Charas-Project
Off-Topic => All of all! => Topic started by: Blue_Strife on August 16, 2007, 02:44:30 AM
-
A link brought to me by a friend, who's trying to find the problem in the theory (if any). I've read it over, but I still need more time to mull it around my head.
Thought I'd post it here--hear some other thoughts on it.
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0605uan.asp
Discuss?
-
Interesting theory. It would never sway an atheist, however, since they are indeed unimpressionable about their views of such an entity, but for any believers or even agnostic peoples, this theory definitely holds its weight about a more definite existence of God. I believe in a God, even if only to give myself a chance at avoiding the potential suffering in Hell, but my views do not exactly coincide with that of any religion that I've encountered. Sometimes, I even wish I was atheist, since it would be nice to lose my fear of moral wrong-doings and such, but I cling to a God simply so that I may have something left to believe in (I'm quite a depressed person, and faith in something really helps me hold it together).
-
It's an interesting view on god, it took a lot of re-reading to get wtf they were trying to save, but I got it, I think. Being an agnostic, it makes me think a little bit, but, if I'm reading this right, what they're saying is that the act of existing is itself an entity. Because, according to their theory, things that perceive are beyond a shadow of a doubt existing and without existence we would not exist and that would be impossible because we can perceive things and so on. But that doesn't really make much sense because then they're saying that Existence is in itself a thing(entity/god) and with that in mind and according to their theory, that it can perceive. This doesn't really prove to me (or make much sense) beyond a shadow of a doubt that god exists or that Existence is god. I may be reading it wrong, but it's kind of confusing and not very straightforward. I'll need to think it over in my head.
-
Sure, there might be an entity that exists somewhere, but not THE god.
The god of christianity is stories just as true as our belief in the old gods, the northern mythology.
But the only thing they state is argumetns like how it is not affected by time then it must be eternal. How do they know that it really isn't? It's been quite some tiem sicne god's last visit, it could have died during that time.
And I doubt that a god could know everything, the technology, history, my thoughts, your memories. Just can't be done.
If there is one thing that proves in god then it must be;
I know that I am not complete because there is something that is. This something must be a higher power, one who is what we used to be when we were shaped from his image. He is god as god is complete.
-
I've read way too many things that are essentially the same thing as this, only the opposite, saying "God does not exist, and here's why".
The other week I had mormons telling me how the mormon religion works. It was actually quite interesting, but I wasn't converted. Their strand of Christianity is "the right one" due to it having been created by the latest prophet in the 1800s to set things on track, while all the other Christ based religions, though have stuck to the bible for the most part, have strayed away in certain areas, which makes them all different and slightly wrong. Will they go to Hell for being wrong? I don't know, I should have asked in retrospect. But if I don't accept Christ by golly I'll certainly be turned away by God once I get there.
Which is where my main gripe lies. If this God does exist, he certainly isn't omnipotent and/or omniscient and/or all loving. My understanding is that He made me the way I am, but gave me free will so I could make my own choices. Which include not accepting Christ (which would be classed as a "mistake"). Which is all I can do having seen the things I've seen.
And if a God will let me make mistakes and won't take me back after I make them, then mister, he's not the God I want to look up to.
That, and the whole Heaven/eternity/family errors.
-
And if a God will let me make mistakes and won't take me back after I make them, then mister, he's not the God I want to look up to.
This is where I totally agree with you on. (Actually I agree with you on everything) The whole idea of a god that is all loving banishing someone to an eternity of brimstone and fire for not accepting Christ does not seem like the kind of a god I would want to believe in. I believe if God does exist and IS as all loving and forgiving as they than he couldn't possibly be as ruthless as the bible at times depicts him to be.
If you live out your life doing whatever you can to just be, in general, a good person, why should you go to hell simply because you did not accept Christ? If I live out my life and do the best I can to be a good person and I STILL go to hell, then in hell I'll lay knowing all the bastards in this world are enjoying themselves upstairs.
-
Originally posted by drenrin2120
But that doesn't really make much sense because then they're saying that Existence is in itself a thing(entity/god)
That was my reaction also!
This theory seems to be akin to the ontological argument for God, and shares similar flaws with it.
Let's take point 11:
Originally posted by catholics
Even if you’re a brain in a vat, you can perceive that you have the capacity to know. Because you are only partly actual, and esse is purely actual, esse must know all there is to know. That is, esse is all-knowing, or omniscient.
They make the faulty assumption that knowledge is somehow correlated with existance. A peregrin falcon knows more than a chair, but that doesn't make the falcon somehow more "real" than the chair. I could just as easily say that I am partially actual and therefore have a partial lack of knowledge, whereas esse is completely actual and therefore knows absolutely nothing.
-
The truth is simple, there are more than one god. One all-loving, one all-caring, one all-knowing, one all-judgning and so on. Wonderful idea. But now after 2000 years they have passed away in tears of what mankind became.
Or maybe he just has a twisted mood, like that sickness whatever-it-was-called.
-
Bi-polar?
-
They're just saying that God is everything that exists. That's not God, that's everything.
It proofs that
A) I exist
B) Everything around me exists
This did not convince me that a God exists.
Also, if God is all-loving. Then why is there a place called Hell? If he is all-loving, Hell is empty and Ghandi is drinking a cup of thee up in Heaven while playing poker with Adolf Hitler and Sadam Hussein.
Hell is probably just a holiday place.
-
Oh Drace, you just lost the game by evoking Godwin's Law.
But I agree, and that's something that's also bothered me. An all loving God WOULD take back Hitler, Saddam, seemingly everyone but Satan (but technically...).
To add to the Hitler thing, apparently he was some kind of Christian, as well. (http://"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_religious_beliefs#Christianity")
Originally posted by drenrin2120
If I live out my life and do the best I can to be a good person and I STILL go to hell, then in hell I'll lay knowing all the bastards in this world are enjoying themselves upstairs.
lol
-
Something I read before that sounded interesting for a counter-arguement for God not existing. O.o... The Epicurean Paradox.
"God either wants to eliminate bad things and cannot, or can but does not want to, or neither wishes to nor can, or both wants to and can.
If he wants to and cannot, he is weak -- and this does not apply to God.
If he can but does not want to, then he is spiteful -- which is equally foreign to God's nature.
If he neither wants to nor can, he is both weak and spiteful and so not a god.
If he wants to and can, which is the only thing fitting for a god, where then do bad things come from? Or why does he not eliminate them?"
-
In the end, there is no explanation. It all comes down to faith. You either believe in the guy, or you don't.
I believe God exists. There is a big man in the sky who loves everybody and gave his only begotten son because of it. I do not see myself changing this belief anytime in the near future.
Originally posted by drenrin2120
This is where I totally agree with you on. (Actually I agree with you on everything) The whole idea of a god that is all loving banishing someone to an eternity of brimstone and fire for not accepting Christ does not seem like the kind of a god I would want to believe in. I believe if God does exist and IS as all loving and forgiving as they than he couldn't possibly be as ruthless as the bible at times depicts him to be.
If you live out your life doing whatever you can to just be, in general, a good person, why should you go to hell simply because you did not accept Christ? If I live out my life and do the best I can to be a good person and I STILL go to hell, then in hell I'll lay knowing all the bastards in this world are enjoying themselves upstairs.
In responce to the first paragraph, you have to remember that most people in the world are Christians. Jesus, and many others proclaimed the Messiah, believed in a non-violent approach. The more traditional practices such as stoning and sacrifing animals are pretty much null in void. You also cannot pick and choose acts out of the new testament and call them sins either. The only rules you are supposed follow are the Ten Commandments.
Razor, you especially are missing the point despite all of my posts afterward. Again, being a good person is not the point of Christianity, or any other monotheistic religion based on our god. We don't run on a point system. Like you've said before, you simply have to believe.
As to your good acts scenario, take it this way. If you intentionally act like Mother Teresa yet go around everyone telling everyone that religion is wrong and should be abolished, this is an act of defiance. You cannot say that this person truely has a good heart.
If you still don't undersand it, think of it like a non-racist person accidentally doing a racist action. After finding out that his audience was offended, this person defends his action because of his mindset, and refuses to apologize.
If you are wondering why I believe in God so strongly, I'm not too sure myself. I've met people who have been legally pronounced dead before, and they've told people what they've seen. Their experiences relate to the idea of a Heaven and a Hell. I also believe that there are other "places" than Heaven and Hell. Purgatory is a good one. If you remember my Ghost topic that seemed to disappear, I believe in Ghosts. I've always believed in an afterlife.
At the same time, I've never been afraid of dying or going to hell. You're not supposed to worry. Just live your life. If you go, you go. If you don't, you don't.
I remember someone posting a very good question about "doing everything possible to stop a person from burning in hell." I think it was Moosetroop11. To answer that, honestly...no. The most I can do is say...
I believe in Jesus Christ as my savior and I suggest you do the same.
Anything further than that is "pressuring someone into my beliefs." This day in age, you can't even say Merry Christmas anymore. Religion something you have to decide for yourself.
Also, Jesus Christ taught me this lesson about putting everyone else above yourself. This is what separates religions that have a Messiah from other religions to me. The idea of giving your life for someone, even if they are not your lover, or child, or family member, or friend just sticks to you.
I've read a lot about other religions before the time of Christ. Summerian religion. Greco-Roman religion. The fae. I could never find this idea of self sacrifice and love in those. Christ reperesents that idea. I think that's what makes him, and God so real, and why is so engrained into culture.
Of course there are those that treat it like a social club. :dry:
What can you do?
I have to go.
-
Originally posted by Blue_Strife
Something I read before that sounded interesting for a counter-arguement for God not existing. O.o... The Epicurean Paradox.
"God either wants to eliminate bad things and cannot, or can but does not want to, or neither wishes to nor can, or both wants to and can.
If he wants to and cannot, he is weak -- and this does not apply to God.
If he can but does not want to, then he is spiteful -- which is equally foreign to God's nature.
If he neither wants to nor can, he is both weak and spiteful and so not a god.
If he wants to and can, which is the only thing fitting for a god, where then do bad things come from? Or why does he not eliminate them?"
Well, think like I think: If God did eliminate everything bad from the world, where would be the fun? It's not a joke, either. Since everyone here is being so philosophical, here's my two cents:
- Something is only what it is if it has it's opposite. If God banned everything bad, there would be no good. Sure, everyone would do good things, yay, but nobody would really care, because it'd be just the natural. alternativaly, if God destroyed everything good, everyone would kill each other and be evil, but again nobody would care, in fact we can argue that everyone would be happier that way since they would not know the existence of evil, thus not think about it.
...
Oh, I just found a wall of text for me to quote and dissecate, how wonderful!
As to your good acts scenario, take it this way. If you intentionally act like Mother Teresa yet go around everyone telling everyone that religion is wrong and should be abolished, this is an act of defiance. You cannot say that this person truely has a good heart.
Then there is the other way around. My cousin, as an example, is a religious zealot, he just can't accept that I don't believe in J.C. and tries to convert me everytime we meet. Now, he is aways going around telling me how I'm wrong for not being part of his religion, seriously. I'm just pointing out about how things can go two ways in these cases, I still think you're right in that example of yours.
If you still don't undersand it, think of it like a non-racist person accidentally doing a racist action. After finding out that his audience was offended, this person defends his action because of his mindset, and refuses to apologize.
ARE YOU CALLING ME A RACIST BECAUSE IF YOU ARE YOU BETTER APOLOGIZE!!!
I don't have the patience to dissecate anymore.
doh, doh doh... what now... huh....
Oh, yeah.
- About believing in Big J.C., yo.
I don't, really. That is all.
-
Are we just talking about God's existance in general here or just the article? Just so I'm clear.
Originally posted by Prpl_Mage
The truth is simple, there are more than one god. One all-loving, one all-caring, one all-knowing, one all-judgning and so on. Wonderful idea.
Actually, that's another point that relates to the article. "Esse" is the epitome of existance, so would there also be similar Gods of love and knowledge etc? Why should we bundle them all into one package?
I know things, therefore the act of knowing exists, let's call it Asse, and it lives in a pink fairy castle with Esse. Apply also for loving and judging and whatever.
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
christians... racism... etc
Discriminating against a religion is leagues different from discriminating against a race. For one thing, your race is not chosen. You can't help your race. And more importantly, a race is not a set of beliefs and customs.
If you tell me your race, any assumptions I made about your personality or thoughts would be horrendously unfair. If you told me you were a christian however, I could pretty safely assume that you believed in Jesus Christ, an omnipotent God, that the bible is a special and holy book, and an afterlife.
Also, what if I acted like [STRIKE]Mother Theresa[/STRIKE] (okay I don't actually think MT was all that hot) really really awesome, like I cured cancer and saved orphans and **** and simply disbelieved in God without saying anything about it being abolished. Better yet, what if I had simply never heard of Jesus Christ and therefore never had the chance to convert? Would I deserve a place in hell?
-
Originally Posted by Red Giant
Discriminating against a religion is leagues different from discriminating against a race. For one thing, your race is not chosen. You can't help your race. And more importantly, a race is not a set of beliefs and customs.
If you tell me your race, any assumptions I made about your personality or thoughts would be horrendously unfair. If you told me you were a christian however, I could pretty safely assume that you believed in Jesus Christ, an omnipotent God, that the bible is a special and holy book, and an afterlife.
This is comeplete and utter bull****. If you make an assumption about a person based on anything other than their character at all, you are not in the right mindset.
I]Originally Posted by Red Giant[/I]
Also, what if I acted like Mother Theresa (okay I don't actually think MT was all that hot) really really awesome, like I cured cancer and saved orphans and **** and simply disbelieved in God without saying anything about it being abolished. Better yet, what if I had simply never heard of Jesus Christ and therefore never had the chance to convert? Would I deserve a place in hell?
In the first case, maybe. You've heard about Jesus Christ. You decide that he isn't real. Then you go out and do the things Christians are supposed to do anyway, you're doing something wrong. You're too worried about going to hell. STOP WORRYING ABOUT IT! If you truely are a Christian, you simply live your life. You may screw up from time to time, but you don't expect any rewards for being a good person. You just naturally are.
In the second case, I think you would go to heaven. You never had the chance. I think you would just have to have the right mindset. In the end, it's up to God and I believe it would be something similar.
-
GEMINI'S TWO CENTS:
yeah...my god can kick your gods ***
jesus was half alien
-
Like Grandy said, if there was no evil then nothing would be good. It would be normal. Dark and light walk hand in hand and between them is twilight... Yeah something like that.
In other words, the evil are tests or things created by the downright efil satan so that the good will apppear stronger than it is.
It's like those creepy civilizations run by cults and such. They villigers doesn't know of anything else and therefor they do not question it.
But if I would go there and tell them that the world was created in an explosion as Science states then they wouldn't believe me and call it herecy.
And the patriarch in their church will not have to be a dictator because he got all the power as long as they do not have any possibilities in believing in something else.
I had this disscusion with a friend of mine and we got to the conclusion that supreme christianity would be the best for the people but not quite right moraly.
-
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
Originally Posted by Red Giant
This is comeplete and utter bull****. If you make an assumption about a person based on anything other than their character at all, you are not in the right mindset.
And I would say that one's religion is a part of one's character. Would you say it was unfair to assume that a christian believed in God, Jesus and the Bible? If someone tells me they are a nazi, I don't need to ask anymore questions to know that I disagree with some major points in their thinking. If you're a nazi, you're a ****ing bastard, IMO. I mean that's very much what political or religious labels are helpful for- they communicate the persons beliefs easily.
Let me ask you something. I'm an atheist. You can safely assume- to no offense to me- that I don't believe in God. You would also assume that I am wrong in not believing in God, wouldn't you? You've already judged me in a small way- you now know that I hold at least one incorrect belief that you know better.
-
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
you have to remember that most people in the world are Christians.
What's your definition of 'most'?
That 'proof' is one of those things that helps you believe if you desperately want to. It's many steps just proved that the ability to exist exists >.>
-
"'I refuse to prove that I exist', says God, 'Because proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing'".
Jim, get on MSN. Now. I have news to impart. New news.
-
Originally Posted by Red Giant
And I would say that one's religion is a part of one's character. Would you say it was unfair to assume that a christian believed in God, Jesus and the Bible?
Yes, I would say it was unfair. This is because you cannot possibly know exactly what it is I believe without me telling you. You would have to assume how I practice my religion, how I study the bible, and how I have chosen my denomination.
If someone tells me they are a nazi, I don't need to ask anymore questions to know that I disagree with some major points in their thinking. If you're a nazi, you're a ****ing bastard, IMO.
I DO NOT SUPPORT NAZISM IN ANY SHAPE OR FORM.
With that said, this statement would only work if there was only one denomination of Nazism. Yes you have the rascist people who believe in killing everyone that isn't blonde with blue eyes. You have to remember that until Hitler began practicing these beliefs, Nazism was a Germanic sense of nationalism. Many were in the dark about the party's true practices.
This statement also apply to Neo-Nazism. Would you believe that some sects accept blacks and latin americans, instead directing thier efforts towards illegal immigrants? Would you believe that many Neo-Nazism group members are homosexuals? Would you believe that there are Nazi organizations that accept the Hebrew as whites, based on the evidence supporting that Hitler was himself one?
Let's take that same statement and replace Christian with nazi.
If someone tells me they are a Christian, I don't need to ask anymore questions to know that I disagree with some major points in their thinking. If you're a Christian, you're a ****ing bastard, IMO.
I mean that's very much what political or religious labels are helpful for- they communicate the persons beliefs easily.
You cannot assume you know everything about a person's beliefs based on a word. There are too many people in the world. There are too many sects in religions. There are too many variances within each church as far as beliefs and interpretations go. With or without the Bible, it's a moral to only judge others based on their character. You're smart enough to know this.
Let me ask you something. I'm an atheist. You can safely assume- to no offense to me- that I don't believe in God. You would also assume that I am wrong in not believing in God, wouldn't you? You've already judged me in a small way- you now know that I hold at least one incorrect belief that you know better.
To be honest, no. I would not believe you were wrong in not believing in God. I would ask you for your reasons why you don't believe in God. It would be your words that I judge you upon. That is true character. If you can give me a sensible response as to why you do not believe in God, I would simply leave you alone. If you cannot, I would question you.
Originally Posted by Moosetroop11
What's your definition of 'most'?
Googled.
According to and ARIS report in 2000 and posted on this website, 33% of people in the known world are Christians. If you consider that the Christian God, Allah, and Yahweh are the same entity, 52.8% in the know world believe in God.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm
If you would like a more recent report made in 2005, or a bigger pie chart.
http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html
-
honestly dudes, when it comes to faith and morals, you arent going to sway anyone with statistics. You arent going to sway anyone with anything. Its Faith. They believe in it because they FEEL its right. Facts dont matter. Im not saying this is an awesome thing...but its something to remember before getting into long winded debates about god....full of quotes and such.
As for 32 or 52 percent of the worl believing in God....thats so effing subjective you cant even use it in an argument. How many prodestant Churches, each with different interpretations of "God" are there? And then your going to throw catholics and Hindus into it? nope. Good try though.
Sure....for the most part, these "god"s are the same....Except that one dosent like gays...One thinks that the jews are evil...one tells you its okay to have many wives....one says you need to drink wine to worship...one says......you get the picture.
Ive never understood why people feel the need to yammer on about their beliefs in the existential. You figure out what the reality of it is alot quicker if you quit talking...and get away from everyone elses talking, and just listen.
That was geminis other two cents. Good day, sirs.
-
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
Yes, I would say it was unfair. This is because you cannot possibly know exactly what it is I believe without me telling you. You would have to assume how I practice my religion, how I study the bible, and how I have chosen my denomination.
[/I]
Exactly which denominations don't believe in those things? It also begs a question of definition. I mean, I don't know about you, but I would think that someone who didn't believe in those things couldn't be a christian by definition.
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
I DO NOT SUPPORT NAZISM IN ANY SHAPE OR FORM.
Well I wasn't really trying to say you did.
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
With that said, this statement would only work if there was only one denomination of Nazism. Yes you have the rascist people who believe in killing everyone that isn't blonde with blue eyes. You have to remember that until Hitler began practicing these beliefs, Nazism was a Germanic sense of nationalism. Many were in the dark about the party's true practices.
This statement also apply to Neo-Nazism. Would you believe that some sects accept blacks and latin americans, instead directing thier efforts towards illegal immigrants? Would you believe that many Neo-Nazism group members are homosexuals? Would you believe that there are Nazi organizations that accept the Hebrew as whites, based on the evidence supporting that Hitler was himself one?
Really? Which ones?
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
Let's take that same statement and replace Christian with nazi.
I can only assume you did this purely for entertainment.
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
You cannot assume you know everything about a person's beliefs based on a word. There are too many people in the world. There are too many sects in religions. There are too many variances within each church as far as beliefs and interpretations go. With or without the Bible, it's a moral to only judge others based on their character. You're smart enough to know this.
I never claimed I could know everything, just some things. If the words don't communicate anything at all then what would be the point in having them?
EDIT: In that pie chart, I love the way the Chinese Folk outnumber the Jews and Sikhs. tf? Chinese Traditionals? That's believing in effing dragons and **** man. Come on guys, get on the ball.
-
How could a guy I respect this much be this hard-headed?
Originally Posted by Red Giant
I never claimed I could know everything, just some things.
That's where the problem lies. You cannot assume anything.
If the words don't communicate anything at all then what would be the point in having them?
They're their so you can get to the good stuff like response, action, and character.
I've twice posted that a person should only be judged by their character. Twice you responded. I believe you have a problem with this statement. This realization does not come from what I know of you, but from the fact that you have responded twice. I've judged you on your actions, which is a real sign of character.
So now I am going to ask you. Should a person be judged by anything other than his or her character?
-
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
Originally Posted by Moosetroop11
What's your definition of 'most'?
Googled.
According to and ARIS report in 2000 and posted on this website, 33% of people in the known world are Christians. If you consider that the Christian God, Allah, and Yahweh are the same entity, 52.8% in the know world believe in God.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm
If you would like a more recent report made in 2005, or a bigger pie chart.
http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html[/B]
Because there never was a period in time when the majority of people were wrong and the minority was right.
o wait