this one act justifies eternal punishment. I'd say it's morality and ethics that are not your strong suit.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7 |
AS, many bible scholars do not believe those sent to hell will suffer forever. They perceive that though the fires of hell burn forever God does not want them to suffer for ever and it is as if one is cast into a lake of fire that burns forever but the poor soul is history and dead in essentially the blink of an eye. I guess that can be a bit of solace to some who would accuse Him of being cruel. Yes, and the Church has also gone back and forth on what happens to children who die too young to accept Jesus. I wouldn't exactly call these a ringing endorsement.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 24,239
Campfire Ranger
|
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 24,239 |
Your implication is incorrect. I said I interpret "Genesis" as both literal and figuratively. There is more in Genesis than just the creation account.
As pertaining to the creation account, where in Genesis does it say that Adam and Eve were forbidden from eating "a single apple?" This type of supposition is very telling.
Secondly, even if it were an apple, which you can provide no scientific of philosophical evidence that it was, your argument would not be furthered.
Eternal punishment was and is the consequence of disobedience to revealed truth from an eternal God.
I'm well aware the Bible just identifies it as fruit. We referring to an apple I was just using common parlance. As for what it says about my presuppositions, it actually says nothing about the way in which I actually interpretation of the Eden narrative. Yet somehow, you still think this one act justifies eternal punishment. I'd say it's morality and ethics that are not your strong suit. How "fair" is it of you to judge God based on what some of His creatures wrote about Him thousands of years ago? The wise, and fair, thing for you to do is to become acquainted with Him yourself before judging Him.
Never holler whoa or look back in a tight place
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,750
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,750 |
Your implication is incorrect. I said I interpret "Genesis" as both literal and figuratively. There is more in Genesis than just the creation account.
As pertaining to the creation account, where in Genesis does it say that Adam and Eve were forbidden from eating "a single apple?" This type of supposition is very telling.
Secondly, even if it were an apple, which you can provide no scientific of philosophical evidence that it was, your argument would not be furthered.
Eternal punishment was and is the consequence of disobedience to revealed truth from an eternal God.
I'm well aware the Bible just identifies it as fruit. We referring to an apple I was just using common parlance. As for what it says about my presuppositions, it actually says nothing about the way in which I actually interpretation of the Eden narrative. Yet somehow, you still think this one act justifies eternal punishment. I'd say it's morality and ethics that are not your strong suit. I would say that judgment, in this case, the infinite supposing to pass judgement on the eternal, is beyond your pay grade.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7 |
Your implication is incorrect. I said I interpret "Genesis" as both literal and figuratively. There is more in Genesis than just the creation account.
As pertaining to the creation account, where in Genesis does it say that Adam and Eve were forbidden from eating "a single apple?" This type of supposition is very telling.
Secondly, even if it were an apple, which you can provide no scientific of philosophical evidence that it was, your argument would not be furthered.
Eternal punishment was and is the consequence of disobedience to revealed truth from an eternal God.
I'm well aware the Bible just identifies it as fruit. We referring to an apple I was just using common parlance. As for what it says about my presuppositions, it actually says nothing about the way in which I actually interpretation of the Eden narrative. Yet somehow, you still think this one act justifies eternal punishment. I'd say it's morality and ethics that are not your strong suit. How "fair" is it of you to judge God based on what some of His creatures wrote about Him thousands of years ago? The wise, and fair, thing for you to do is to become acquainted with Him yourself before judging Him. Well, lets be clear. Since I don't believe the Christian God exists, I'm not actually judging him, I'm judging the morality of the Bronze Age goat herders who wrote the Bible. As for who am I to judge these goat herders? I'm an educated, thinking moral human who refuses to subjugate my morality to a superstitious, animal sacrificing, human sacrificing, genocidal blood thirsty primitives that imposes infinite punishments for finite crimes. If he did exist, the judgement would still be fair, since this is his "perfect book", "directly inspired" etc... which mean nobody wrote anything about him, that he didn't want written about him, and if the Bible is not what he wanted it to be, then he's not much of a god.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7 |
"In order to call something or someone "good" there has to be an absolute standard. Without an absolute standard, no one or nothing is either good or bad."
I don't know about that. I've got a Mark V Weatherby in 257 WBY that I think is just real good.
I didn't have to measure it against ANY standard to develop that opinion.
Life ain't nearly as complicated as some folks make it out to be.
My statements were generic and not directed toward you. I think it is good that you ex daughter-in-law is allowing your grand daughter to attend church. And I think it would be good if she were taking her to church.  Really? You want me sitting next to her in the pews pointing out all the preachers B.S and the parts of the Bible they like to skip?
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7 |
Your implication is incorrect. I said I interpret "Genesis" as both literal and figuratively. There is more in Genesis than just the creation account.
As pertaining to the creation account, where in Genesis does it say that Adam and Eve were forbidden from eating "a single apple?" This type of supposition is very telling.
Secondly, even if it were an apple, which you can provide no scientific of philosophical evidence that it was, your argument would not be furthered.
Eternal punishment was and is the consequence of disobedience to revealed truth from an eternal God.
I'm well aware the Bible just identifies it as fruit. We referring to an apple I was just using common parlance. As for what it says about my presuppositions, it actually says nothing about the way in which I actually interpretation of the Eden narrative. Yet somehow, you still think this one act justifies eternal punishment. I'd say it's morality and ethics that are not your strong suit. I would say that judgment, in this case, the infinite supposing to pass judgement on the eternal, is beyond your pay grade. It's not about my pay grade, it's about my Humanity.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 24,239
Campfire Ranger
|
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 24,239 |
"You want me sitting next to her in the pews pointing out all the preachers B.S and the parts of the Bible they like to skip?" Actually........ that's MY job.  Naw..... I'll tell her like I told her Daddy at that age..... Just assume that Jesus loves you and keep your mind open where God is concerned. As you grow, you will go back and forth in your thinking, but keep your mind open to the possibility that God exists. Any God worth having can convince you of His existence, and once that happens, nothing, or no one, can take that conviction away. He will close your mind on the subject forever after. But He can't/won't operate against a willfully closed mind. Yep..... That's exactly what I'll tell her. Once she asks me about it.
Never holler whoa or look back in a tight place
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,750
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,750 |
Your implication is incorrect. I said I interpret "Genesis" as both literal and figuratively. There is more in Genesis than just the creation account.
As pertaining to the creation account, where in Genesis does it say that Adam and Eve were forbidden from eating "a single apple?" This type of supposition is very telling.
Secondly, even if it were an apple, which you can provide no scientific of philosophical evidence that it was, your argument would not be furthered.
Eternal punishment was and is the consequence of disobedience to revealed truth from an eternal God.
I'm well aware the Bible just identifies it as fruit. We referring to an apple I was just using common parlance. As for what it says about my presuppositions, it actually says nothing about the way in which I actually interpretation of the Eden narrative. Yet somehow, you still think this one act justifies eternal punishment. I'd say it's morality and ethics that are not your strong suit. I would say that judgment, in this case, the infinite supposing to pass judgement on the eternal, is beyond your pay grade. It's not about my pay grade, it's about my Humanity. In either case, it is deficient.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,750
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,750 |
"You want me sitting next to her in the pews pointing out all the preachers B.S and the parts of the Bible they like to skip?" Actually........ that's MY job. Naw..... I'll tell her like I told her Daddy at that age..... Just assume that Jesus loves you and keep your mind open where God is concerned. As you grow, you will go back and forth in your thinking, but keep your mind open to the possibility that God exists. Any God worth having can convince you of His existence, and once that happens, nothing, or no one, can take that conviction away. He will close your mind on the subject forever after. But He can't/won't operate against a willfully closed mind. Yep..... That's exactly what I'll tell her. Once she asks me about it. Sage advice.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7 |
"You want me sitting next to her in the pews pointing out all the preachers B.S and the parts of the Bible they like to skip?" Actually........ that's MY job. Naw..... I'll tell her like I told her Daddy at that age..... Just assume that Jesus loves you and keep your mind open where God is concerned. As you grow, you will go back and forth in your thinking, but keep your mind open to the possibility that God exists. Any God worth having can convince you of His existence, and once that happens, nothing, or no one, can take that conviction away. He will close your mind on the subject forever after. But He can't/won't operate against a willfully closed mind. Yep..... That's exactly what I'll tell her. Once she asks me about it. You are being more fair then most Christian parents. I'd say you pass the "Hitchen's Test" for not trying to actively brain wash her into believing, and trying to let her make up her own mind. Good for you!! And ultimately, good for her.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,468
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,468 |
"You want me sitting next to her in the pews pointing out all the preachers B.S and the parts of the Bible they like to skip?" Actually........ that's MY job. Naw..... I'll tell her like I told her Daddy at that age..... Just assume that Jesus loves you and keep your mind open where God is concerned. As you grow, you will go back and forth in your thinking, but keep your mind open to the possibility that God exists. Any God worth having can convince you of His existence, and once that happens, nothing, or no one, can take that conviction away. He will close your mind on the subject forever after. But He can't/won't operate against a willfully closed mind. Yep..... That's exactly what I'll tell her. Once she asks me about it. Excellent advice. She's a fortunate young lady.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 24,239
Campfire Ranger
|
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 24,239 |
It worked with her father and aunt. Eleven years at U.T. at Austin exposed my son to a lot of liberal and Atheistic brainwashing, and it worked............ for a while. We just avoided all talk of spiritual matters during those years. Then he developed his own relationship with - and concept of - God.
A person who has never allowed themselves to believe in the possibility of a universe with no God, or, more specifically, allowed themselves to visit the possibility that Jesus Christ is NOT the personification of God may not have the conviction necessary to overcome a real trial of faith.
I believe EVERY person must come to some sort of understanding - AS AN ADULT - with the God that made him if he is to enjoy all that life has to offer.
An Atheist may be reasonably content, but he will never experience that "Peace which passes all understanding" until, or unless,he comes to terms with his Creator.
Of course, you can't miss what you never had. [editorial "you"]
Those Christians who view their relationship with Christ as a way to avoid Hell are in the same boat as the Atheist as far as that "Peace" is concerned.
Never holler whoa or look back in a tight place
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 19,825 Likes: 3
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 19,825 Likes: 3 |
...A person who has never allowed themselves to believe in the possibility of a universe with no God, or, more specifically, allowed themselves to visit the possibility that Jesus Christ is NOT the personification of God may not have the conviction necessary to overcome a real trial of faith.
I believe EVERY person must come to some sort of understanding - AS AN ADULT - with the God that made him if he is to enjoy all that life has to offer.
An Atheist may be reasonably content, but he will never experience that "Peace which passes all understanding" until, or unless,he comes to terms with his Creator.
Of course, you can't miss what you never had. [editorial "you"]
Those Christians who view their relationship with Christ as a way to avoid Hell are in the same boat as the Atheist as far as that "Peace" is concerned. Excellent post, Gene! I am sitting about eight feet from a person who has that "Peace which passes all understanding". My Mom. She is battling liver cancer right now and is an inspiration to all who meet her. Her faith is something to behold. It is unfortunate that so many people will not open their minds to accept even the possibility that God is not only real, but DOES have personal relationships with us. Ed
"Not in an open forum, where truth has less value than opinions, where all opinions are equally welcome regardless of their origins, rationale, inanity, or truth, where opinions are neither of equal value nor decisive." Ken Howell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301 |
Those Christians who view their relationship with Christ as a way to avoid Hell are in the same boat as the Atheist as far as that "Peace" is concerned.
Well stated! I am not a follower of Christ because I fear Hell, I am a Christian because I love Christ.
The first time I shot myself in the head...
Meniere's Sucks Big Time!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 17,094 Likes: 5
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 17,094 Likes: 5 |
Christ didn't come and use fear to make us obey. He gave brotherly advice.
He didn't come to be worshiped but to share our humanity.
He could have commanded both.
Religion demands both and that we grovel in repentance...
God is probably sick of the whining and wish those would get up, quit apologizing and act like men who can control themselves.
Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,750
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,750 |
Christ didn't come and use fear to make us obey. He gave brotherly advice.
He didn't come to be worshiped but to share our humanity.
He could have commanded both.
Religion demands both and that we grovel in repentance...
God is probably sick of the whining and wish those would get up, quit apologizing and act like men who can control themselves.
Kent You are not describing the Christ of the Bible. If you read his sermons, he preached more on hell then on heaven. He called the Scribes and Pharisees "hypocrites." He even referred to them as "whited sepulchers full of dead mens' bones." Those who heard him speak did not comment on his brotherly advise, they commented that he spoke as one "having authority." He took a whip and drove the money chargers out of the temple. Christ himself said that he came "to call sinners to repentance." If I misunderstood your meaning, please excuse.
Last edited by GeorgiaBoy; 03/03/15.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,178 Likes: 7 |
Christ didn't come and use fear to make us obey. He gave brotherly advice.
He didn't come to be worshiped but to share our humanity.
He could have commanded both.
Religion demands both and that we grovel in repentance...
God is probably sick of the whining and wish those would get up, quit apologizing and act like men who can control themselves.
Kent You are not describing the Christ. If you read his sermons, he preached more hell then on heaven. Those who heard him speak did not comment on his brotherly advise, they commented that he spoke as one "having authority." Christ himself said the he came "to call sinners to repentance." If I misunderstood your meaning, please excuse. GB is correct. Hell is not a Jewish concept. Hell was introduced at the time of Christ.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 46,965
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 46,965 |
Hell is not a Jewish concept. Hell was introduced at the time of Christ. Wrong, as is most everything you claim about Christianity and Judaism. Deut 32:22 22 For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains. KJV 2 Sam 22:6 6 The sorrows of hell compassed me about; the snares of death prevented me; KJV Job 11:8 8 It is as high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know? KJV Job 26:6 6 Hell is naked before him, and destruction hath no covering. KJV Prov 27:20 20 Hell and destruction are never full; so the eyes of man are never satisfied. KJV Prov 5:5 5 Her feet go down to death; her steps take hold on hell. KJV Isa 14:9 9 Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations. KJV There's another couple dozen,or so. More than in the New Testament.
We may know the time Ben Carson lied, but does anyone know the time Hillary Clinton told the truth?
Immersing oneself in progressive lieberalism is no different than bathing in the sewage of Hell.
|
|
|
|
|
255 members (160user, 260Remguy, 06hunter59, 257 roberts, 1badf350, 2UP, 22 invisible),
1,975
guests, and
1,105
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,194,327
Posts18,526,528
Members74,031
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
