Is it actually impossible to reason with a devout christian?

[Karna]

1 hour ago, Moonobserver said:

If one believes in deity of any sort, the belief that God (for lack of a better word) will eventually end all suffering is perfectly legitimate. It can't be proven since it's an inductive argument, but it is a legitimate belief.

It is more like a 'comforting' belief. In my opinion, that is a big difference. And then beliefs have nothing to do with reality.

[Moonobserver]

31 minutes ago, Karna said:

It is more like a 'comforting' belief. In my opinion, that is a big difference. And then beliefs have nothing to do with reality.

There are two kinds of belief: believing because you have *faith* in something and believing because you have *reason* to believe something, and that goes into the area of how people argue for what they believe in----even if they believe in a deity.

[Moonobserver]

38 minutes ago, florduh said:

 

Legitimate belief? Then the belief in Santa is also legitimate. More correctly, it's an unfounded belief/wishful thinking. People believe in Xenu, but is that legitimate? The word "legitimate" means more than simply that people believe it.

Pardon me for invoking William Lane Craig here (I try to avoid that), but he has pointed out that we know Santa doesn't live at the North pole because we've been there. As far as I know no one has proposed Santa as the source of all existence, so the existence of a deity isn't as easy to dispense with as Santa. The word "legitimate" as it pertains to belief applies to any belief one can argue for, and many argue for the existence of some form of deity.

[Joshpantera]

3 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

When you look at the Bible and it says x and y, and then later adds z, the reasonable approach is how does x,y, and z fit together under one idea.  Jesus promises to end suffering at His return. I'm unclear how each of you over and over and over move towards "God is unwilling to end" our suffering......especially since it's reasonable to place ourselves post Jesus and pre return of Jesus.....where God has given control over to the evil we witness.  Am I the only one who remembers this part of the story? 

 

That's a fair question. First of all, god knew this would all happen, sin, suffering the whole shebang. Because we're talking an "all" god, who is all-knowing among everything else. He failed to stop suffering BEFORE it happened, for one thing. 

 

1) Apologists would then say that he didn't stop it from happening because of "free will."

 

But that doesn't work very well. Calvinist's understand that according to all-knowing, everything that happens including the saved and dammed are predestined, because it's all known in advance of any of it happening. The more we focus in on what an all-knowing god entails, the more deterministic the scenario. For this reason, the first excuse or apologetic that claims that god allowed sin and suffering into existence due to free will, flies in the face of an all-knowing god with all of the necessary deterministic's involved in such a claim. Whatever someone may call free will in this scenario, turns out to not be very free will in the grand scheme, the big picture. 

 

So none of it really needed to happen, but he basically predetermined that it would happen anyways even though the whole thing is entirely unnecessary. Then, allowed it to play out for centuries on end for no good reason. 

 

2) Apologist's would say that he allowed it play out because of the plan of salvation and eventual end to suffering.

 

But the plan of salvation makes little sense in the first place considering apology #1 and how that plays out.

 

Why does the god have to start off humans making sacrifices so that eventually, he himself can come to the earth, live a human life knowing that he will sacrifice himself, to himself, as an atonement for sin? The whole thing is already full of nonsense. He didn't have to let it happen on account of free will, so because of free will he didn't have to let sin play out, come to earth as a human, and sacrifice himself to himself as an atonement for sin. If we factor in the pantheistic philosophy that comes from an actual, "all" god who is "all present" among other things, the god is all of it anyways and this charade makes no sense whatsoever. He has to be both the god and lucifer to this extent, the boss and the rebel.

 

So in this bigger picture god is allowing free will to play even though it's illusory and the whole thing unnecessary, in order that an aspect of himself (the "all god") can chose to rebel against himself, take the rebellion to earth (which is the "all god" too), deceive humans (also the "all god"), instate the plan of salvation by starting sacrificial rites, (the "all god" is both human and animal btw) so that he can send himself to earth, at some pre-determined point, into the womb of a virgin girl (who is also the "all-god"). So that this all knowing god can live a human life, experience suffering (which he's been experiencing all along anyways, because the god is everything), die, knowing that he will return himself back to life in the human form (which he has already been in anyways, because he's all humans) and ascend up and away (whatever that means concerning a god who is already everywhere and everything). Then later, come back (from where?) and raise the dead (who have been himself all along) and send death, sin, the grave, the beast, false prophet and dragon (all of whom must be him) in a lake of burning sulfur (which is the god himself, again). At which point, finally, an END TO SUFFERING is finally established per the end of Revelation????

 

3 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

My proposal was that all these interactions are allowed in that they serve a purpose in God's plan....hardship and all. 

 

Yet we can't seem to get past God doesn't want to stop it....impotent God.  Say something else.....we've heard it and it's not part of the story that I can tell.  xoxo Edgarcito.

 

The plan is utter and complete nonsense, demonstrable nonsense, though. Read the bold over.

 

It's not that I've forgotten the plan of salvation, it's that I've taken the assertion of such a plan to task in my own mind. The bottom line is that it is a situation where the god won't stop it. Even though there's no good reason to have ever allowed any of it to begin with! And the part about finally stopping it (see above) stretches the term "utter and complete nonsense." It's gibberish! Poppycock! 

 

Many hugs and kisses right back at you, Edgarcito! 

 

Maybe think on this for a while. This is a very WTF sort of plan, wouldn't you agree?????

[WalterP]

7 minutes ago, Moonobserver said:

There are two kinds of belief: believing because you have *faith* in something and believing because you have *reason* to believe something, and that goes into the area of how people argue for what they believe in----even if they believe in a deity.

 

I agree with your definition of the two kinds of belief, Moonobserver.

 

However, a big problem arises when what people believe by faith causes them to disconnect themselves from their fellow human beings.  For instance, look at Edgarcito's lack of empathy towards the suffering of that ten year old sex slave.  Faith isn't a good thing if it corrodes your humanity.  

 

Thanks.

 

Walter.

[Edgarcito]

1 hour ago, Joshpantera said:

 

That's a fair question. First of all, god knew this would all happen, sin, suffering the whole shebang. Because we're talking an "all" god, who is all-knowing among everything else. He failed to stop suffering BEFORE it happened, for one thing. 

 

1) Apologists would then say that he didn't stop it from happening because of "free will."

 

But that doesn't work very well. Calvinist's understand that according to all-knowing, everything that happens including the saved and dammed are predestined, because it's all known in advance of any of it happening. The more we focus in on what an all-knowing god entails, the more deterministic the scenario. For this reason, the first excuse or apologetic that claims that god allowed sin and suffering into existence due to free will, flies in the face of an all-knowing god with all of the necessary deterministic's involved in such a claim. Whatever someone may call free will in this scenario, turns out to not be very free will in the grand scheme, the big picture. 

 

So none of it really needed to happen, but he basically predetermined that it would happen anyways even though the whole thing is entirely unnecessary. Then, allowed it to play out for centuries on end for no good reason. 

 

2) Apologist's would say that he allowed it play out because of the plan of salvation and eventual end to suffering.

 

But the plan of salvation makes little sense in the first place considering apology #1 and how that plays out.

 

Why does the god have to start off humans making sacrifices so that eventually, he himself can come to the earth, live a human life knowing that he will sacrifice himself, to himself, as an atonement for sin? The whole thing is already full of nonsense. He didn't have to let it happen on account of free will, so because of free will he didn't have to let sin play out, come to earth as a human, and sacrifice himself to himself as an atonement for sin. If we factor in the pantheistic philosophy that comes from an actual, "all" god who is "all present" among other things, the god is all of it anyways and this charade makes no sense whatsoever. He has to be both the god and lucifer to this extent, the boss and the rebel.

 

So in this bigger picture god is allowing free will to play even though it's illusory and the whole thing unnecessary, in order that an aspect of himself (the "all god") can chose to rebel against himself, take the rebellion to earth (which is the "all god" too), deceive humans (also the "all god"), instate the plan of salvation by starting sacrificial rites, (the "all god" is both human and animal btw) so that he can send himself to earth, at some pre-determined point, into the womb of a virgin girl (who is also the "all-god"). So that this all knowing god can live a human life, experience suffering (which he's been experiencing all along anyways, because the god is everything), die, knowing that he will return himself back to life in the human form (which he has already been in anyways, because he's all humans) and ascend up and away (whatever that means concerning a god who is already everywhere and everything). Then later, come back (from where?) and raise the dead (who have been himself all along) and send death, sin, the grave, the beast, false prophet and dragon (all of whom must be him) in a lake of burning sulfur (which is the god himself, again). At which point, finally, an END TO SUFFERING is finally established per the end of Revelation????

 

 

The plan is utter and complete nonsense, demonstrable nonsense, though. Read the bold over.

 

It's not that I've forgotten the plan of salvation, it's that I've taken the assertion of such a plan to task in my own mind. The bottom line is that it is a situation where the god won't stop it. Even though there's no good reason to have ever allowed any of it to begin with! And the part about finally stopping it (see above) stretches the term "utter and complete nonsense." It's gibberish! Poppycock! 

 

Many hugs and kisses right back at you, Edgarcito! 

 

Maybe think on this for a while. This is a very WTF sort of plan, wouldn't you agree?????

Excellent effort Josh, thanks.  Let me think on it.  Thanks again.

[Edgarcito]

1 hour ago, WalterP said:

 

I agree with your definition of the two kinds of belief, Moonobserver.

 

However, a big problem arises when what people believe by faith causes them to disconnect themselves from their fellow human beings.  For instance, look at Edgarcito's lack of empathy towards the suffering of that ten year old sex slave.  Faith isn't a good thing if it corrodes your humanity.  

 

Thanks.

 

Walter.

Walter, you have no idea what empathy level I possess.  Thanks.

[WalterP]

41 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Walter, you have no idea what empathy level I possess.  Thanks.

 

Edgarcito,

 

Context is all important. I was talking about the level of empathy that you've displayed in this thread towards that ten year old sex slave. I've seen none from you. When the RedneckProfessor first asked you about that little girl, here's the level of empathy you displayed.

 

Posted October 10

  On 10/10/2019 at 12:13 AM, TheRedneckProfessor said:

A ten-year-old girl gets sold into sexual slavery and is brutally raped multiple times every day; she kills herself a year later.  Is that the level/place god needed her to be to fit his plan?  

That would be the theory...

 

You washed your hands of her.

 

Which is very curious, considering that you have children and I do not.  Even though you are the Christian and I'm not, even though you have children and I don't and even though you have faith and I do not, you've displayed a callous disregard for her, while I am very concerned about her.

 

A good worked example of how faith can be a bad thing if it corrodes a person's humanity.

 

[Edgarcito]

1 hour ago, Joshpantera said:

Maybe think on this for a while. This is a very WTF sort of plan, wouldn't you agree?????

Just off the cuff...for a thinking experiment...cause it beats boredom....I'm proposing this outline.  Granted it is very off the cuff....likely full of holes.

 

I)  God

    A. Good

          1) Contains good, love

    B. Evil

          2)  Contains bad, evil

    C. Suffers

          3) Allows self suffering

 

Proposes autonomy to a part of Himself understanding it would suffer and ultimately die if not faithful to the good aspect of Himself, A.

 

Knows he will ultimately throw out that part of Himself that is evil, B.

 

So within self autonomy, the unrestricted growth of Himself, He is unhappy with the outcome.

 

Enter the good part He has known is existent from the beginning in Himself.

 

Demonstrates to the autonomous component that He has the ability to regenerate Himself even after death....through the Cross.....in order to demonstrate that even though he/we have evil within, it's still possible to become the renewed version of Himself.....showing us the resurrected body of good.

 

Truthfully this makes sense to me.  A little scary as well. 

 

And it's interesting that our entire argument hinges on proof/types of evidence, and belief.

 

I'll stick with my outline, thanks.  Blessings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

god took the evil part of himself and created us out of it, knowing we would suffer as a result.  But, hey, at least he's happy.

[WalterP]

Edgarcito,

 

God regenerates and renews himself?  He throws out the evil part of himself? 

 

 

 Numbers 23:19 

19 God is not human, that he should lie,
    not a human being, that he should change his mind.
Does he speak and then not act?
    Does he promise and not fulfill?

 

Psalm 92:15

15 proclaiming, “The Lord is upright;
    he is my Rock, and there is no wickedness in him.”

 

Hebrews 13:8 

8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

 

James 1:17 

17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.

 

1 John 1:5 

5 This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.

 

 

 

The idea of a changing and once-evil god may truthfully work for you.   

 

But it's not Biblical Christianity, my friend.

 

[Edgarcito]

19 minutes ago, WalterP said:

Edgarcito,

 

God regenerates and renews himself?  He throws out the evil part of himself? 

 

 

 Numbers 23:19 

19 God is not human, that he should lie,
    not a human being, that he should change his mind.
Does he speak and then not act?
    Does he promise and not fulfill?

 

Psalm 92:15

15 proclaiming, “The Lord is upright;
    he is my Rock, and there is no wickedness in him.”

 

Hebrews 13:8 

8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

 

James 1:17 

17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.

 

1 John 1:5 

5 This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.

 

 

 

The idea of a changing and once-evil god may truthfully work for you.   

 

But it's not Biblical Christianity, my friend.

 

Isaiah 45:7?

[TheRedneckProfessor]

12 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Isaiah 45:7?

" I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things."  Isaiah 45:7

 

god created evil.  It doesn't say god was once evil.

 

Incidentally, this is why god is not willing to prevent evil.  He created it in the first place.

 

...but I'm sure this is one of those parts in the bible that just isn't complete, right? 

[Edgarcito]

3 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

" I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things."  Isaiah 45:7

 

god created evil.  It doesn't say god was once evil.

 

Incidentally, this is why god is not willing to prevent evil.  He created it in the first place.

 

...but I'm sure this is one of those parts in the bible that just isn't complete, right? 

What is not God if everything spoken is God.  Thinking it says God made man in "our" image.....and then "own" image.  Interesting.

 

Idk, I suggested he wants to do away with His own potential for evil...

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

12 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

What is not God if everything spoken is God.  Thinking it says God made man in "our" image.....and then "own" image.  Interesting.

 

Idk, I suggested he wants to do away with His own potential for evil...

 

 

You do realize that going down this path will lead us to the point at which your god is the rapist of the ten-year-old sex slave, don't you?

[Edgarcito]

1 minute ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

You do realize that going down this path will lead us to the point at which your god is the rapist of the ten-year-old sex slave, don't you?

A cancer on God, but that may be healed....kind of like priests do...lol. 

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

18 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

A cancer on God, but that may be healed....kind of like priests do...lol. 

 

 

Nice of god to sacrifice ten-year-old girls for his own personal comfort and convenience.  Reminiscent of Countess Bathory, who, if legend holds true, was a genuine monster. 

[Edgarcito]

17 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Nice of god to sacrifice ten-year-old girls for his own personal comfort and convenience.  Reminiscent of Countess Bathory, who, if legend holds true, was a genuine monster. 

Appears the responsibility to heal would be our responsibility given it’s our autonomy 

[WalterP]

1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

What is not God if everything spoken is God.  Thinking it says God made man in "our" image.....and then "own" image.  Interesting.

 

Idk, I suggested he wants to do away with His own potential for evil...

 

 

 

I hope that's a typo, Edgarcito.  That you meant to write, 'What is not God if everything spoken [by God]  is God.'  

 

Otherwise, you'd be claiming that God is everything that is spoken in scripture.

 

Meaning that all of Satan's words in the Bible... ARE GOD. 

Meaning that the words of the unclean spirits called Legion... ARE GOD.

Meaning that the words spoken by Balaam's ass... ARE GOD.

Meaning that all the words spoken by every human in the Bible... ARE GOD.

 

Assuming you want to restrict things only to the contents of the Bible?

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

36 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Appears the responsibility to heal would be our responsibility given it’s our autonomy 

It would appear that, according to your logic, it is our responsibility to heal god.

 

This strikes me as particularly cruel, given that god could heal himself; but he, instead, allows ten-year-old girls to be raped for his healing.  All part of his "plan", I reckon.

 

god's plan is sounding more and more selfish, the further along this conversation progresses.   But what about:

 

For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.. Jeremiah 29:11

 

What future, what hope for the little girl?

And why claim his plans are not to harm her, when he clearly intends to allow her life to be abject misery and do nothing to prevent it?

 

[sdelsolray]

Watching folks play in this particular theist's sandbox is fancifully boring.

[Edgarcito]

26 minutes ago, sdelsolray said:

Watching folks play in this particular theist's sandbox is fancifully boring.

Please join in.

[florduh]

According to the story, we are made in God's image, therefore we are like him. We often would do a better job at running things, however.

[LogicalFallacy]

1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

Please join in.

 

Why? I admire TRP for his perseverance, but there is precious little real substance to replies to us here. 

[midniterider]

1 hour ago, sdelsolray said:

Watching folks play in this particular theist's sandbox is fancifully boring.

 

All of these Christians are starting to bore me, frankly.