Malaysia Calls For Ban On "bruce Almighty"

X_Stickman

<!--QuoteBegin--z.x. bogglestiensky+Jul 30 2003, 04:02 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (z.x. bogglestiensky @ Jul 30 2003, 04:02 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> if your girlfriend who you love with all your heart and would die for turns her back on you and denys you ever existed, wouldnt you be angry? as a human, i'm pretty certain (after you got over the initial shock) you would forget about her and start over with a new girl. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I would be upset. I wouldn't kill her, and her whole family. I would start again, but her not loving me does not, in my opinion, constitute murder. Whatever way you look at it, God created humans and gave them free will. Then he killed them all if they didn't believe in him (using their free will). There is simply no way of denying that if God is real, he has mental issues. He created humans with free will, then despises it when they use that free will to do anything other than worship him. It's like giving a child an Ice Cream, then putting a bullet in his head if he eats it.

Also, my parents had no choice if they were going to baptised. Their parents did it to them when they were like, 1. No choice. Again, showing a major trend in religions as forcing their beliefs on people.

You mentioned you would feel sorry for me on Judgement day, implying that there is some sort of Punishment awaiting me. For what? For using my free will and not believing in "Him" (or her, i mean, no way would a male God put the ball sack on the outside). In this respect, God is no better than, say, Saddam Hussein. That is a hugely Bleasphemous (ffs, can't spell) remark, but think about it: God essentialy forgets about, and punishes, all those who don't believe in him. Precisely what Saddam did. What's the difference? God deserves belief and love? Why? This world Sucks, death, desease, murder everywhere. So, ok, he might have created us. So what? What he has done, if it was compared to a human, is a woman having a baby then dumping the infant in a bin. She would be arrested, God, apparantly, expects people to love him for it.

Now, i don't hate God. I have no problem with religion. People believe what they want to, you know? I don't care. Devil Worshipers, Christians, Jews.... all rank the same, because they all believe in something. I don't try to stop them from believing it. I only really mention my beliefs if i'm asked for them, except in this thread, but that was because i'm bored. In most people's eyes, this would make me a pretty nice guy: I let people get on with what they want to do. But apparantly, God will make me burn in hell for not worshipping him. Actually, i've just thought of something.

This is gonna seem really, really childish. But remember in Black & White, the game. When that hermit doesn't think your creature is big enough for you to be a good God. What would the Christian God do, if all scriptures are to be believed? He'd kill him, and burn his house to the ground. This makes you evil in the game (i've tried).

I try to have fun in my life, i try to make people laugh, often at the expense of myself (dancing in streets, hurting myself etc). I live my life how i want, trying to help others. That is a fairly god life by all accounts, yet i shall be punished for it, because i refuse to believe that God is a nice guy, he cares for us so much he lets things like WWW I and WWW II happen. The holocaust, The Plague etc. He is simply not a nice guy, IF he exists.

I don't know if God exists, i don't deny he does, but i don't think he does either. I've forgotten the word for that (agnostic?). But i do, however, believe there is some truth in religion. If you study each religion, there are similarities that simply can't be conincidences. So, <b>something</b> happened a long time ago, that span off a lot of different ideas. What happened? That is the question. But we have no way of finding out.

I have probably offended a few people with this post, and i am truly sorry if i have. As i said, i never aim to hurt people (that haven't hurt me). But these are my beliefs, that are probably wrong. But as i said, i shall find out when i am dead.

**EDIT**
Just a few corrections**

TeoH

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
There can be no doubt about my own significance. I agree with Descartes: I think, therefore I am. The problem is the significance of the universe. Keep in mind that Descartes was able to escape the trap of solipsism he had constructed for himself <i>only</i> with an appeal to God's benevolence: God wouldn't betray me with a fake world, i.e. "The Matrix". This is the only viable refutation of solipsism I can accept. And refuting it is inevitable, unless you want to arrive in a world of madness where nobody and nothing you see and feel can be certain to exist.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Now i'll admit that i don't study this topic, and had to look up the word Solipsism:

sol·ip·sism

- The theory that the self is the only thing that can be known and verified.
- The theory or view that the self is the only reality.

Based on that - You can't refute solipsism anymore than you can refute the existence of a god or any number of other theories that attempt to explain why we are here, or what is going on. I wouldn't even accept Descartes' refutation.

Refuting it is not inevitable, if you do not see the need to find an overall theory of existence. Which is more or less what i am getting at. Implying that you would be mad to accept the possibility of Solipsism, may well irritate many people who are happy to accept that everything around them could well be a figment of their imagination - or it might not be. If you have no need to know, then you have no need to refute it. Which is handy since there is no way to refute it logically without making an assumption you cannot back up, such as the existence of a god.

And we're back to my last post - There is no universal truth or theory of existence that can be shown to be correct. If you accept any, you are doing so on faith alone, in which case you may find comfort in religion or personal beliefs. However, not everyone has a need for such faith. I would personally be more comfortable accepting that i cannot possibly know why i am here, or if there is a reason why i am here at all (Or if i even am 'here' at all). Than to choose a theory out of the thousands of equally viable theories, and subscribe to it <b>not because i know it to be true,</b> but simply so that i have pitched a tent and chosen a belief, a belief i had no need for in the first place. I do whatever it is that i do because i derive pleasure from doing so, why i derive pleasure from it i do not know, and probably cannot possibly know, but i continue to exist anyway. Since i would derive no pleasure from going to church every sunday, or convincing myself of a reason why i am here, i don't do it.

Universal Truths depend on belief, you cannot accept a universal truth unless you believe in something that you cannot show to be correct.

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
This is the ontological side of the coin. The other side is ethical, and the dilemma is of equal magnitude: Why is it wrong to murder? If you throw God into the dustbin, this question becomes a nightmare too horrible (and off-topic for this thread :) ) to touch. An appeal to God tackles both problems coherently (and gracefully, I might add).
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

meh, i'm going to touch it anyway ;)

Who says it's "wrong" to murder? You're assuming there even is a concept of Right and Wrong, Good and Evil. I'd like to throw that out the window. There are reasons people don't murder, and there are reasons we typically look down on murderers, but they don't necessarily have anything to do with morals, right and wrong, or god. I'd like to believe that there is no such thing as a selfless act, that people only do things because they believe (wether the belief is correct or not) that doing so will benefit them, or bring them pleasure. Human communities typically shun murderers, they do this because doing so benefits them. In general, people don't want to die. Since the desire to not die tends to be greater than the desire to kill someone else, avoiding those who murder is in an individual's best interests. As long as a community shuns murderers, most individuals will not benefit from murdering another person, since doing so would, at best, lower other people's opinions of you. And at worst occur a severe punishment.

The punishment and dislike of murderers is then a naturally occuring phenomenum in a social environment, as are many other rules that ensure, although an indivdual may only be concerned with himself, the individual will benefit from actions that aid other members of a community. "Morals" could then be said to be simply a form of social programming, where a society benefits from implanting the suggestion of Right and Wrong into children, and enforcing it, to ensure that individuals who are naturally selfish, still end up helping the society as a whole. Instead of divine intervention teaching us what we should and shouldn't do, the rules of a society form naturally to ensure that a group of people who are infact entirely selfish, actually end up working together for the benefit of the group. It's practically darwinian.

moultano

<!--QuoteBegin--TeoH+Jul 30 2003, 12:14 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TeoH @ Jul 30 2003, 12:14 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The punishment and dislike of murderers is then a naturally occuring phenomenum in a social environment, as are many other rules that ensure, although an indivdual may only be concerned with himself, the individual will benefit from actions that aid other members of a community. "Morals" could then be said to be simply a form of social programming, where a society benefits from implanting the suggestion of Right and Wrong into children, and enforcing it, to ensure that individuals who are naturally selfish, still end up helping the society as a whole. Instead of divine intervention teaching us what we should and shouldn't do, the rules of a society form naturally to ensure that a group of people who are infact entirely selfish, actually end up working together for the benefit of the group. It's practically darwinian. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
That touches on another topic I've been thinking about alot recently. These days in our moral thinking we make a great distinction between 'wrong' in a moral sense, and 'wrong in a practical sense as in not the best choice. When we talk about something being the wrong course of action we don't think of the action as morally wrong, and when we talk about something like murder we don't talk about it being wrong from a practical standpoint. I've been wondering recently if this distinction existed for people in biblical times. A great many of the old testament moral laws that many now consider to be archaic had their roots in the health concerns of the time. It may well have been that for people in such an incomprehensible world that there wasn't a distinction between the spiritual wrong, and the practical wrong. You can see this type of thing when you look at ancient cultural tradtions that have become matters of moral right and wrong when originally they were most likely practical things to stay alive and healthy. Thinking along the lines of dietary restrictions for instance.

Josiah_Bartlet

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->yes, God did get angry, but who wouldnt?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The God of Traditional Judeo-Christian Theology.

A better way of explaining this is to say that the Hebrew were still trying to understand their relationship with God.

However to say this is to undermine the authority of the Old Testament which is not what you are trying to do.

To imply that God becomes angry is to break with the ideas classical of Judeo-Christian theology, which attests that:

1.God is all-loving
2.God is all-powerful

If God is all-loving then how can he become angry?

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The bible speaks of washing your hands before dealing with pregnant women, an idea that was only implemented in the victorian times.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yes but the Bible also speaks of all manner of other things that we do not do today because we feel they are barbaric or just simply inappropriate. Just because the Bible says to wash ones hands before dealing with a pregnant woman does not show that is entirely correct nor does it address the point that was trying to be made.

The point, at least this is what I think the point was, was about miracles.

One can say that the miracles Jesus performed were acts of someone not of this Earth, and indeed it can, and has, been argued that Jesus was not.

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> it was a miracle, and it still happens in this day and age<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Miracles are a topic for great philosophical debate.

Philosophical consensus about what a miracle is boils down to:

1. It must break the laws of nature
2. It must have purpose or significance.

However, we come to pretty much the sticking point of such philosophical debates.

What is a law of nature?

Take for instance Joshua 10:13. Basically the Hebrew were fighting another nation and they were winning. However it was getting dark and there was no way to win before the battle had to be called off, and so the enemy would be able to run away. Joshua prayed to God to help them out and God stopped the sun so that the battle could be finished and the Hebrews won.

This could be interpreted as an act of God. However, how does one know that it wasn't simply the law of nature that on that day the Earth stopped spinning for the time the battle took place?

How does one know that some black hole didn't pass within the right area of space so that its gravitation affected the spinning of the Earth? (Just an example, physics experts don't crucify me on this it is just an example and you get the idea)

And if one says that God had something to do with that black hole then why did God not do it himself and just stop the Earth. If he needed to use a black hole then God must not be omnipotent because he would be able to do it himself without the use such objects.

Say, for example, if I was to stand up and let go of a ball that I held in my hand a thousand-and-one times. Say a thousand times that ball dropped to the ground, as one would expect from human knowledge and reasoning. On the thousandth-and-one time the ball did not fall to the floor, it stayed where it was or floated to the ceiling.

I could say this was a miracle performed by God. But how did I not know that the laws of nature are that for every thousandth-and-one time the ball is dropped it floats to the ceiling or stays where it is in mid air?

So you see from our human experience we 'know' that the ball will drop every time we let go of it, but human experience is not all knowing. Human experience just tells us what to expect from a situation, not what would actually happen.

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I have said this before. Look around you. does it seem like one big cosmic fluke?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The Teleological (or Design) Argument claims that certain phenomena within the universe appear to display features of design, in so far as they are perfectly adapted to fulfil their function. Such design cannot come about by chance and can only be explained with reference to an intelligent, personal designer.

To use William Paley's often used analogy of the watch and the watchmaker supports this argument.

Paley's analogy is:

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><i>In crossing a heath, suppose I pitched my foot against a stone, and were asked how the stone came to be there. I might possibly answer that, for anything I knew to the contrary, it had lain there for ever; nor would it, prehpas, be very easy to show the absurdity of this answer. But suppose I found a watch upon the ground, and it should be inquired how the watch happened to be in that place. I should hardly think to answer which I had before hiven - that, for anything I knew, the watch might always have been there. Yet why should this not answer serve for the watch as for the stone? Why is it not as admissible in the second case as in the first? For this reason...that when we come to inspect the watch we perceive...that its serveral parts are framed and put together for a purpose...</i><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Essentially, just as the discovery of the watch in the heath could not be satisfactorily explained by saying it had 'always been there' the order evident in the universe demands an explanation.

However, to merely say that this world has a creator does not prove that it is the God of Classical Judeo-Christian Theology.

Whilst the apparent order of the world brings us to the idea of a creator, as opposed to the random creation, it does not support the view of your creator.

To use John Stuart Mill's views about a Limited God, why should God need to use all the intricacies of nature to create the world and order it.

With God's omnipotence God could do it all himself without the superfluous laws of nature.

Indeed one can believe that the creation of the universe shows a God that is not that of Classical Judeo-Christian Theology, as you address with the problem of evil.

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->maybe suffering is just a nessecary evil?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Not if God is all-powerful and all-loving. Surely He could find a better way.

Bogglesteinsky

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I would be upset. I wouldn't kill her, and her whole family. I would start again, but her not loving me does not, in my opinion, constitute murder. Whatever way you look at it, God created humans and gave them free will. Then he killed them all if they didn't believe in him (using their free will). There is simply no way of denying that if God is real, he has mental issues. He created humans with free will, then despises it when they use that free will to do anything other than worship him. It's like giving a child an Ice Cream, then putting a bullet in his head if he eats it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

i'm not saying you would kill her, im saying you would forget about her and start again. its like God said "oh **** this, im going to Mars. Have a nice time suckers!" and left us, but he didnt.

its not like giving a child an ice cream beacsue he didnt kill us. Its like creating someone who can choose to love you or chose to hate you, then giving them a special place and a set of rules by which they can live thier life to the full, then having them turn against you, then giving them a second chance... and a third chance

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Also, my parents had no choice if they were going to baptised. Their parents did it to them when they were like, 1. No choice. Again, showing a major trend in religions as forcing their beliefs on people.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

in that case it wasnt a baptism, it was a chistening.

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You mentioned you would feel sorry for me on Judgement day, implying that there is some sort of Punishment awaiting me. For what? For using my free will and not believing in "Him" (or her, i mean, no way would a male God put the ball sack on the outside). In this respect, God is no better than, say, Saddam Hussein. That is a hugely Bleasphemous (ffs, can't spell) remark, but think about it: God essentialy forgets about, and punishes, all those who don't believe in him. Precisely what Saddam did. What's the difference? God deserves belief and love? Why? This world Sucks, death, desease, murder everywhere. So, ok, he might have created us. So what? What he has done, if it was compared to a human, is a woman having a baby then dumping the infant in a bin. She would be arrested, God, apparantly, expects people to love him for it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

no, its like a woman giving birth to a baby she loves, caring for it, looking after it only to have it turn its back on her thinking it knows better

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Now, i don't hate God. I have no problem with religion. People believe what they want to, you know? I don't care. Devil Worshipers, Christians, Jews.... all rank the same, because they all believe in something. I don't try to stop them from believing it. I only really mention my beliefs if i'm asked for them, except in this thread, but that was because i'm bored. In most people's eyes, this would make me a pretty nice guy: I let people get on with what they want to do. But apparantly, God will make me burn in hell for not worshipping him. Actually, i've just thought of something. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

in most people's eye, yes, but in Gods? i doubt any of us gets close to the "you're so despicable i want nothing to do with you" mark on a scale of 1 to 10, we rate about -763

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->This is gonna seem really, really childish. But remember in Black & White, the game. When that hermit doesn't think your creature is big enough for you to be a good God. What would the Christian God do, if all scriptures are to be believed? He'd kill him, and burn his house to the ground. This makes you evil in the game (i've tried).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

i've never played black and white, so i have no comment on that

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I try to have fun in my life, i try to make people laugh, often at the expense of myself (dancing in streets, hurting myself etc). I live my life how i want, trying to help others. That is a fairly god life by all accounts, yet i shall be punished for it, because i refuse to believe that God is a nice guy, he cares for us so much he lets things like WWW I and WWW II happen. The holocaust, The Plague etc. He is simply not a nice guy, IF he exists.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

i refer you to my other comment a good life, but good enough for God? as for the ww1 and ww2 and all the others, this is the riddle of suffering which i have mentioned before and will not talk about here, but as for the plague, yes, a lot of people died and it was a terrible tragedy, but a lot of good came out of it. the peasants who survived were treated a lot better than they were before, because there we les of them and so they were more valuable. the plague was the end of the oppression of the peasants.

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I don't know if God exists, i don't deny he does, but i don't think he does either. I've forgotten the word for that (agnostic?). But i do, however, believe there is some truth in religion. If you study each religion, there are similarities that simply can't be conincidences. So, <b>something</b> happened a long time ago, that span off a lot of different ideas. What happened? That is the question. But we have no way of finding out.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I beleive its called "sitting on the fence" as for other religions, there are also fundamental differences - reincarnation vs heaven/hell, one God vs many different Gods.

clearly they cannot all be right

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I have probably offended a few people with this post, and i am truly sorry if i have. As i said, i never aim to hurt people (that haven't hurt me). But these are my beliefs, that are probably wrong. But as i said, i shall find out when i am dead.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

unfortunately, when we are dead, its already too late

Bogglesteinsky

<!--QuoteBegin--Josiah Bartlet+Jul 30 2003, 06:47 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Jul 30 2003, 06:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->yes, God did get angry, but who wouldnt?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The God of Traditional Judeo-Christian Theology.

A better way of explaining this is to say that the Hebrew were still trying to understand their relationship with God.

However to say this is to undermine the authority of the Old Testament which is not what you are trying to do.

To imply that God becomes angry is to break with the ideas classical of Judeo-Christian theology, which attests that:

1.God is all-loving
2.God is all-powerful

If God is all-loving then how can he become angry?
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
My Dad loves me yet he still gets angry with me when i do wrong. because he loves me, he wants the best for me and so when i do wrong, he tells me not to.

its something called discipline, and there isnt enough of it tbh

there is nothing wrong with anger. it is what you do when you are angry that is the problem

Josiah_Bartlet

<!--QuoteBegin--z.x. bogglestiensky+Jul 30 2003, 05:54 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (z.x. bogglestiensky @ Jul 30 2003, 05:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--Josiah Bartlet+Jul 30 2003, 06:47 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Jul 30 2003, 06:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->yes, God did get angry, but who wouldnt?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The God of Traditional Judeo-Christian Theology.

A better way of explaining this is to say that the Hebrew were still trying to understand their relationship with God.

However to say this is to undermine the authority of the Old Testament which is not what you are trying to do.

To imply that God becomes angry is to break with the ideas classical of Judeo-Christian theology, which attests that:

1.God is all-loving
2.God is all-powerful

If God is all-loving then how can he become angry?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My Dad loves me yet he still gets angry with me when i do wrong. because he loves me, he wants the best for me and so when i do wrong, he tells me not to.

its something called discipline, and there isnt enough of it tbh

there is nothing wrong with anger. it is what you do when you are angry that is the problem <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes but your Dad isn't the God of Classical Judeo-Christain Theology.

If God is all-powerful why can't he control his anger or at least sort something out so that the world is perfect and we still have free will?

Wheeee

wow, there sure is a lot of hating going on in this thread...why do a lot of people not like religion? Just teen angst, or what?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Yes but your Dad isn't the God of Classical Judeo-Christain Theology.

If God is all-powerful why can't he control his anger or at least sort something out so that the world is perfect and we still have free will?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

It is his prerogative. There is no reason for him to control his anger, and yet he does (proof: we're still alive, even while a lot of us are cursing/disbelieving/blaming him). We are created, and thus he "owns" us, which admittedly is quite a foreign idea to us, the idea of being "owned" by another. He has the right to do with us however he pleases, and yet he has mercy on us. That is the root of Judeo-Christian theology.

Josiah_Bartlet

Yes but he's not exactly all loving if he punishes entire groups of people , which he apparently did in the Old Testament.

I mean that is some tough love.

If he is all powerful then he should be able to reason with everyone and explain to them the error of their ways.

He should be able to make Hitler go "You know what? You're right God! My anti-semitic views were totally wrong and now I have learned to love everyone." But he didn't.

So either God couldn't (not all powerful) or wouldn't (not all loving).

Not exactly what Christians believe, unless of course God was and is now impassive but Christians don't believe that either.

It doesn't matter if God "own's" us or not, if he is what Christians say he is then why did this happen?

PS. Bugger me if I can't spell Christian I'm only studying Philosophy and Christain Ethics at A-Level. Grrrrrr.

kida

<span style='font-family:Arial'>"During a British conference on comparitive religions, experts from around the world debated what, if any, belief was unique to the Chiristian fatih. They began elmininating possiblities. Incarnation? Other religions had different versions of gods appearing in human form. Resurrection? Again, other religions had accounts of return from death. The debate went on for some time until C.S. Lewis wandered into the room. "What's the rumpus about?" he asked, and heard in reply that his coleagues were discussing Christianity's unique contribution among world religions. Lewis responded, "Oh, that's easy. It's grace."
"After some discussion, the conferees had to agree. The notion of God's love coming to us free of charge, no strings attached, seems to go against every instinct of humanity. The Buddhist eight-fold path, the Hindu doctine of karma, the Jewish covenant, and Muslim code of law-each of these offers a way to earn approval. Only Christianity dares to make God's love unconditional"</span>

Jesus talked about this a lot in the bible. Moses (old testament) was given the law and Jesus was the gospel (good news).
<b>When Jesus died on the cross, the temple curtain, a really thick curtain, was ripped in half by lighting I think, signifying the end of the old ways</b>.
Jesus was the law, he is the way the truth and the life and God in Jesus worked his plan in a way so unlikely. He was raised in a poverish home, did not force anyone to believe in him, and showed his work through example, parables, miracles, and teachings. Even though a lot of people did not believe in him, and even though his own nation and closest friends, the disciples, all betrayed him, he still chose to die for our sins. "And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless, not as I will, but thou wilt."-Matthew 26:39
You could imagane a man in a giant garden awaiting his arrest, when he could stop everything with a heavenly command.

If God came down to Earth in power and glory forcing everyone to believe in him or showing off his greatness so that people would believe in him, then there would be no point in worship or faith, which God desires to see in our own free will. He came to Earth as a vulnerable human, tasting the mortality that we all face.

I know what most of you feel, because for myself, I have felt the same way as everyone of you has about God. Doubt has came to me a time to many, but people and things have shown me through example on what it means to be a Christian. It is through experiences that I come to a conclusion that there is a God, but for many of you, it takes a vision or some concrete evidence that God exists. Seeing is not always believing, and regardless of what you may think, faith is what makes it through and faith is what keeps Christians to their God. And to my wonder, there are many scientists and great scholars, who have spent their whole lives searching for God, when infact God was always there. He works in ways we cannot comprehend, in ways through showing his unconditional grace, and in ways of pure love, when at hardest times we thought we could not possibly deserve.

"Amazing grace! How sweet the sound
That saved a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found;
Was blind, but now I see.

¡¯Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,
And grace my fears relieved;
How precious did that grace appear
The hour I first believed.

Through many dangers, toils and snares,
I have already come;
¡¯Tis grace hath brought me safe thus far,
And grace will lead me home.

The Lord has promised good to me,
His Word my hope secures;
He will my Shield and Portion be,
As long as life endures.

Yea, when this flesh and heart shall fail,
And mortal life shall cease,
I shall possess, within the veil,
A life of joy and peace.

The earth shall soon dissolve like snow,
The sun forbear to shine;
But God, Who called me here below,
Shall be forever mine.

When we¡¯ve been there ten thousand years,
Bright shining as the sun,
We¡¯ve no less days to sing God¡¯s praise
Than when we¡¯d first begun."

-John Newton

John Newton was a slave trader, who at sea looked for God's grace in savage storm and found it.
Here is a story of what happened:
<a href='http://www.gospelcom.net/chi/GLIMPSEF/Glimpses/glmps028.shtml' target='_blank'>http://www.gospelcom.net/chi/GLIMPSEF/Glim.../glmps028.shtml</a>

God can be angry, because his anger is through just means, if you deserve some sort of punishment for correction, then God can punish you for it. God will be merciful to those, who truly seek for mercy and punishes those, who simply don't care. He will punish those he loves, meaning he cares for those, who he sees will have a chance in changing their ways..
On Judgement day God will judge those according to their actions and punish them for it, but Jesus is our "scapegoat," our "testament," and our deliverer. He is the lamb of God.

Remember Moses in the Old testament? Everytime he asked for forgiveness or mercy, God gave it to him and the Israelites.

Here is a pretty good article on the angry God and loving God issue...
<a href='http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:mC-' target='_blank'>http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:mC-</a>
07xfnehIJ:www.angelfire.com/mb2/translations/files/The_Angry_God_and_the_Loving_God.doc+how+can+god+be+angry+and+loving%3F&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Wheeww, ok im done..That was long...

EDIT: sorry, you will have to copy and paste the above article.

Wheeee

<!--QuoteBegin--Josiah Bartlet+Jul 30 2003, 01:12 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Jul 30 2003, 01:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Yes but he's not exactly all loving if he punishes entire groups of people , which he apparently did in the Old Testament.

I mean that is some tough love.

If he is all powerful then he should be able to reason with everyone and explain to them the error of their ways.

He should be able to make Hitler go "You know what? You're right God! My anti-semitic views were totally wrong and now I have learned to love everyone." But he didn't.

So either God couldn't (not all powerful) or wouldn't (not all loving).

Not exactly what Christians believe, unless of course God was and is now impassive but Christians don't believe that either.

It doesn't matter if God "own's" us or not, if he is what Christians say he is then why did this happen?

PS. Bugger me if I can't spell Christian I'm only studying Philosophy and Christain Ethics at A-Level. Grrrrrr. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->


I'll quote Neo on this one: "Choice. The problem is choice."

I'll leave you to mull over that one for a bit.

And much <3 to kida, nicely put.

Josiah_Bartlet

Chioce is not a problem.

How can choice be a problem for God if he is all powerful?

Josiah_Bartlet

In every response by someone supporting the Christian faith they always contradict at least one part of what Christians hold to be central to their views.

I do not ask for God to come "down to Earth in power and glory forcing everyone to believe in him or showing off his greatness so that people would believe in him, then there would be no point in worship or faith, which God desires to see in our own free will. "

All I ask is that God uses the powers you say he has and uses all the time.

[EDIT] Damn my hands for not typing Christian correctly.[/EDIT]

Wheeee

<!--QuoteBegin--Josiah Bartlet+Jul 30 2003, 01:30 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Jul 30 2003, 01:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Chioce is not a problem.

How can choice be a problem for God if he is all powerful? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Obviously you haven't thought the whole line of reasoning through (both yours and mine).

a link that might interest you: <a href='http://entertainment.planetwisdom.com/movies/brucealmighty.cfm' target='_blank'>what a Christian site has to say about this.</a>

*edit*
and by the way,
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->All I ask is that God uses the powers you say he has and uses all the time.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

what's that supposed to mean? You don't think that God uses his powers?
What sort of thing should he do, short of coming down from heaven in glory would make you believe that he does?

kida

I think Wheee meant that God gave hitler a choice, his own freewill, to do what he wanted to do. Not to mention Satan and his probable effects on Hitler, it might be that Hitler was influenced by means.

Choice is not a problem for God, when he is all powerful, infact it is something he gives to each and every human. We could jump off a bridge and God might show you grace, but chances are your body will have crushed in the fall, leaving science and logic to do the choice making.

I also have a lot of questions, which I might bring up concerning God, but in the end some of these questions might be answered and some left empty. It all runs down to the belief, again the belief, the faith in God.

The problem is seeing past those obstacles and [B]focusing[B/] on being the good human that God desires from us.
I know, many of us, like me are in a ****, but in the end our choice making will decide our fate in the long run, lest God had already chose it and intervenes, which also brings up another problem, predestiny

EDIT: Oh, and Josiah, I wasn't filling in your order, just merely illustrating the point. And people contradict themselves all the time, me, yeah, I do a lot here and there, but as long as his point sticks out thats what matters mostly.

Josiah_Bartlet

<!--QuoteBegin--Wheeee+Jul 30 2003, 06:39 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wheeee @ Jul 30 2003, 06:39 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--Josiah Bartlet+Jul 30 2003, 01:30 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Jul 30 2003, 01:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Chioce is not a problem.

How can choice be a problem for God if he is all powerful? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Obviously you haven't thought the whole line of reasoning through (both yours and mine).

a link that might interest you: <a href='http://entertainment.planetwisdom.com/movies/brucealmighty.cfm' target='_blank'>what a Christian site has to say about this.</a> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't get it.

I "choose" not to follow the Christian faith.

If God was to go "James, here is what is going on and using my omnipotent power I'm going to show you the error of your ways and why Christianity really is the way to go" then I'd "choose" to be a Christian. If God want's people to follow them of his own free will then why doesn't He show us so we can have proof of his existence and be happy and contented.

But he doesn't, despite what Christians hold to believe. How can God love me if he is quite happy to leave my languishing in my own doubt?

There must be a better way for it all to work.

Surely God needn't punish people, there needn't be evil in the world, and there needn't be any doubt about God.

How this can happen I don't know but then again I'm not God.

However, it would be nice to have an all powerful, all loving, always working God to get things going though.

kida

If we had God to get us through every problem we humans ever or would have had, then I doubt we would ever need to do anything much, but sit down and watch good ol' God TV. Really, it boils down to our sin, because Adam and Eve sinned in the beginning, we as humans have felt the effects even to today and sin is often accompanied by pain, mortality, and whatnot. But the point that I am saying, is that God is holy, meaning he is pure, and because we are sinners God cannot languish with us like he did with Adam and Eve. Don't ask me why, but its how its always been.

People are evil, because they choose to be evil, maybe there was a cause that made them evil, but they chose to be evil.

Josiah, God showed us his power through Jesus thousands of years ago, but even then people like you and I still didn't believe what they saw. Do you think if someone showed you real scientific analysis or pictures proving God as an entity, that you would actually believe? I think you would rather find it harder believing the evidence itself.

God gave us the bible and the bible should have sufficent enough evidence and teachings to help us on our path to heaven or whatnot. God said that the path to his kingdom would be narrow and long, but the way of sinners leading to hell, wide and large.

Hell and heaven, yes what is exactly heaven and hell? Well nobody knows, maybe hell is a dimension or some contraption used by God that we could not understand until we were actually there.

God loves you even though your still languishing inside the thoughts that incript your brain. God will show his loving grace to you if you yourself search really hard for him. A lot of people believe in God, because they experienced his love through a tragedy or some mishap and some have felt his love through even scientific study. In the end as my mom says, it really is up to you to do the finding. I am pretty sure God has to take care of the universe hehehe.

And finally, yes finnally, phewww, /swipes sweat across his hot face, I'm done...

EDIT: sorry, I had to correct some stupid errors like "chosen" and "A God"
EDIT: do the forums seem really slow right now? Like donkey slow?

Josiah_Bartlet

<!--QuoteBegin--kida+Jul 30 2003, 06:46 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (kida @ Jul 30 2003, 06:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I think Wheee meant that God gave hitler a choice, his own freewill, to do what he wanted to do. Not to mention Satan and his probable effects on Hitler, it might be that Hitler was influenced by means.

Choice is not a problem for God, when he is all powerful, infact it is something he gives to each and every human. We could jump off a bridge and God might show you grace, but chances are your body will have crushed in the fall, leaving science and logic to do the choice making.

I also have a lot of questions, which I might bring up concerning God, but in the end some of these questions might be answered and some left empty. It all runs down to the belief, again the belief, the faith in God.

The problem is  seeing past those obstacles and [B]focusing[B/] on being the good human that God desires from us.
I know, many of us, like me are in a ****, but in the end our choice making will decide our fate in the long run, lest God had already chose it and intervenes, which also brings up another problem, predestiny

EDIT: Oh, and Josiah, I wasn't filling in your order, just merely illustrating the point. And people contradict themselves all the time, me, yeah, I do a lot here and there, but as long as his point sticks out thats what matters mostly.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sorry for the apparent double post(if there is one) but I was writing my earlier post when kida's post was being written.

Indeed Christianity is a faith, and indeed I wish I could have that faith and the security it brings.

However, I cannot understand why people would choose to be a Christian when there are so many questions left, apparently, unanswered.

All I can see (which I am not saying that any of you are doing) is that Christians are just placing bets with Pascal's Wager.

Pascal's Wager is basically "I'm not sure if God exists or not but I'll believe in him because if he does exist then he will be good to me and if he doesn't exist then I have lost nothing."

As in "I'll believe in God so I can book my place into the afterlife."

I hope that there is a God, and I hope that he is all loving and that there is an afterlife that doesn't end up with me in firey torment (fortunately I took one of those online tests on which circle of Hell I'd end up in and I got limbo so I'm with all the Greek philosophers apparently <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> ). However that is just hoping and somehow I doubt I shall ever get the proof my skeptical mind desires. As for the "Day of Judgement" I would be a Christian just so I can pass the test but God would know what I did and so I'd end up on "the left." (Hurrah for obscure Bible reference, I want to see if anyone gets it)

Josiah_Bartlet

<!--QuoteBegin--kida+Jul 30 2003, 07:09 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (kida @ Jul 30 2003, 07:09 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If we had a God to get us through every problem we humans ever or would have had, then I doubt we would ever need to do anything much, but sit down and watch good ol' God TV. Really, it boils down to our sin, because Adam and Eve sinned in the beginning, we as humans have felt the effects even to today and sin is often accompanied by pain, mortality, and whatnot. But the point that I am saying, is that God is holy, meaning he is pure, and because we are sinners God cannot languish with us like he did with Adam and Eve. Don't ask me why, but its how its always been.

People are evil, because they choose to be evil, maybe there was a cause that made them evil, but really they are chosen to be evil.

Josiah, God showed us his power, through Jesus, thousands of years ago, but even then people like you and I still didn't believe what they saw. Do you think if someone showed you real scientific analysis or pictures proving God as an entity, that you would actually believe? I think you would rather find it harder believing the evidence itself.

God gave us the bible and the bible should have sufficent enough evidence and teachings to help us on our path to heaven or whatnot. God said that the path to his kingdom would be narrow and long, but the way of sinners leading to hell, wide and large.

Hell and heaven, yes what is exactly heaven and hell? Well nobody knows, maybe hell is a dimension or some contraption used by God that we could not understand until we were actually there.

God loves you even though your still languishing inside the thoughts that incript your brain. God will show his loving grace to you if you yourself search really hard for him. A lot of people believe in God, because they experienced his love through a tragedy or some mishap and some have felt his love through even scientific study. In the end as my mom says, it really is up to you to do the finding. I am pretty sure God has to take care of the universe hehehe.

And finally, yes finnally, phewww, /swipes sweat across his hot face, I'm done... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
True and valid points.

As for the old Jesus bit that is faith and as for people who undergo tragedy and find God that could just be their way of coping.

Technically God didn't give you the Bible, not as Allah gave the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) the Koran. The Bible is a collection of laws, the history of the Hebrew people, and the teachings of Jesus and things like that.

My favourite bit of the Bible is Revelations because its a damn good read (what was that guy on?) , but I digress.

And as for watching God TV? They just brought back L!VE TV on Sky Digital and it has topless darts <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->


Not really, I only watch Paramout Comedy (MASH, Spin City, and Frasier) BBC Parliament and Classic FM TV (Vanessa Mae murders all my favourite songs with that band of hers - classical music is not to be played on the drums and electric guitar unless the part was written for them grrrrrr)

God TV is full of Yanks from the Bible Belt which isn't really my cup of tea.

Anyway I digress again!

Basically I need more convincing either way which I why I am going to try and study the Philosophy of Religion at University. It was good talking with you, but I fear the closest I will come to God is singing "God Save the Queen" and "God damn it!"

Shockeh

Who's to say that <b>if</b> there is a God, or higher power, he particularily likes you or is even aware of your existance?

Such ramblings about malign influence is just a scapegoat used by extremists of both religious poles.

"It is the will of God."

"The Devil made me do it"

These may be used in different circumstances, but both serve the same purpose. To provide a scapegoat when you've performed what most humans would consider an 'evil act' so you don't have to face the fact you're not only an animal, like the rest of one, but an animal with the capacity for cruelty, or violence for the sake of violence.

If indeed there is a day of Judgement, I will happily take the opportunity to say "How about you quit trying to be impressive and divine, and start doing a better job?"

And films featuring Jim Carrey will not feature.

Bogglesteinsky

<!--QuoteBegin--Josiah Bartlet+Jul 30 2003, 08:11 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Jul 30 2003, 08:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> All I can see (which I am not saying that any of you are doing) is that Christians are just placing bets with Pascal's Wager.

Pascal's Wager is basically "I'm not sure if God exists or not but I'll believe in him because if he does exist then he will be good to me and if he doesn't exist then I have lost nothing."

As in "I'll believe in God so I can book my place into the afterlife."
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
a God that is the object of a bet is not worth any worship from anybody

Wheeee

<!--QuoteBegin--z.x. bogglestiensky+Jul 30 2003, 02:31 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (z.x. bogglestiensky @ Jul 30 2003, 02:31 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> a God that is the object of a bet is not worth any worship from anybody <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wanna bet? <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
just kidding; becoming a Christian is not merely about "securing a place in the afterlife so I don't rot in hell" or whatever. Becoming a Christian is about acknowledging God's grace to us, accepting it, and allowing God to lead us and grow closer to Him. That is far more than betting for your life. Christianity doesn't merely acknowledge God's existence and the saving grace of Jesus Christ, but includes many other things which have nothing to do with the initial "bet" - for example, the great comission says that we should spread the gospel, and yet it is not a prerequisite for salvation.

Wheeee

double post, sorry

p4Samwise

Bah! I had this great thoughtful post written out and the forum ate it because it's being hit so hard right now. I'll try to get the key points down, and if any need elaboration, let me know.


"The problem is choice." Why is it a problem for God? Because if humans didn't have choice, didn't have free will, what would be the point? We might as well be action figures that God poses and dresses up. What would be the point in that?

So God gave us free will. And of course, some of us choose to do evil, do stupid things, et cetera. And thus there is suffering in the world. If everyone in the world were perfectly good (I figure) there would be no suffering - the world has more than enough resources to go around, and if every living human being were perfectly altruistic, nobody would ever want. But obviously, not everyone is good.

Is it possible to have a perfect world, with no suffering, and yet have choice? Only if we exercise that choice in a good way. God can't make us all good without robbing us of free will. And that's the problem.


Baptism. Stickman, I think you had a problem with this, so I'd like to try to clear things up a lil' with my Catholic perspective. (Disclaimer: may not apply to some Protestant denominations.) As an infant, you are incapable of making choices for yourself, so the responsibility falls to your parents to try to do what's best for you. Physically, this includes things like making sure you eat. Spiritually, this means that when you're an infant, your parents might choose to get you baptized. Does this commit you into God's hands forever? NO. It simply starts you out on the right foot. Once you become an adult, you have to make the decision for yourself whether to keep following that path, and that's the purpose of Confirmation, which is in a sense the completion of Baptism. In order to be considered a real Catholic, you must have been Confirmed - that is, you must have freely chosen for yourself what your parents chose for you at baptism. Don't want to follow God? Don't get confirmed. You have free will, you can do what you want. Baptism doesn't mean anything if you willingly turn your back on it.


The afterlife. Is it really free will if we just get smoten for our sins later on? First off, the afterlife doesn't really affect what you do in life, for the most part, so you've still got free will up the wazoo in life, if only because you can choose not to believe that it'll have any impact on anything.

A more important point, though, in my opinion, is what Dante implies in the <i>Inferno</i>. Those who have studied this work in any depth will recall that in the various circles of Hell, the fate of the damned is simply a reflection of what they did in life. The wrathful, for example, muddle around in the mire of their own wrath, cursing and clawing at each other, or sullenly burbling to themselves from the bottom of the muck. They are in death as they were in life. The first difference is that in death, the illusion is stripped away, and we see them as they really were (spiritually) all along. The second difference is that being dead, they no longer have the chance to change their lives, so Hell is essentially static. Them's the breaks. If at any point in life, even up till the very instant of death, they had decided "gee, maybe being wrathful isn't the best way to be", they'd be in Purgatory instead, and on the road to washing all that muck off of them and ascending to Paradise. Anyway, the point that I took from all of this is that God doesn't condemn you to Hell. You choose Hell for yourself - if you really want to wallow in sin, you get to wallow in sin, and God isn't going to rob you of your free will by plucking you out of it.


On Pascal's Wager: Think of it more like this. You can live a generally good life, or a generally evil life. If God does not exist, and you led an evil life, well, you lived an evil life, and now it's over. If God does not exist, and you led a good life, well, at least you lived a good life. This ties in with the whole Dante thing and the belief that your afterlife is simply a continuation of how you were in life - if you were happy and good in life, you're happy and good in the afterlife. If you were evil and unhappy in life (and it can be argued that "evil" people are never really happy), you're evil and unhappy in the afterlife. If there is no afterlife, it doesn't really change things all that much.


Finally, returning to the whole issue of choice. If you yourself had the choice right now, between a perfect world in which you had no choice, and an imperfect world in which you did have choice, which would you choose? The blue pill? Or the red pill? Tree of Life? Or Tree of Knowledge?

Wheeee

<!--QuoteBegin--Legionnaired+Jul 29 2003, 10:43 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Legionnaired @ Jul 29 2003, 10:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--moultano+Jul 29 2003, 10:26 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano @ Jul 29 2003, 10:26 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I'm actually a little curious about this. What happens to a person so deviod of any form of reason that they truly and honestly believe themselves to be doing right by these atrocities? Does mental illness of this level prevent you from entering heaven, or does their intent absolve them of the consequences of their action? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, a grey area. I know I can't really answer with any degree of certainty, but I refer you to the edit on my previous post.

My personal belief is that when Christ is accepted, that person is saved. Period. So, that person in the example would be saved, if the acceptance was genuine. That's about as far as my knowledge of the subject goes. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Romans (New Testament of the Bible) deals with many sticky issues raised in this thread, for example this one.

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This is a passage from Romans 2:15. What this says is that every person is born with a conscience, with the "law" written into it, an innate sense of morality and ethics. This is the law that non-believers will be judged under, and since all fall short they will be condemned. Therefore, the discussion of whether "someone can believe in God and yet carry on atrocities believing that it is God's will" is moot, as it can't happen. If, on the other hand, the Bible did not say this at all, I suppose the person believing in God would indeed go to heaven, or God would have a little talk with him ;P.

This is of course all based on the assumption that you accept the Bible as the truth (which I do).

*edit*
Let's have a thought experiment.

Premise: Suddenly everything imperfect is made perfect, all the flaws in the physical nature becoming as if it were never there, humans suddenly gaining God's perfection. Everything is perfect.

Question: Would we still have free will? What would exercising that free will lead to? Would you be able to maintain the state of perfection, while retaining your free will? What if you inserted something imperfect into this mix?

I'll leave the implications of that for you to mull over.

p4Samwise

<!--QuoteBegin--Wheeee+Jul 30 2003, 12:03 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wheeee @ Jul 30 2003, 12:03 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--moultano+Jul 29 2003, 10:26 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (moultano @ Jul 29 2003, 10:26 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I'm actually a little curious about this. What happens to a person so deviod of any form of reason that they truly and honestly believe themselves to be doing right by these atrocities? Does mental illness of this level prevent you from entering heaven, or does their intent absolve them of the consequences of their action? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
If they were that devoid of reason, they'd be in Hell and think they were in Heaven. So it's all good. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->

In Dante's scheme of Hell, they'd probably be in the very upper level, along with the virtuous pagans, since their only failing was "not knowing any better". For those who haven't read <i>Inferno</i>, the inhabitants of that realm aren't tormented, they're just kinda dreary. They did not know God and did not conceive of Paradise, and so what they're really getting is the best that they'd hoped for. Your person devoid of reason would in all likelihood happily run around the first circle of Hell thinking "wow, this must be heaven!"

Wheeee

<!--QuoteBegin--[p4]Samwise+Jul 30 2003, 03:10 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> ([p4]Samwise @ Jul 30 2003, 03:10 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If they were that devoid of reason, they'd be in Hell and think they were in Heaven. So it's all good. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->

In Dante's scheme of Hell, they'd probably be in the very upper level, along with the virtuous pagans, since their only failing was "not knowing any better". For those who haven't read <i>Inferno</i>, the inhabitants of that realm aren't tormented, they're just kinda dreary. They did not know God and did not conceive of Paradise, and so what they're really getting is the best that they'd hoped for. Your person devoid of reason would in all likelihood happily run around the first circle of Hell thinking "wow, this must be heaven!" <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
lol, excellent point <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> although it's flogic, nevertheless it's funny <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->

Brave_Ulysses

<!--QuoteBegin--Josiah Bartlet+Jul 30 2003, 07:52 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Jul 30 2003, 07:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If God want's people to follow them of his own free will then why doesn't He show us so we can have proof of his existence and be happy and contented. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hmmm... I don't agree with your sentiment here at all. It all comes down to Faith. If God appeared to us and said: "Lo! I've created a nice pie. Believe in me!" and we had proof that we hadn't gone mad then it would seem foolish not to believe. But religion comes down to your own Faith. You CAN'T prove it one way or another. So you choose to believe or you don't.

If God made us "contented" then, in fact, we wouldn't NEED to believe at all because we would know that He exists!

Did any of that make sense? Almost 2 am here... <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->

Brave_Ulysses

<!--QuoteBegin--Josiah Bartlet+Jul 30 2003, 08:27 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Josiah Bartlet @ Jul 30 2003, 08:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> My favourite bit of the Bible is Revelations because its a damn good read (what was that guy on?) <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Check this out - his "visions" of Heaven:

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->King James VersioN:

[3] And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.
[4] These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Which basically means that only 144,000 virgin males will get into Heaven. So all you people boasting about your "conquests"... Sorry. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->

SoulSkorpion

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The God of Traditional Judeo-Christian Theology.

A better way of explaining this is to say that the Hebrew were still trying to understand their relationship with God.

However to say this is to undermine the authority of the Old Testament which is not what you are trying to do.

To imply that God becomes angry is to break with the ideas classical of Judeo-Christian theology, which attests that:

1.God is all-loving
2.God is all-powerful

If God is all-loving then how can he become angry?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We're Jews, not "Hebrews". We stopped being Hebrews when the Romans took Jerusalem and exhiled us, and that was a loooong time ago.

Anyway, there's a difference between interpreting an action of God as being because of anger, and God being angry. It's just a human means of comprehending something. How many ancient civilizations, when they saw lightning, interpreted it as anger?

<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Miracles are a topic for great philosophical debate.

Philosophical consensus about what a miracle is boils down to:

1. It must break the laws of nature
2. It must have purpose or significance.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not always. That's only "manifest" miracles. Judaism predicts that just before the Messianic age there will be a period of many miracles such as the restoration of sight to the blind, and restoration of life to the dead. However, one interpretation is that these miracales (and the coming of the messiah) will happen no matter how "good" or "bad" the world is - if the world is "good" they will come in the form of thunder and lightning and great celestial fanfare (your garden variety manifest miracle); alternatively they will come from the miracle of medical science and the like. Ultimately, God is still credited with responsibility, and the act is still identified as being a miracle.

...
(paraphrased)
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Why does god give us free choice and let us do evil?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
point of information: according to Judaism, humans are considered to be on a higher spiritual level than angels. Angels, being the servants of God, can do no wrong. They have full knowledge of Him, and really don't have much choice in what they do. They can't err. Humans, on the other hand, <i>can</i> err. This means they can improve themselves, and virtue gained through self improvement is regarded as being of greater value than virtue by itself.
...
point of information: Judaism's take on heaven and hell is that you do go to heaven when you die, almost regardless. "Heaven" is a misnomer, as there are many, many levels of it (42, or thereabouts). The lowest level is Gehennom, or "Hell", but you don't automatically go there when you're "bad".

Judaism basically views the real world as a "soul cleaning machine", so to speak. What level of heaven you end up in depends on your spiritual merit on Earth, because the afterlife is static. The difference is, your soul (or parts thereof, but that's another story) is free to reincarnate into the physical world and "have another go", so to speak, if it *really* wants to. Also, Gehennom is reserved for if you've been *really* *really* evil, and it more accurately corresponds to a not-very nice prison in the physical world - your soul basically serves a sentence in Gehennom depending on how bad you were. Not everyone needs a trip to Gehennom, and nobody stays there forever. There are no "damned", according to Judaism.