Basically all I was told was; God was all seeing, all powerful, and all knowing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Printable View
Basically all I was told was; God was all seeing, all powerful, and all knowing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Venial - venal, I never claim to be a typist. And being human I can make mistakes. But venial is most correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
As for the reference. I read it. I have never been one to be very comfortable reading and using small parts of anything that is parsed as many verse quotes in the Bible. Anyway I also am not one that claims the Bible is word for word the only criteria, nor that God concerned himself with day to day operations of humanity. Kind goes against the concept of free will! I did have a number of concerns with the reference, too short, and divorced from the situation at hand. Reading more of Samuel raised additional concerns.
Not pointing fingers at anyone in particular here, but far too many people base their beliefs only upon what they've been told, and not upon rational thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
I was taught, through 12 years of Catholic schooling, that God was all good, all knowing and all powerful. (This is, of course, the standard Judeo/Christian/Islamic God.) It was also accepted that God was eternal, unchanging. Yet the only evidence we have for these statements are religious texts written by men about a being they cannot possibly begin to understand, by their own admission. So my question must be, how do we know just what, or who, this God is? Or if he even exists? We have no evidence for anything said in any texts, whether Bible, Torah or Quran. Hell, one of the greatest stories in the Old Testament, the story of Moses and the Exodus, may be nothing but a fairy tale! There is no evidence to suggest that anything written about this ever actually happened, in any manner. How can we trust anything else written there, then?
It wasn't my intention to correct your spelling or typing. I'm just trying to understand your meaning. By my dictionary, venial means, "Easily excused or forgiven; pardonable", which did not appear to apply to what I thought your were saying. Venal, meaning, "characterized by corruption" seemed more accurate. I'm sorry if I was wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
I don't much care for it either, but this tactic is frequently used by those who wish to use the Bible to support their own positions.Quote:
As for the reference. I read it. I have never been one to be very comfortable reading and using small parts of anything that is parsed as many verse quotes in the Bible.
Everything I was ever taught about the biblical God raised concerns for me. A God who is all good and all loving should not allow evil to exist, or allow innocents to be punished along with the guilty. A God who is all knowing contradicts the concept of free will, too. And if He knows something will happen, how can He become angry when it does?Quote:
Anyway I also am not one that claims the Bible is word for word the only criteria, nor that God concerned himself with day to day operations of humanity. Kind goes against the concept of free will! I did have a number of concerns with the reference, too short, and divorced from the situation at hand. Reading more of Samuel raised additional concerns.
No, everything I have learned tells me that, IF a god or gods created the universe, they did it for reasons we poor mortals cannot possibly comprehend, and believing that they did it just for us is a level of pride which would make one worthy of the biblical hell. As near as we can tell, our existence in this universe is the result of a nearly infinite series of cosmic accidents and random occurrences. One tiny change in that sequence eliminates humanity, as we know it, from the universe. And believe me, the universe would not miss us.
"(T)hrough 12 years of Catholic schooling, that God was all good, all knowing and all powerful. (This is, of course, the standard Judeo/Christian/Islamic God.) It was also accepted that God was eternal, unchanging"
You can not be trying to say that any being that can accomplish creation is not outside the understanding of mankind. Any "culture" sufficiently advanced will appear to operate as if by magic to a "primitive" culture.
12 years, huh, got you beat by one. Have you already forgotten one of the primary God questions we all asked? "Can God make a rock so big he can not pick it up?"
Quote:
As for the reference. I read it. I have never been one to be very comfortable reading and using small parts of anything that is parsed as many verse quotes in the Bible.
I don't much care for it either, but this tactic is frequently used by those who wish to use the Bible to support their own positions."
In my early teens a pair of Witnesses came to the door. Made a quote and presented the Book to show me. It was part of a sentence. Did not make much sense, read the whole sentence, did not make much sense either. Ended up reading the whole paragraph. At that point the mean was a bit clear but my understanding was the opposite of what they cited.
I began to discuss that with them but did not get very far.
Not for that reason. ----
My mom came to the front of the house and made me come in and shut the door!
No, I'm not saying that at all. What I am saying is that, if such a being existed, such that it's very being is outside the understanding of mankind, then no one, especially those self-proclaimed religious leaders, would be able to claim an understanding of that being. And to decide, without any evidence to confirm it, that all of the universe was built just for us smacks of a pride which those same leaders would condemn as sinful.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
An obviously intelligent woman!Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
BTW the consept of an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscientient, or even omnibenevolent deity does not preclude or negate free will in anyway whatsoever.
From each creatures personal perspective the theory of consepual awarness of ones fate or destiny if it does exist shouldnt preclude the fact that since you have no foreknowledge or way of precieving your own fate (trapped as we are by the human condition) that speculation on it doesnt rob you of it.
As for the existance of Evil geting in the way of omnibenevolance; I shall refer you to the philosopher St Augustine who wrote so much about it in his work "The City of God".
Semantics! Regardless of one's personal knowledge, if an omniscient being has already foreseen the results of everything, then anything you do will only lead to those results. While you may perceive it as free will, from the perspective of such a being it's predestined.Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
Yes, theologians have been wrestling with this problem for centuries, with little or no success. Evil comes from Satan, they say. But God created Satan, and that omniscient God knew that Satan would bring evil to the world, so God knowingly created evil.Quote:
As for the existance of Evil geting in the way of omnibenevolance; I shall refer you to the philosopher St Augustine who wrote so much about it in his work "The City of God".
The God in this quote is, of course, the traditional Judeo/Christian/Islamic God as defined in the Old Testament. While this does not say that a god or gods cannot exist, it does refute the existence of God as we've been taught to understand him.Quote:
From "God: The Failed Hypothesis", by Victor J. Stenger:
"The problem of evil can be formally stated as follows:
1. If God exists, then the attributes of God are consistent with the existence of evil.
2. The attributes of God are not consistent with the existence of evil.
3. Therefore, God does not and cannot exist.
Predestination that you are incable of knowing doesnt change the fact that from your perspective: you and you alone decide for yourself what your going to do in any given situation.
The one attempting to argue symatics here isnt me.
It doesnt refute anything whatsoever when you put Stenger up against Augustine and Occum with his razors.
Not all theologians say evil comes from "satan" (which wouldnt matter eaither since god made the devil) and being all powerful the devil must work for him by Stenger's model or not exisit at all, which only really addresess the issue of omnibenevolance.
Which btw isnt one of the criteria of being a surpreme deity persay.
Let's play a little game. You are my prisoner and I have given you a choice. Press the wrong button and you will die. Press the right button and you will go free. You have no reason to believe I am lying, and have every reason to believe that you may get free. You don't know that both buttons will kill you, so you assume you have a choice, but in reality your fate is sealed.Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
Just because YOU think there is a choice, or free will, does not make it so. An omniscient God implies that your fate is sealed. Your choices, while perhaps important in your mind, are meaningless.
Stenger's arguments are just as valid as Augustine's. Neither has any evidence for his side, although to my mind Stenger has the more logical argument, based upon the attributes of God as defined in the Bible.Quote:
It doesnt refute anything whatsoever when you put Stenger up against Augustine and Occum with his razors.
Not all theologians say evil comes from "satan" (which wouldnt matter eaither since god made the devil) and being all powerful the devil must work for him by Stenger's model or not exisit at all, which only really addresess the issue of omnibenevolance.
I don't know about any generic supreme deity, but God, as defined in the Bible, is omnibenevolent, omniscient and omnipotent. So he either permits evil things to happen, which means he is not omnibenevolent, or he doesn't know when evil will happen, which means he is not omniscient, or he cannot do anything to contain evil, which means he is not omnipotent. In ANY of these cases he fails the test, a test based on his own purported words, as put down in the Bible.Quote:
Which btw isnt one of the criteria of being a surpreme deity persay.
Ah yes, but the predetermined fate God gives you (if indeed He is omniscient) might be based upon your life up to that moment. How you lived it...how you treated others...how you reacted to situations, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
MY theory - and it is JUST a theory of mine - is that God was the meaning of creation, and just as compared to the universe, our lives on earth are just a blink of an eye as far as "time" goes. God created life to allow good and evil to wage against each other, and it is up to each individual to wage their own war against evil. Some lose, others win.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
As to predetermined fate; my theory on that is that the decisions we make in life (and the decisions of the people who surround us) lead us to a moment in time where the continuation of our life or our death might occur. I believe we make myriad decisions daily that could easily effect whether we live or die.
Case in point; You might be driving a motorcycle because it is a sunny day and you decided to go for a pleasant drive, but the person driving in the lane beside you decides to fiddle with the radio, or possibly to send a text message. Suddenly, their car swerves into you and you get into a fatal accident. Was your death your fault? Maybe, because you didn't HAVE to get on that motorcycle. The accident surely wasn't your fault, but your death could have been prevented had you made a different decision.
I can understand this, even accept the possibility of it. But it is NOT Jehovah you are talking about here. The god you hypothesize would not be likely to intervene in human affairs, would not really care whether or not people believed in him, would not be interested in having people worship him. He would have started the universe and let it go.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelish
Obviously this statement holds true as far as we can know. We do make decisions every day, and they do affect our own future, however minutely, and the futures of those around us. I have no problem with this.Quote:
As to predetermined fate; my theory on that is that the decisions we make in life (and the decisions of the people who surround us) lead us to a moment in time where the continuation of our life or our death might occur. I believe we make myriad decisions daily that could easily effect whether we live or die.
And again, I am dealing with the traditional definition of the biblical God. As an omniscient being, by definition, he knows the entire path of the universe, and every particle and beam of light, from creation to destruction. Since the bible places him outside of the universe, infinite, he knows everything about everything even before he creates it, again by definition. So regardless of how we may believe our actions are performed by our own free will, those actions were written in the mind of God, if you will, even before the creation of the universe. That is predestination.
Now I don't believe any of this. I don't find any need to hypothesize beings who have no interaction with the universe, beings who do not help or hinder us along our paths. As far as I can tell, such beings have no real meaning in our lives.
[QUOTE=Thorne;837746]Yes, theologians have been wrestling with this problem for centuries, with little or no success. Evil comes from Satan, they say. But God created Satan, and that omniscient God knew that Satan would bring evil to the world, so God knowingly created evil.
QUOTE]
As I remember Satan created himself!
[QUOTE=DuncanONeil;837898]If that were true then Satan would be God's equal, able to create something from nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
The way I learned it was that Satan, or Lucifer as he was called, was an angel created by God and cast down for rebelling against God. But with his omniscience, God would have known beforehand of Lucifer's evil, yet he created him anyway. Therefore, either God created evil, or he is not all knowing, or he is unable to stop what has been preordained. In any of these cases he fails the test for God (Jehovah).
Not necessarily. I believe our life on earth is God's test for us.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
[QUOTE=Thorne;837911]"Lucifer as he was called, was an angel created by God and cast down for rebelling against God."Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
See! As I said Satan created himself.
"with his omniscience, God would have known beforehand of Lucifer's evil," I take it then that you are of the opinion that God must not allow free will? Omniscience is not so much knowledge of will happen. But of all of the courses of results for all decision points.
Not exactly. It's my opinion that the idea of God, as defined in the Bible, is incompatible with the idea of free will.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
That's one definition, certainly, but not the one which is taught in the Biblical version of God. Or at least the why I was taught it. And much depends on which specific religion you are talking about. Since none can actually know anything real about their god, they make up their own definitions of what that god is, what he can do and why he does it. And when society grow beyond those definitions, why, they change the definitions!Quote:
Omniscience is not so much knowledge of will happen. But of all of the courses of results for all decision points.
Sorry I can not see such a restrictive description. Free will existed and is mention since the Garden.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
I will be honest, I do not remember the exact language of the lessons I received. Yet the concept of an All Knowing, All Powerful" God does not alter the description of knowing the result of all different actions by any of the creations. Now that you made me think thjat far back I do have a vague recollection of such a comment being made eithe by the nuns in elementary or priests in High School.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Non the less we have the illussion if nothing else of free will, regardless of weather or not God allready knows our choices etc, we still make them for ourselves.
But, some take a much more trancendental approach to the interpetation of these things.
It is also written that God is Love, and that God resides within each and every one of us, yes even you Thorne lol.
We are after all made in his image.
Yeah, that's part of my problem. I've spent so many years gratefully forgetting those lessons it's hard to dredge them up again.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
Everyone is entitled to take whatever approach they wish. That's one of the joys of freedom.Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
But my points are in reference to the Biblical Jehovah, who is supposedly the author of the Bible, and who is anything BUT love. And thankfully I am absolutely confident that there is no God residing within me. For we are not made in His image: rather, He was made in ours, with all our faults and foibles. And as mankind, through ignorance, created God, so mankind, through education, will eliminate him.
Or one day may find he is real and within us all.
God didnt write anything directly on the pages of a book unless in extension through us of his omnipotence. In which case, everything ever written by the hand of any man, including pornographic stories, is also written by god.
What is it about the "bibical interpretation of God that leads you to a decision that there is no free will and that no God?Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
"(S)o mankind, through education, will eliminate him"
Good luck with that!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
The Biblical interpretation, as I understand it, says that God knew, even before creation, everything that would occur after creation, right up to the end of the universe. That implies that the future is fixed, and therefore free will is an illusion. This is the way I was taught, and one of the things which pushed me away from the Catholic Church was their refusal to answer questions like this. It was always a case of "taking it on faith", which I found I could not do.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
The gods were created by men in an attempt to explain those things which they were ignorant about and unable to control, such as storms, earthquakes, volcanos, and the like. As our understanding of the natural world and the universe at large has grown, the need for having supernatural creatures to explain things has diminished. The advent of the home computer and the internet, bringing unprecedented means of information to virtually everyone everywhere is allowing great strides in understanding our real place in this universe, and the growing desperation of religions trying to maintain their hold on people's minds is allowing people to see those religions for what they really are. I honestly believe that, eventually, the greatest part of mankind (except for a few fanatics and idiots) will toss off the shackles of religion and realize their true potential.Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
I have faith in us.
The existance of Gods or God if you will isnt just some catch all imaginary thing used to explain our surroundings nessesarally, it's also a way of explaining those things we see within our selves sometimes those things that come from ourselves.
Perspective is everything when it comes to understanding something.
Ancient societies and faiths despite being seperated from each other developed many similar views on these things.
The more we discover through science and faith the closer to understanding the actual true nature of the universe and of god we come.
Ancient knowledge isnt nesseasarally popycock just becuase its been maligned by the faithless or those who think only one way exists of looking at things.
Ancient knowledge should not be confused with ancient superstitions. Knowledge is gained through experience and education, while superstition is just a way to explain something you cannot, or will not, understand. As you gain understanding the need for such explanations declines. A perfect example is lightning.Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
Christians always considered lightning to be a sign of God's wrath, inflicted upon sinners for their evil ways. Until Ben Franklin determined the true nature of lightning and, more importantly, developed a defense: the lightning rod.
Church leaders called the lightning rod a tool of the devil, intended to divert God's wrath. Business owners, on the other hand, realized that their buildings weren't getting struck when protected by the rods. When Church leaders realized that the town churches were being struck repeatedly while the town brothels were not they quickly changed their tunes.
Education and understanding eliminated the need for God as an excuse for being struck by lightning. Superstition feeds that obsolete need.
A Greek mathematician, Eratosthenes, calculated the diameter of the Earth around 240BC, so the ancients certainly had the knowledge and the intelligence to use that knowledge. But that does not mean that everything they believed should be taken as gospel. They were just as easy to manipulate and mislead as modern humans.
Certainly people can believe that God resides within them. There is no one who can prove them wrong. But if they cannot admit to themselves that this belief is based only on faith and not on evidence they are no better off than some ancient shepherd cowering in his field because a comet hangs in the sky. Maintain your faith if it comforts you. But don't deny reality and don't attempt to force that faith on others.
Again, I agree, no one should force anything on anyone, including athiests and scientists. And some of those beliefs are based on more than just faith depending upon which beliefs we are speaking of here. The world is not the Catholic Church that maligned you so during your youth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
I disagree. Inspiration and understanding (wisdom) may come through meditation, but not new knowledge.Quote:
Originally Posted by denuseri
You have proof of clairvoyance? And remote viewing? All I've ever heard of are illusionists' tricks and failed tests. I would love to see your evidence of these things. (Remember, anecdotes are not evidence.)Quote:
Another one is mans beilief that clairvoance was a fallacy, yet remote viewing techniques have proven thats not entirely true.
What difference does that make? His work is the same, regardless.Quote:
Benjamin Franklin was raised as an Episcopalian but was a Deist as an adult.
Actually, the crosses were part of the problem, providing a relatively easy path for lightning. And since they weren't grounded they didn't drain off the excess charge. Instead, they transmitted the full force of the lightning to the building (church).Quote:
(a lot of churches allrady had a version of the rod in a cross on a steeple, where do you think Ben may have got the idea)
Today's magic is either illusion for entertainment or for fraud. Magic does not work. Every scientific test of magic or supernatural claims has failed. While it is true that a sufficiently advanced technology could appear to be magic, the very fact that we are aware of that possibility allows us to search for the science behind it, rather than chalking it up to magic.Quote:
Todays magic is tomarrows science too.
Such as? I am quite willing to accept anything they may have believed, provided there is evidence for it. Their belief that Zeus ruled from Mt. Olympus, and such, does not impress me, however.Quote:
A Greek mathematician, Eratosthenes, calculated the diameter of the Earth around 240BC, so the ancients certainly had the knowledge and the intelligence to use that knowledge. (and yet they also belived in a great many other things you wish to blithely ignore or refuse to see as valid, when they were part of the whole)
It has been considered and studied. And discounted. That's what science does! That's why we have chemists rather than alchemists. That's why we have astronomers rather than astrologers (although there are still far too many of those around, too.)Quote:
I think all of it should however be considered and studdied in much greater detail before poetions are dismissed.
I can't speak for all atheists and scientists, of course, but I don't believe in forcing beliefs on anyone, either. But keeping theists from equating superstitions with science is not forcing beliefs, but keeping the two separate. Telling people that there's nothing wrong with not believing in God (as in the atheist bus ads campaigns) is not forcing anyone to believe in anything.Quote:
no one should force anything on anyone, including athiests and scientists.
I wouldn't say I was maligned by the Church. More like misled and lied to. But while I am more familiar with the Catholic Church than any other religions, I am against all types of religions. It's my belief that religion causes more problems and divisions in the world, simply by segregating people into believers and non-believers, than any other form of human endeavor. Using people's fears of death to control them is not my idea of a good thing.Quote:
The world is not the Catholic Church that maligned you so during your youth.
I am completely against organized religion. Most are zealots who (I agree with you) use people's faith as scare tactics to enforce the behavior they require their congregation to exhibit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
That being said it is my belief that faith in God's existence is exactly that...FAITH. I do believe he resides in each one of us. I feel He is the guiding force for good. Some call it a conscience, I prefer to believe it is God's guiding hand. Call it what you will. I for one think people are entitled to their own opinion in regards to faith. I do not believe in trying to "recruit" followers as organized religions are want to do. What another person believes (as far as religion goes) doesn't directly effect my life. Thank God (a slight pun there) that I live in the States and not where it WOULD effect my life, such as Ireland, Israel, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.
Even here in the US religion has far too great an influence on our lives than it should. Where I live they still have "Blue Laws" proscribing what one can do on Sundays. Your religion, or lack of it, has no bearing on whether these laws apply to you: they affect everyone. Those who protest against gay marriage are mostly doing so on religious grounds. Just ask gays in California if the tenets of organized religion have affected their lives. The same goes for abortion. And how likely would it be for an avowed atheist, for example, to be elected President?Quote:
Originally Posted by steelish
Religion in the US is so ubiquitous that we don't always see how it affects our daily lives, whether we believe or not. Most vocal atheists are striving to make people aware of that. They aren't trying to "recruit", or convert, people. They don't care what you believe. All they (we) want is for religious beliefs to be kept out of our lives. Don't make something illegal on Sunday if it's not illegal on Saturday. Don't push religion into public schools. Don't make others adhere to a religious belief of what constitutes a "proper" marriage.
As I've stated often here, I have no problem with those who believe in God, or gods. If you find comfort in your beliefs, who am I to say you are wrong? And if I don't feel the need for such a belief in my life, who is there to tell me that I am wrong?