Deva Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 After all those years of study one day you just decided it was not true? As we have all said repeatedly in this thread - it was not a decision. It was more like a revelation - a removal of the blinkers of faith. I didn't "decide" it was not true - I "found out" it wasn't true. There is a HUGE difference. A point that OC is either ignoring or can't comprehend. At this point I am thinking it is that he can't comprehend. To do so would be to jeopardize his neat little world view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brakeman Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 I always feel that I'm playing a virtual game of dodgeball with these Xtians. They know what you're asking and WHY, but pretend to answer with sidesteps. They're harder to pin on a point than a wrestler but then they'll claim to be open and honest and to answer all questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 At this point I am thinking it is that he can't comprehend. To do so would be to jeopardize his neat little world view. Nah. I suspect he's being a hardass on purpose. He's afraid that if he isn't, he could be in danger of losing his faith, and all would be crumbling down. And he's right. It would. Religion is just another name of self induced delusion based on fear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddbird1963 Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 It may be the environment. The spirit of debate and discourse causes one to be entrenched in their positions. And I can understand keeping your position, but there is no indication of an appreciation of our ex-Christian point of view. That's what I find inexcusable. At least give the people you are dialoging with a good listening to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdp Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 koo-koo. koo-koo. the stupid is stinging too hard, I have got to stop reading this thread. (yes, OC, I mean you) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
par4dcourse Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 The street preacher we had a while back was really out there. This guy is just standard issue apologist, although a well spoken one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdp Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 The street preacher we had a while back was really out there. This guy is just standard issue apologist, although a well spoken one. LNC does it better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franko47 Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 No, God knows all potential worlds(moves), and then chooses to actualize one. His choice could be based on picking the one with the minimum amount of evil, hence the no logical paradox. This allows Him to be omniscient, omnibenevolent and omnipotent with no logical contradiction. Wow. God told you that, did he ? The intellectual gymnastics required (as usual) to support these God theories are remarkable. Your double-backflips are good, though. Very neat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanta Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 You think so? I think some people are content to have their beliefs and leave others to have theirs. Transiently, maybe, but only while distracted with other things. I know many people who are content, not distracted, and so leave others to their beliefs. It is a sign of deep contentment not to feel driven to evangelize. You may not know such people because your experiences have only been with people putting their views on others. Part of this will be your immersion in the Evangelical community where the charge is to do so. Part of it may be just that like attracts like. People who are content with their beliefs don't need to argue them when faced with other views, so you wouldn't even know they didn't agree with you. And of course, you are here. We're an opinionated bunch. There are some quiet confident here. Can you name them? Hint: they aren't in the threads you like to participate in. Overall, your perspective is extremely limited by your own personality and religious goals. If someday you learn to be a listener instead of an Evangelizer, you will begin to notice those of quiet confidence. I can recognize quiet confidence and still evangelize. The recognition of the former does not preclude the action of the latter. I have found that I'm limited as to where I can post, but by all means point out to me those posts you think are evidence of quite confidence. You misunderstand my post. I'm not talking about you. You are not a practitioner of live and let live in quiet confidence; you are a vocal and active salesperson for your belief system. I'm talking about other people. My observations is that sometimes quiet is due to confidence, not "distraction by other things", as you asserted. I think I understand your perspective. Maybe. Those are bold words. Can you demonstrate that you understand Legion's perspective to Legion's satisfaction? Phanta What is predicated on my demonstrating anything to Legion? He wished I could. I believed I do. Demonstrating that you understand Legion's position provides evidence to us that your belief (that you understand him) is grounded in reality. It ensures that your end of the conversation is with a real person rather than your misunderstanding. It is also an act of good will and sincerity. Phanta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanta Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I made a consciouses choice to not believe based on the evidence. Which is my point. Ultimately you have to face the fact that is was a choice. Do you hav some awareness of how you feel when you try to believe or be with something contrary to the evidence? If so, can you share what happens to you? How do you feel? What thought processes manifest? Do these things have an impact on your daily quality of life? Phanta Yes, I choose not to believe, and yes this impacts my daily life. I don't understand where you are going with this to be honest. I want to make sure I understand what you are saying here. I'm going to paraphrase. You said, "Yes, I choose not to believe things even when I have evidence supporting them. This impacts my daily life." Do I have you right there? If so, when you choose to believe something contrary to significant evidence, how do you do it? How does it feel to you to operated contrary to evidence? What coping mechanisms do you put into place to deal with the cognitive dissonance? Would you be willing to share , an example of a time that you decided to believe something against extraordinary evidence to the contrary? How did that experience play out for you? Do you still affirm that belief? The place I am going is I am learning about who you are and how you operate and how it is similar and different to me. My point is that we can not pretend we are not responsible for our choices. We are. I would contend if a person pretends they are not then they may be trying to protect themselves from a choice they may not really believe was the right one. I agree that is one reason for not taking responsibility for our choices. It's one possible reason. Can you think of any others? Phanta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdinaryClay Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 No, God knows all potential worlds(moves), and then chooses to actualize one. His choice could be based on picking the one with the minimum amount of evil, hence the no logical paradox. This allows Him to be omniscient, omnibenevolent and omnipotent with no logical contradiction. I see you are waffling around on this one with "could be". Who knows, right? What is the "minimum amount of evil?" Why would a good God ever pick one with any evil? You may continue to pretend to know the mind of God - great entertainment value. I don't know the mind of God. I can not know the mind of God. My point is that the Problem of Evil is posed by some as a logical contradiction within the attributes of God. I've shown it is not by showing there could be a logical reason for picking a world with evil given we have free wills. As long as some possible reason exists there is no contradiction. Now the question about which actual world God chooses is another question as you point it. It may simply not be possible given we have free wills to actualize a world where the maximum amount of salvation occurs with out evil. We have a tendency to be ungrateful. None of us have the ability to know why God chose the world He did because we can not see the total picture, hence my quoting 1Co 13:12. In this I trust Him because of who He is. I worship Him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdinaryClay Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I made a consciouses choice to not believe based on the evidence. Which is my point. Ultimately you have to face the fact that is was a choice. So are you saying you reject evidence in order to believe, or that you have found a way to reconcile accepting evidence with your faith? I'm truly curious to know. Is it faith through denial, or transcending seeing the symbols literally into a different plane than literal facts on the ground? No, I accept evidence in order to believe. I look at the picture writ large. My faith is rational. Your faith in your dentist is not based on the fact you understand dentistry as well as he does. This would pick up with the other discussion. I don't consider the trust shown to the dentist to be a matter of faith, at least not in any way comparable to what is known as religious faith. I'd call that Faith, with a capital F. Faith in God, is nothing at all like faith in a dentist. As Tillich would call it, an Ultimate Concern. Dentists are not a matter of Ultimate Concern for a human (unless of course that dentist were a Nazi with a drill used for something really terrible)... So do you start with Evidence for your matters of Ultimate Concern? Or is there more than just a scientific approach to Faith, with a capital F? Does it begin with evidence, or something existential? My analogy still holds whether we are talking faith or "Faith", but we can go with your distinction if you like. It starts with evidence. As I've stated many times empirical evidence is not the only form of valid evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdinaryClay Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 After all those years of study one day you just decided it was not true? As we have all said repeatedly in this thread - it was not a decision. It was more like a revelation - a removal of the blinkers of faith. I didn't "decide" it was not true - I "found out" it wasn't true. There is a HUGE difference. How many years did it take you to have this "revelation"? What I don't understand is why it happened when it did and not a year earlier for example? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdinaryClay Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 No, God knows all potential worlds(moves), and then chooses to actualize one. Determinism then. Calvin was right. No, we have free will. God choose the world in which we would freely choose. His choice could be based on picking the one with the minimum amount of evil, hence the no logical paradox. Minimum amount of evil is: zero. There is not zero evil, hence God didn't pick minimum. This allows Him to be omniscient, omnibenevolent and omnipotent with no logical contradiction. Not since evil still exists. Was it impossible for God to create world without evil? Evil is a necessary attribute of nature? Why? You say it's because of free will. But how can there be free will if God already "picked" the will we will choose? You don't know what the minimum amount of evil is needed in a world with a maximum amount of salvation given free willed agents. It may well have been the case that God needed to allow a certain amount of evil to optimize the good given our free wills. None of us know the details of this dynamic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdinaryClay Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 After all those years of study one day you just decided it was not true? After years of doubt and attempts of keeping my faith (reading the Bible, praying, going to Church, asking God for more faith), one morning, after the shower, I looked into the mirror and just realized: There is not God. But to be on the safe side, I decided to pray anyway and ask God to convince me, somehow, his choice, to make me believe again. I'm still waiting... Since God picked this particular chain of events in my life, it is God's will that I'm not a believer. So why do you fight God? I don't fight God. I don't understand your question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdinaryClay Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 After all those years of study one day you just decided it was not true? As we have all said repeatedly in this thread - it was not a decision. It was more like a revelation - a removal of the blinkers of faith. I didn't "decide" it was not true - I "found out" it wasn't true. There is a HUGE difference. A point that OC is either ignoring or can't comprehend. I've responded to it multiple times. You may have come into the thread late. Choices were made to accept or reject principals, ideas and evidence. So choices were made. It was a decision as sure as any decision we make in our life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanta Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 None of us have the ability to know why God chose the world He did because we can not see the total picture, hence my quoting 1Co 13:12. In this I trust Him because of who He is. I worship Him. God is beyond your understanding so you trust him. God is beyond your complete understanding, so you worship God. A criteria (inspiration?) for you to trust in and worship something is that it be incomprehensible as a whole. Yes? If you understood God as a whole, would God not be worth worshiping? If you understood God as a whole, would God be untrustworthy? As an aside, why do you speak of God with a male gender pronoun? P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdinaryClay Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I know many people who are content, not distracted, and so leave others to their beliefs. It is a sign of deep contentment not to feel driven to evangelize. You may not know such people because your experiences have only been with people putting their views on others. Part of this will be your immersion in the Evangelical community where the charge is to do so. Part of it may be just that like attracts like. People who are content with their beliefs don't need to argue them when faced with other views, so you wouldn't even know they didn't agree with you. And of course, you are here. We're an opinionated bunch. There are some quiet confident here. Can you name them? Hint: they aren't in the threads you like to participate in. Overall, your perspective is extremely limited by your own personality and religious goals. If someday you learn to be a listener instead of an Evangelizer, you will begin to notice those of quiet confidence. I can recognize quiet confidence and still evangelize. The recognition of the former does not preclude the action of the latter. I have found that I'm limited as to where I can post, but by all means point out to me those posts you think are evidence of quite confidence. You misunderstand my post. I'm not talking about you. You are not a practitioner of live and let live in quiet confidence; you are a vocal and active salesperson for your belief system. I'm talking about other people. My observations is that sometimes quiet is due to confidence, not "distraction by other things", as you asserted. I understood. I was asking for you to point me to the posts of those(other people on this site) you thought demonstrated quiet confidence. Sorry for the confusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanta Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 No, God knows all potential worlds(moves), and then chooses to actualize one. Determinism then. Calvin was right. No, we have free will. God choose the world in which we would freely choose. His choice could be based on picking the one with the minimum amount of evil, hence the no logical paradox. Minimum amount of evil is: zero. There is not zero evil, hence God didn't pick minimum. This allows Him to be omniscient, omnibenevolent and omnipotent with no logical contradiction. Not since evil still exists. Was it impossible for God to create world without evil? Evil is a necessary attribute of nature? Why? You say it's because of free will. But how can there be free will if God already "picked" the will we will choose? You don't know what the minimum amount of evil is needed in a world with a maximum amount of salvation given free willed agents. It may well have been the case that God needed to allow a certain amount of evil to optimize the good given our free wills. None of us know the details of this dynamic. God's system requires some evil to work. Huh. Phanta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdinaryClay Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 None of us have the ability to know why God chose the world He did because we can not see the total picture, hence my quoting 1Co 13:12. In this I trust Him because of who He is. I worship Him. God is beyond your understanding so you trust him. God is beyond your complete understanding, so you worship God. A criteria (inspiration?) for you to trust in and worship something is that it be incomprehensible as a whole. Yes? If you understood God as a whole, would God not be worth worshiping? If you understood God as a whole, would God be untrustworthy? Your criteria is artificial. We can make choices and decisions on partial information. We do it all the time. The only criteria is that we understand enough that is relevant to the decision. I know God is the Creator. I know God gave us Salvation through Christ. I know God is Love. I know many other characteristics, and in total they make my decision to worship Him very easy. Joh 6:68 (68) Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanta Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 After all those years of study one day you just decided it was not true? After years of doubt and attempts of keeping my faith (reading the Bible, praying, going to Church, asking God for more faith), one morning, after the shower, I looked into the mirror and just realized: There is not God. But to be on the safe side, I decided to pray anyway and ask God to convince me, somehow, his choice, to make me believe again. I'm still waiting... Since God picked this particular chain of events in my life, it is God's will that I'm not a believer. So why do you fight God? I don't fight God. I don't understand your question. What is your goal in posting in these forums? Plain and honest. What are you looking to get out of this? Please list all intentions Phanta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 No, we have free will. God choose the world in which we would freely choose. So we can choose freely, but God already knows what we will choose. It's a deterministic system. When the system has a given and specific outcome, which cannot be changed--since God knows the future with absolute certainty--the system is deterministic. You don't know what the minimum amount of evil is needed in a world with a maximum amount of salvation given free willed agents. It may well have been the case that God needed to allow a certain amount of evil to optimize the good given our free wills. None of us know the details of this dynamic. But you claim that you do know. You're making the assumption that this world is the minimum amount of evil, but you can't know. You're making an assumption, and that is your proof of God, and your belief in God is the proof of your assumption. You're begging the question all over again, over and over and over... by using circular arguments. You're not researching the ideas with an honest mind. You're locked into a given system of thoughts, and you won't give them up because you're afraid of the consequences. You're avoiding the questions and refuse to really look into the problems of the arguments. In other words, you're dishonest to yourself and to others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I don't fight God. I don't understand your question. North of the North Pole. You don't understand because you are protecting your belief and can't see beyond your trained apologetic reasoning. If God exists and he is the way you say he is (North of the North Pole), then I am exactly at the point in life he knew I would be, so why are you here trying to undo God's will? But perhaps that's another "North of the North Pole" question for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 What is your goal in posting in these forums? Plain and honest. What are you looking to get out of this? Please list all intentions I can answer that. He's doing it because he thinks he's better than us, and he wants to show us how superior he is in all aspect and hopefully create a cult group of followers who worship the ground he walks on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted March 8, 2010 Author Share Posted March 8, 2010 What is your goal in posting in these forums? Plain and honest. What are you looking to get out of this? Please list all intentions My guess... He's put a lot of effort into acquiring his apologetic arsenal and now he wants to test it out on us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts