Religion

[TuDou]

Thought i would revive the time old thread of religion!
-------------------

Are you religious? what do you think on religion? ect ect

[God is a cat girl]

Two threads with the same name.
http://www.hmotaku.net/forums/showthread.php?t=849

My views are too complex to be in two phrases only.

[TuDou]

True but equally those threads are very old. Didnt want to be diggging in the graveyard.

[God is a cat girl]

4 pages is called laziness.

Anyway, I just meant it for a mod or something to view it and decide what to do.

[Boy_Tomo_Chan]

tolby just made it called religion to mess with people though D:

*doesn't state his views!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

[God is a cat girl]

That's what I wanted to know.

[Mike Arcanum]

God is right.

[Taills]

Religion bad. T_T

[danigurl]

Religion isn't bad, it just isn't for everyone.

*doesn't state her views!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

[Mike Arcanum]

Religion isn't bad, it just isn't for everyone.

Wrong. People are just lazy.

[danigurl]

No, some people don't see the point. Or have a hard time and struggle constantly with "keeping the faith". Especially those who can't see everything in black and white (Guess I'm the latter. So much for not getting involved in this thread, I hate you Mike).

Anyways.

Religion is a nice, healthy thing to have. Whether just to keep people in line moral wise, or to give them hope about the world as a whole, or not so afraid of death.

Unfortunately no one can say for sure which religion is the "right" religion, but then there are those that don't think any shape or form of religion is right.

What I don't agree with is how some people can get so caught up in it, that they pick fights with others about it. Or follow it so blindly that it leads them to do destructive things. I also think it tends to make people a bit close minded. But then again I think atheists are pretty close minded too.

Agnostics would probably be the most open minded in my eyes, that or just severely confused XD. But like with anything it depends on the person.

[Stingray]

Agnostics would probably be the most open minded in my eyes, that or just severely confused XD. But like with anything it depends on the person.

I agree with that statement. That's what I always say. Anyway, I like Buddhism because no one can possibly have a beef with Buddhists.

[Mike Arcanum]

See
China: Hates religion in general. More so as a theological head of state of a nation they annexed is of it.
India: I'm pretty sure it's a bit of a powderkeg. Hindus don't like Muslims, who don't like Sikhs and none of them like Buddhists while the Buddhists aren't too fond of them either.
Japan: There has been a theological war between Shinto and Buddhism since forever.

[Stingray]

Yeah, I know that, but It's true. You know?

[Boy_Tomo_Chan]

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y139/boy_tomo_chan/RUN.jpg
Obligatory Picture for this thread.

[Mike Arcanum]

Yeah, I know that, but It's true. You know?

Then I can say the exact thing for Christianity. Or any other religion for that matter.


Buddhism is not Canada. Don't forget it.

[danigurl]

Atheists just aren't anti-christian though =/

[Boy_Tomo_Chan]

but they eat them and more. Those monsters.

[Stingray]

Then I can say the exact thing for Christianity. Or any other religion for that matter.


Buddhism is not Canada. Don't forget it.

What do you mean by that?

[Mike Arcanum]

What is the difference between Christianity and Buddhism for you Stingray? What makes it so different that it receives special distinction?

[Stingray]

um, most of what I talk about is stupid http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/6546/rhinohaleyhe8.pnghttp://img440.imageshack.us/img440/6546/rhinohaleyhe8.pnghttp://img440.imageshack.us/img440/6546/rhinohaleyhe8.pnghttp://img440.imageshack.us/img440/6546/rhinohaleyhe8.png we talk about in school.

[JazzieAussie]

Um, I believe in the Christian God, and it influences my thinking and whatnot, but I'm really not a religious person at all. I mean, I probably discuss it once in a blue moon and end up praying at least once a day, but that's about it. I've just been around too many people that claim to be Christians that I really have no wish to resemble in any way.

But that's not to say that Christianity itself is any less valid because of that; people are just stupid. ..And I guess it's also worth mentioning that I don't necessarily think that all other religions are completely made of lies, either.

[Taills]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4yBvvGi_2A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZFG5PKw504&feature=related

[Serpia]

To the moderates, the believers, the atheists: Just don't be ignorant. Just love people.

Religion is religion. Whether you partake in it or not, it causes problems if you get too caught up in whichever side you believe is right. D;

[TuDou]

I think religion is harmfull to a modern society at large.

However its not easy because our moral systems in the west are based on religious values from the past. I am quite socialist/marxist in SOME respects and i do believe that religion was used to controll in the past and these values hold us back today. But at the same time these values are the basis of what we are so you cnat dismiss them as bad.

I do think it holds people back. And especially things like science i would suport all forms of stemcell research ect that are held back for moral reasons that i cant see. Well perhaps a living hybrid human/animal would be too far - perhaps- but making one in a lab! Of course!

The only thing im going to teach my kids about religion is that they should look into it when they are teenagers or older (and can make informed decisions) as i do think it would be poison to instill religion in them at a young age. But if they become religious when they are older then fair enough it is their lifes.

I almost converted to Islam once. As i do think its definatly the healthiest of all the major religions by FAR! Especailly some interpretations.

---------

And lol Buddhism isnt the nicest of religions either - less bloodshed but there certainly has been some. People were murdered in its name in the past where i used to live and places like tibet (xizang) we abused under liamaism. Its just less abusable by people for their own ends as its more of a moral guideline that is difficult to warp. But people have.

[agrarian]

What is the difference between Christianity and Buddhism for you Stingray? What makes it so different that it receives special distinction?
Christianity is different because

1 - It's true, it involves the worship of the real God who actually has real authority over man, and the God who people rebel against.

2 ` It claims authority over the entire earth, because it is the true worship of the whole Earth's Creator

3 ` It directly threatens the status quo of the world.

None of these things are true of other beliefs, and this is what is so offenseive about Christianity.

[elli_the_baker]

Wrong. People are just lazy.

*Is apparently lazy*

I'm agnostic. If a friend asks me to go to chruch with her and I'm not busy, I go. I don't reject religions, but I'm not taking any of them for my 'own'. If I'm confused, I ask questions and then I get a better understanding or the religion.

[Tolby]

How can a fairy tale be true?

[agrarian]

How can a fairy tale be true?A fairy tale would be true if fairies were real.

But we are not talking about stories about fairies, We are talking about stories about God.

And those stories can be true because God is real.

(Note, many stories people tell about God are not true, because people can make mistakes)

[Stingray]

You ever seen him?

[JazzieAussie]

By that reasoning, pretty much no one at HMO exists. o_o

[Stingray]

Pitures.

[agrarian]

You ever seen him?
No, but I have felt His presence, and how do you know that my experience was not what I thought it was?

[JazzieAussie]

Pitures.I'm at least still just a figment of everyone's imagination, then. ;_;

[Taills]

Well, I think an Omnipotent being can do a little bit more... darn lazy Gods.

Oh, and whoever is correct after we're dead gets complete bragging rights. :D

[Mike Arcanum]

I'm at least still just a figment of everyone's imagination, then. ;_;

I am too! :D

[Stingray]

Deal.

[JazzieAussie]

I am too! :DLOLOLS WHAT A RELIEF

[danigurl]

Anyone here a member of the church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

[Taills]

Kinda a member. :x Pastafanarian. XD

[Stingray]

I'm the Pope of Space Sock.

[Tolby]

A fairy tale would be true if fairies were real.

But we are not talking about stories about fairies, We are talking about stories about God.

And those stories can be true because God is real.

(Note, many stories people tell about God are not true, because people can make mistakes)

But he isn't real, so they aren't true.

[Toue]

Christianity is different because

1 - It's true, it involves the worship of the real God who actually has real authority over man, and the God who people rebel against.

2 ` It claims authority over the entire earth, because it is the true worship of the whole Earth's Creator

3 ` It directly threatens the status quo of the world.

None of these things are true of other beliefs, and this is what is so offenseive about Christianity.
1 - That's the stupidest argument I ever heard of and if you expected it to be left at that I have just lost a great deal of respect for you. In other news my Cat is the Supreme Ruler of the Cosmos.

2 - Many religions do.

3 - How does it threaten the status quo? Last I heard it was the most popular religion for the last few centuries(I'm not actually sure when it became the most widely accepted theism so I took a very conservative stab at it)

[The Mop]

A fairy tale would be true if fairies were real.

But we are not talking about stories about fairies, We are talking about stories about God.

And those stories can be true because God is real.

(Note, many stories people tell about God are not true, because people can make mistakes)

Got any proof?

[Mike Arcanum]

Got any proof?

I got a book a couple millennium old writen by divinely inspired men, philosophers from Cicero to Thomas Aquinas to Pascal and hundreds of miracles.

You have "Nothing is there because I say so."

[Taills]

I say something might be out there, but it sure as heck ain't Christian. XD

[Toue]

You have a book, collected and possibly written by people born after the events. A book that has been translated countless times over many years, and which just about everyone ignores half of.

I have "Nothing is there because I have seen no evidence that suggests otherwise, but if evidence does arise I am willing to revise my position."

[Taills]

I have a question. :x


What would have to happen for you not to believe in your God anymore?

[The Mop]

Mike giving his adress to me! :D

[Toue]

Christians? Hell I believe, but Miek is viewing so lets listen to him.

[Mike Arcanum]

You have a book, collected and possibly written by people born after the events. A book that has been translated countless times over many years, and which just about everyone ignores half of.

None of that really makes a difference XD

And the Bible hasn't been "translated countless times". One of the huge stipulations of the Church was that it didn't want to translate it from Latin, which for the most part has been the main language it has been written in for Catholicism, until I believe the 14th century when some monks in England tried doing it and passed them out and then later when, I think it was Calvin, translated the books into German.

I will address the point of the Old Testament though, because you are obviously ignorant to it. We don't ignore the Old Testament. We respect it and learn from the lessons in it, but we don't follow it as though it were law. The Jews do that and that's because that is their holy book. We follow Jesus, who wasn't exactly the best practitioner of Judaism, as I hope you know.

I have "Nothing is there because I have seen no evidence that suggests otherwise, but if evidence does arise I am willing to revise my position."

Which is the exact same as what I said only put into smarter sounding words.

Christians? Hell I believe, but Miek is viewing so lets listen to him.

Actually (Is it Joab Aggy?) God has his followers to be stronger than Satan, by allowing Satan to completely smash the life of one of his follower, by robbing him of everything dear to him and him still being faithful in the face of it.

And I've given out my address. Three times. And only because I don't think the people who have it would gather the effort to come to my house. >_>

[The Mop]

You didn't give it to me. I'll come, burn your house and eat your mom.

[elli_the_baker]

Why's everyone hatin' on Christianity?

Yeah, I was skeptical too. Especially after the whole 'rib from Adam' thing, but yeesh.

There's no solid physical proof of God/gods/goddesses/etc, and there's no physical solid proof that they don't exist. People have faith and that is why they believe. And last time I checked, faith was real.

[Mike Arcanum]

You didn't give it to me. I'll come, burn your house and eat your mom.

I'll put your favourite beer on the road a mile before my house to serve as a distraction. Then you fall right into my trap MWAHAHAHAHAH.

Why's everyone hatin' on Christianity?

Yeah, I was skeptical too. Especially after the whole 'rib from Adam' thing, but yeesh.

It's always that way in an online debate. I'm sure if we were on an Arab speaking forum there would be hate on Islam.

And most Christians aren't literals, meaning they believe that everything in the Bible happened EXACTLY as the Bible says it did, such as Genesis. The only ones who are, are Protestants because that's all they have to rely on. But that is another subject.

[Taills]

And last time I checked, faith was real.

Faith is a RPG character. :x


Still, I guess I hate on this religion the most because I have it to thank for wasting my childhood away. T_T All my memories are from where I've been hurt in accidents and going to chruch.

[elli_the_baker]

It's always that way in an online debate. I'm sure if we were on an Arab speaking forum there would be hate on Islam.

And most Christians aren't literals, meaning they believe that everything in the Bible happened EXACTLY as the Bible says it did, such as Genesis. The only ones who are, are Protestants because that's all they have to rely on. But that is another subject.

Huh. Okay the next thing I'm gonna say is what I've been told, so if you want to clear anything up, that'd be cool.

I was baptized Protestant because it's apparently close to Lutheran? And is less strict than Catholic? So now your post confuses me ):


EDIT: HARDY HAR. Except it's Faith, not faith. Just like shoes aren't puppies, but Shoes is.

[danigurl]

I was actually baptized protestant too, even though my parents don't go to church? Makes no sense really.

[Taills]

Hallucinations are real, but the things in hallucinations aren't real. :x Same can be in faith? Faith is real, but the things you have faith in can also not be real. So it has just as much accountability right?

[Mike Arcanum]

Lutherans are Protestant. But it's like the whole "All Catholics are Christian but not all Christians are Catholics" thing. So "All Lutherans are Protestant, but not all Protestants are Lutheran."

There is a difference between strictness and orthodoxy. We love to be conservative with our teachings and views but that doesn't mean we are big monsters that can't change with the times. For example, I learn evolution and Genesis at the same time in my Catholic school. That always seems to shock people XD

Catholics are probably just as strict Protestants, the difference is we are strict about things that you guys stopped caring about. Which I think is the main problems for ecumenists of both sides :/

I was actually baptized protestant too, even though my parents don't go to church? Makes no sense really.
I'd think the main reasoning behind that is because if you don't get baptized it's considered a really bad thing.

[danigurl]

Hallucinations are real, but the things in hallucinations aren't real. :x Same can be in faith? Faith is real, but the things you have faith in can also not be real. So it has just as much accountability right?
Hallucinations are something physical in your brain though, faith is something you feel.

[Taills]

Hallucinations are something physical in your brain though, faith is something you feel.

So hallucinations have more credibility? :x

[danigurl]

Not really considering hallucinations are pretty much guaranteed to be misleading. It's just easier for the person having them to believe what they're seeing is real.

I'd think the main reasoning behind that is because if you don't get baptized it's considered a really bad thing.
Why would it be considered bad though? It's not like on a job application I have to put if I was baptized or not.

[elli_the_baker]

Hallucinations are real, but the things in hallucinations aren't real. :x Same can be in faith? Faith is real, but the things you have faith in can also not be real. So it has just as much accountability right?

Hallucinations generally have no reasoning behind them and are often an ill effect of something in the brain firing off wrong, whether it be from drugs or mental illness. Faith is a feeling you can choose to have and choose to let go. There's reasoning and understanding.

[Mike Arcanum]

Well, for Catholics the reason is because we believe we are born with sin and baptism absolves us of that sin. It's considered by us to be a sacrament (Though I know it's not by Protestants).

As I understand, Protestants are split on the matter but the general Christian feeling is it's bad not to do it.

[danigurl]

Well my dad's Catholic, mom's Lutheran, guess they figured they could do that one thing.

If I remember correctly there was a group called the Anabaptists that believed in waiting until adulthood to be baptized, I think that makes more sense, but I guess if something happens to you beforehand you're kind of screwed?

Also, I think the one thing Catholics and Protestants could agree on (back in Martin Luther's day anyways) was picking on the Anabaptists XD

Where do Catholics stand if something happens to a baby before it has the chance to be baptized? :X

[Toue]

And the Bible hasn't been "translated countless times". One of the huge stipulations of the Church was that it didn't want to translate it from Latin, which for the most part has been the main language it has been written in for Catholicism, until I believe the 14th century when some monks in England tried doing it and passed them out and then later when, I think it was Calvin, translated the books into German.
Alright, fair enough. It's still a few to many translations for me but it seems reasonable.

I will address the point of the Old Testament though, because you are obviously ignorant to it. We don't ignore the Old Testament. We respect it and learn from the lessons in it, but we don't follow it as though it were law. This is my fault, ignore isn't the right word. Rather it seems to me that christians are selective of which parts of the Old Testament to awknowledge. For example. Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the people went to meet them outside the camp. But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle. "Why have you let all the women live?" he demanded. "These are the very ones who followed Balaam's advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the LORD at Mount Peor. They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD's people. Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.
Sounds like murder of prisoners of war, and slavery/rape to me. The Old Testament is established to be true isn't it? (If not I'd like to know what makes you think the New Testament is) So seeing as nothing was done to punish Moses for this in a time when God tended to speak more directly to his followers I would say that God had no problem with it.
[QUOTE=Mike Arcanum;158744]

[elli_the_baker]

Well my dad's Catholic, mom's Lutheran, guess they figured they could do that one thing.
That is. EXACTLY. My case.

Except my parents were married in a Catholic church, so my aunt yelled at my mother for that.

So, is that considered bad then? Because if you're married in a Catholic Church, don't you generally promise to have your children baptized Catholic?

[Mike Arcanum]

Where do Catholics stand if something happens to a baby before it has the chance to be baptized? :X
We have a policy, for lack of better term, that allows for any layman who has been previously baptized to be given the power to baptize the baby. Generally though, it used to be you'd baptize the baby DAYS after it was born so unless it was born with a problem it usually wasn't something that was worried about. Now a days we generally know the percents for complications during a birth, so I would assume a parent would assume some responsibility in that case?

I'm not sure on the case of if a baby dies before it can be given, (Xief can answer that better than me) but I think God would be lenient for someone He decided to bring back so soon, wouldn't you?
Alright, fair enough. It's still a few to many translations for me but it seems reasonable.

Well, as I know the four books were written in either Greek or Latin to begin with so that doesn't leave that many translations. The Greek to Latin, then the Latin to English.

Or would you rather learn a dead language to learn about God?

This is my fault, ignore isn't the right word. Rather it seems to me that christians are selective of which parts of the Old Testament to awknowledge.
For example. Sounds like murder of prisoners of war, and slavery/rape to me. The Old Testament is established to be true isn't it? (If not I'd like to know what makes you think the New Testament is) So seeing as nothing was done to punish Moses for this in a time when God tended to speak more directly to his followers I would say that God had no problem with it.

Do you honestly think that Moses would be very lenient toward people who just said "Let's go back to Egypt. If we worship the old idols of the Egyptians and maybe we can win good will from them." The Old Testament was tough because the Jews needed to be tough to survive. They were the first monotheistic people in the world, surrounded by neighbours (And mind you we aren't even talking about time when they have land yet, so they have to be tougher) who all hated them because of it. It wasn't just a "we are different from you" thing it was a "we completely reject the idea that your gods can exist."
That is. EXACTLY. My case.

Except my parents were married in a Catholic church, so my aunt yelled at my mother for that.

So, is that considered bad then? Because if you're married in a Catholic Church, don't you generally promise to have your children baptized Catholic?
If you're married by a Catholic priest then yes, you probably would have promised that. In Catholicism, there is a fairly rigorous question period where the priest decides if he will join the two of you or not, two of the questions that instantly come to mind are "Do you intend to have children?" and the other "If you have children will you raise them in the Catholic Chuch?" both of which if you answer "no" to could and probably would lead to the priest saying he wouldn't preform it. He still may, he's at liberty to decide as far as I know, but the likelihood probably goes down a fair bit.

[danigurl]

I'm not sure on the case of if a baby dies before it can be given, (Xief can answer that better than me) but I think God would be lenient for someone He decided to bring back so soon, wouldn't you?
I would hope so.

I wonder too, with the case of Christianity (just because I'm most familiar with it), what does it say about those who are mentally incapable (ie. autism...or some other mental disability) of making the decision to devote their life to God?

[Toue]

So as long as someones people are generally discriminating/making war with you it's okay to enslave, rape, and murder them in cold blood?

[Mike Arcanum]

Humans have been doing that for thousands of years for less reason. Why is it so special when the Jews do it to the Midianites who made war on them?

[Toue]

Because when they do it it gets put into the holy book of a religion which more-or-less says God gave them the ok, while also saying that God is a kind and merciful fellow.

[Mike Arcanum]

They did it because if they didn't would be done to them. Do you think God would punish his people for protecting themselves from aggressors?

[Toue]

If protecting themselves made them as bad as the aggressors then yes. Murder slavery and rape are horrible things no matter what the situation.

[Mike Arcanum]

If protecting themselves made them as bad as the aggressors then yes. Murder slavery and rape are horrible things no matter what the situation.

Wait, so we are suddenly allowed to judge the crimes of others? That was common practise as the time. If so, then America should be judged harshest of all, seeing as they annihilated the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocents in the blink of an eye.

If you were locked up to another man and given the order to stab out his eyes before he stabbed outed yours what would you do?

[Toue]

If he goes to stab me then yes, I would stab him. But I wouldn't have the gall to say it was the right thing.

[Mike Arcanum]

I didn't say it was right either. I'm saying that you can justify an act if something just as bad or worst is going to happen to you if you don't stop it.

[Boy_Tomo_Chan]

Tomo's thoughts on religion.

Believing in a greater being is not only a smart thing to do, but the positive thing to do? D:

Like, if you have two people. One who believes in heaven, and one who believes you rot in the ground. Lets say there is a heaven. The person who believes in heaven goes to heaven when they die, and the person who believes in nothing doesn't. Now lets say there is no heaven. The person who believes in heaven rots in the ground, the person who doesn't believe in heaven rots in the ground.

I just feel that the only point in denying a greater being is so you can go "AHAHA I'M RIGHT YOU'RE WRONG"

Now this post will be dissected, attacked, misunderstood, eaten, and vomited. Why did I bother posting here D:

[Mike Arcanum]

The problem with believing in a greater power Tomo, is that if there is one then that person will be held accountable for all the things they did in life. They would have to be responsible for their actions. Why would they want that? 3:

Man wants to be the best and top of the food chain, yet it's proved to us on a daily basis we are more fragile that the beings we are suppose to be stewards of.

[danigurl]

I agree with Tomo's post, though at the same time, if someone's just believing in heaven in order to be on the safe-side, I don't think that guarantees them entry.

It's not hard for me to imagine there is some sort of God, I just have a hard time keeping faith in any sort of being when tons of crap seems to always be happening. Not to mention you can never really know which faith is the right faith to believe in. If you live in a place where you can't be exposed to Christianity you're pretty screwed over aren't you?

And really regardless if there is or isn't any God, life still seems pretty meaningless. If there isn't a God then we're living this life to eventually just become fertilizer, and if there is then are we here for his own enjoyment as he watches us destroy one another? Sure there's at least a heaven afterward, but why do we have to go through all that crap just to get there? What was the point in creation to begin with if not for someone's own entertainment?

[Taills]

Well, I see if you do believe in a higher power, you're more limited as to what you can get out of life. Those that believe, stop themselves from doing certain things due to their beliefs. And if it turns out that you do only rot in the ground, well, its kinda sad they wasted their lives following a set of rules that didn't exist. :/

[danigurl]

Those that believe, stop themselves from doing certain things due to their beliefs.
That's why the government likes religion though, it has a way of keeping people in check morality wise. Not that people without religion don't have morals though.

[Chuck]

I look at religion as a set of morals and virtues to live your life by more than as strict theological thing. So in that way, I think religion is a good thing to have in your life. It can help someone to be a better person and give them a sense of purpose/direction in life.

But otherwise, I remember relating some to Jazzie's post a few pages back.
Um, I believe in the Christian God, and it influences my thinking and whatnot, but I'm really not a religious person at all.
Parents eventually stopped going to church when I was a kid, so I didn't get a whole lot of religious exposure other than through Boy Scouts and stuff. Still consider myself Christian though.

[Aysami_Ari]

I'm the complete opposite of a religious person.

[Toue]

Miek I kinda forgot what my point was so...yeah...
Tomo's thoughts on religion.

Believing in a greater being is not only a smart thing to do, but the positive thing to do? D:

Like, if you have two people. One who believes in heaven, and one who believes you rot in the ground. Lets say there is a heaven. The person who believes in heaven goes to heaven when they die, and the person who believes in nothing doesn't. Now lets say there is no heaven. The person who believes in heaven rots in the ground, the person who doesn't believe in heaven rots in the ground.

I just feel that the only point in denying a greater being is so you can go "AHAHA I'M RIGHT YOU'RE WRONG"

Now this post will be dissected, attacked, misunderstood, eaten, and vomited. Why did I bother posting here D:Because I live to please I'm going to tell you that I have never heard of a deity that lets people into their afterlife if they pretend to believe. And not believing is not a choice, I happen to think that if you can describe your faith as being a choice then you made the wrong one. Finally, a few posts seem to be saying that you're a less moral person if you don't believe in a deity. Religion is not a prerequisite to being a good person, that whole catholic priests thing should prove that pretty well.

[agrarian]

Well, I see if you do believe in a higher power, you're more limited as to what you can get out of life. Those that believe, stop themselves from doing certain things due to their beliefs. And if it turns out that you do only rot in the ground, well, its kinda sad they wasted their lives following a set of rules that didn't exist. :/Some people however are inspired by their faith to do things they otherwise would not do. Many have accomplished great things, because they had faith that God was with them.

[Melissa]

Now you're probably thinking me ex-marine, would be the last guy to except the belief of god- and ya'know, your fukin right.


What are you'll's opinions on the existense of God?

[God is a cat girl]

I exist, 'k?

[Chuck]

*merged :O*

[Taills]

I'm Agnostic. And I believe it's the correct way to go. Atheists will tell you that God absolutely doesn't exist, and Theists will tell you that he does exist.

The main point of it all is that: Faith. It is not meant to be proven.

For Theists, starting with something possibly incorrect, implanting their feet into the ground, standing routed on a belief that could very well be wrong and defending it with an impassable resolution for a reason that could or could not be real, is, in the lightest sense, foolish.

For Atheists, believing that the same something is incorrect, which is unknown, shows they they can indeed be incorrect, and stand just as much as Theists on the belief that it is incorrect, saying that in no way it is correct, yet it cannot be proven that it is incorrect, due to the prelude that it is indeed, faith. You cannot disprove a God. So, again, in the lightest sense, foolish.

For Agnostics, believing that we don't know squat based on said "squat" not being proven/disproven until said deity personally makes itself known in an infallible way, is logical. Thus, we don't know if we'll ever know. And we don't currently know, as it has yet to be proven.


If anyone wants to argue against this, no matter what your standing, be able to prove God does/doesn't exist. Not the religion associated with a God.

[Tuff Ghost]

I'm a Christian. I'm actually in church at the moment, it just finished.

[Canned Luna]

Parents eventually stopped going to church when I was a kid, so I didn't get a whole lot of religious exposure other than through Boy Scouts and stuff. Still consider myself Christian though.

This, except my parents never went to church at all (which is weird because both of their parents go to church.). The only religious exposure I get is through school and flipping channels.

[Stingray]

I believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

[Crazy]

You've been touched by his noodly appendage?

[Stingray]

Many times.

[JazzieAussie]

For Agnostics, believing that we don't know squat based on said "squat" not being proven/disproven until said deity personally makes itself known in an infallible way, is logical. Thus, we don't know if we'll ever know. And we don't currently know, as it has yet to be proven.


If anyone wants to argue against this, no matter what your standing, be able to prove God does/doesn't exist. Not the religion associated with a God.Seems like the fact that the details of infallible proof differ from person to person automatically reduces the entire thing to a personal level; otherwise, the first conversion to Theism would've also marked the end of Atheism and Agnosticism altogether. If it was good enough evidence in one case, why not for everyone else?

So I think,
1) Individuals generally need individual proof.

2) Individual efforts have to be made to find that proof, because such that's simply handed out from either of the two other possible sources (other people, or God Himself) is worthless.

Even if someone else's conclusions are convincing enough, they can't just be taken at face value and passively absorbed. Merely plagiarizing someone else's faith is in itself pointless; if God can be so easily fooled by someone parading around only pretending to believe in Him, He's hardly a god and isn't worth the trouble anyway.

On the other hand, for God to personally prove His existence beyond all doubt would defeat the purpose. It seems like, by definition, faith requires believing something in spite of possible doubts -- otherwise it would simply be knowledge. Therefore, just like the concepts of "good" and "bad" can't exist independently, removing all possibility for doubt does the same for faith.


But I dunno. This is the first time I've really considered this, so I'm not even sure it makes sense. XD I guess, if nothing else, it's kind of senseless to try to force specific beliefs onto anyone. Perception is relative, even if truth isn't.

[agrarian]

On the other hand, for God to personally prove His existence beyond all doubt would defeat the purpose. It seems like, by definition, faith requires believing something in spite of possible doubts -- otherwise it would simply be knowledge. Therefore, just like the concepts of "good" and "bad" can't exist independently, removing all possibility for doubt does the same for faith.
This pretty much sums it all up, God desires faith, and faith does not exist in the presence of proof. Faith and proof are two different animals, and those who require proof before they have faith are missing the whole point. Once you have proof, you will never have faith, why would you even need it?

I cannot prove that God exists, but that does not mean He doesn't. He certianly could prove His existence if He wanted to, but He does not want to. and why should He? Why should He even care if you believe in Him? He is God, you are not. He does not owe you a thing, you owe Him everything. That is the most obvious conclusion anyone can draw from just looking around. Any other conclusion is just denial. The denial of God is totally illogical, there is no advantage at all in denying His existance, no disadvantage at at can be shown for believers as opposed to unbelievers, There are people om both sides of this question who live happy and fulfilled lives, so no advantage at all can be found in life, this is a part of the fact that God refuses to be provable. For if believers lived happier and more fulfilling lives then that fact could be used as proof.

But consider this fact, In life it is a tie. Neither side has an advantage.

In death however, belief wins. If there is a God, and you believe in Him you go to heaven, and if He does not exist, it does not matter what you believed anyway.

So if it does not matter in life, why not choose the side that ha sthe potential for great loss in death?

[Stingray]

God is a woman.

[agrarian]

Both men and woman were created in God's image.

[Savato.Reloaded]

The universe had sex with itself and God was born.

[agrarian]

The universe had sex with itself and God was born.Except for the fact that the Universe is a very young 14 billion years old, and God is ETERNAL!!!!!!

[Chuck]

Very young compared to what? :O

[hArVeStMoOnLuVeR]

... I'm not religous. I used to ask my mom why we weren't religous and all she said was that she disliked going to church, and disliked growing up with very strict, religous parents and she didnt want our family going to church, or being like that. D:

[Crazy]

In the beginning, there was nothing....which exploded! We now call it the Big Bang Theory.

[Mike Arcanum]

In the beginning, there was nothing....which exploded! We now call it the Big Bang Theory.

Funny, I call that the morning after taco night.

[Taills]

This pretty much sums it all up, God desires faith, and faith does not exist in the presence of proof. Faith and proof are two different animals, and those who require proof before they have faith are missing the whole point. Once you have proof, you will never have faith, why would you even need it?



So, what made you choose this God? I'm sure some "proof" made you choose this one over others. Otherwise, well, sorry to say, but you should think about it.


I cannot prove that God exists, but that does not mean He doesn't. He certianly could prove His existence if He wanted to, but He does not want to. and why should He? Why should He even care if you believe in Him? He is God, you are not. He does not owe you a thing, you owe Him everything.

Indeed. Yet, I keep hearing about this "love" thing that's being said about him.

Any other conclusion is just denial. The denial of God is totally illogical, there is no advantage at all in denying His existance, no disadvantage at at can be shown for believers as opposed to unbelievers, There are people om both sides of this question who live happy and fulfilled lives, so no advantage at all can be found in life, this is a part of the fact that God refuses to be provable. For if believers lived happier and more fulfilling lives then that fact could be used as proof.

This is completely incorrect. Another conclusion can/is logical and in logic, and sensible in it's own self. Yet, as you stated before, it doesn't require logic, and infact, logic works against it. Do you understand what that means? It means that everything is true, down to the lies you can prove are lies, and you embrace it. You embrace the notion that everything everybody has ever worked for, as, both lies and truth. Your conclusion is the epitome of fault, yet for you, thats a good thing.

But consider this fact, In life it is a tie. Neither side has an advantage.

In death however, belief wins. If there is a God, and you believe in Him you go to heaven, and if He does not exist, it does not matter what you believed anyway.

So if it does not matter in life, why not choose the side that ha sthe potential for great loss in death?


This...

*sigh*
Do you not understand, that if you don't believe in the "correct" religion, that you're going to Hell? And to accomplish what you claim we should do for the insurance for our souls, it is in every regard impossible? You're saying believe in all religions, just to be sure. Hello. You can't use this argument. But it's not like it matters, due to there not being a need to be correct for yourself.


Oh the whole matter of "God gave us free will," he's supposedly an omniscient being. That means "all knowing." So, having created us, he knows what will ultimately happen in the end. So, "for some people, like me," the tracks he has lain down are going to lead me right into a furnace. With this knowledge of operation, where, in the end, does our free will come into this? And coupled with this, people who are going to Hell, are doing so because God wanted them to.

[JazzieAussie]

Oh the whole matter of "God gave us free will," he's supposedly an omniscient being. That means "all knowing." So, having created us, he knows what will ultimately happen in the end. So, "for some people, like me," the tracks he has lain down are going to lead me right into a furnace. With this knowledge of operation, where, in the end, does our free will come into this? And coupled with this, people who are going to Hell, are doing so because God wanted them to.How does it follow that if God is omniscient, He's purposely decided what's going to happen to everyone? :(

Being aware of something doesn't necessarily indicate involvement; knowing doesn't equal doing. Even considering omnipotence as well, I imagine that would include the ability to withhold influence as well as exert it...so I don't really see how that conflicts with free will at all.

[Crazy]

As long as there is free will, there is no "knowing what is going to happen." That would mean there is only one possible outcome. There is only knowing what will happen if involved persons continue doing what they are doing.

[Taills]

How does it follow that if God is omniscient, He's purposely decided what's going to happen to everyone? :(


Because he is all powerful, and knows the outcome of everything, our outcome has already been decided. Because of him, things are the way they are, and because they're like that, we're going to follow our one predetermined path through them, reaching our conclusion.

Being aware of something doesn't necessarily indicate involvement; knowing doesn't equal doing. Even considering omnipotence as well, I imagine that would include the ability to withhold influence as well as exert it...so I don't really see how that conflicts with free will at all.

It conflicts because it supposedly exists. He knows exactly how you're going to die, and why, and what he can do to change it, and that before you were born, you were going to die that way, and that every involvement he's ever had with anything affected that.

Every little thing he had created, every root, pebble, he knew it's destination, and how it would effect others. He knew it at the time of it's creation. See, the thing is, he knew exactly what it would do to others. He intervened. As he created everything, any possible free will ceased. With the conclusion of God, there is no free will, as everything he has done, he has made you move along a set path that he knew you would take.

[Tithis]

I feel like I made a post similar to this in this thread a few days ago. Oh well.

As Tomo and Agrarian has stated they feel there is no disadvantage to believing in God. If you're right you go to heaven, if you're wrong you rot in the ground like the atheists thought everyone would. Taills brought up a good point that based on that logic you should follow every religion.

I would like to believe in a God, ignorance is bliss. Even if he didn't exist the thought of an afterlife would be extremely comforting.

I used to be a pretty religious person, much more so then anyone else in my family. As a got older my faith got weaker and weaker till the point came when I no longer believed in God, although I didn't know it at the time. I prayed and tried to avoid sins and be a good person more out of fear of the 'what if' scenario that God, Heaven and Hell all existed. Believing in God out of fear of a 'what if' is not really believing, its done for convenience.

You cannot force yourself to believe in something.

[Starrimaela]

This could get dangerous....

I believe in reincarnation.

that's about it.

~Starr

[Taills]

This could get dangerous....

I believe in reincarnation.

that's about it.

~Starr

I don't know that awful much about Reincarnation, and this isn't an attack post... just a question. With the growing population, in reincarnation's view, where are they supposedly coming from?

[God is a cat girl]

There is only knowing what will happen if involved persons continue doing what they are doing.

That's still a probability, not a certainty. That would work in closed room without any external influence, but it would be still a probability, because there variables stronger than walls.

You could make predictions with a really high probability if you had absolute acknowledgment, but that's something that humans can't do.

[Yuri]

I'm Muslim, yay.

[crystalmew]

GUYS I'M NOT BUDDHIST!!!!

My family actually. Didn't really raise me on a religion. They might have done rituals or whatever, and a family friend did take me to church here and there, but I was never informed OF religion, etc. o.o So I was clueless. (And the church had a cartoon'd video of Jesus playing where the kids were- I thought he was a hobo.)

During my negative, teenage angst years, I would declare myself Atheist for no real reason except I couldn't see him, etc etc. :D Today I'm less narrow minded about things and would say that Agnostic is the closest to what I am.

[Boy_Tomo_Chan]

(And the church had a cartoon'd video of Jesus playing where the kids were- I thought he was a hobo.)


WAS IT THIS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superbook

[God is a cat girl]

WAS IT THIS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superbook

Portuguese: Super Livro; O Livro Incrível (in this version, the Super Book itself is simply called "Bíblía" [Bible].)
See? We hide nothing.

[agrarian]

Very young compared to what? :OVery young as compared with eternity, I thought that was obvious from the post.

So, what made you choose this God? I'm sure some "proof" made you choose this one over others. Otherwise, well, sorry to say, but you should think about it.Actually according to the Bible, faith is not a choice a person makes, but a gift that God gives to a person. "For by grace are you saved through faith, and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God" Ephesians 2:8-9. I did not need to have any "proof" to receive that gift.

[MicroRave]

I don't know that awful much about Reincarnation, and this isn't an attack post... just a question. With the growing population, in reincarnation's view, where are they supposedly coming from?

I wonder about that myself 0.o

If there've been so many souls floating around, and assuming everybody's lived a certain number of 'past lives' where did those souls originally come from?

[Stingray]

Actually according to the Bible, faith is not a choice a person makes, but a gift that God gives to a person. "For by grace are you saved through faith, and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God" Ephesians 2:8-9. I did not need to have any "proof" to receive that gift.

Couldn't you say that since you just have that gift of faith, that's proof to you that god exists?

[Chuck]

Very young as compared with eternity, I thought that was obvious from the post.I think I was mainly asking because it's hard to claim something like that as fact when it's based largely on peoples' sets of religious beliefs.

[Crazy]

...but that's something that humans can't do.

Yes, I'm aware of that. XD
It was implied when I wrote that in the first place.

[Taills]

Actually according to the Bible, faith is not a choice a person makes, but a gift that God gives to a person. "For by grace are you saved through faith, and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God" Ephesians 2:8-9. I did not need to have any "proof" to receive that gift.

Still, why that one? That can be claimed with any religion.

[God is a cat girl]

Yes, I'm aware of that. XD
It was implied when I wrote that in the first place.

But who knows if it's impossible or not? There was lots of impossible things 100 years ago that are possible now.

Before the earth was the center of the Universe, now we circle the sun.

[Mike Arcanum]

There are a lot of things that are impossible now, that happen 1000 years ago.

[God is a cat girl]

There are a lot of things that are impossible now, that happen 1000 years ago.

Before we could bring our woman home by pulling her hair.

[Canned Luna]

Ha ha.

But what does this have to with religion?

[God is a cat girl]

Ha ha.

the spam should be stopped.

You are my new God, one of the many that I have.

I'm a person that loves more the buildings (Churches, Temples, Shrines), than the religions themselves. XD

[Canned Luna]

Don't worry . You did it too. We're both guilty.

But some religions that existed a long time ago were really weird. THEY SACRIFICED PEOPLE. O__O

[God is a cat girl]

Don't worry . You did it too. We're both guilty.

But some religions that existed a long time ago were really weird. THEY SACRIFICED PEOPLE. O__O

Our guilt is different, so it can't really be our. ;D And yes, I don't have to worry. The guilt that you see has no place in me. Hehehe.


If it's not human sacrifices it will be killing for faith. We've already killed for most, if not all Gods and alike.

[Taills]

There are a lot of things that are impossible now, that happen 1000 years ago.

Jesus' second coming happened in the 1700s. He was burned as a witch.

[Serpia]

I'm a person that loves more the buildings (Churches, Temples, Shrines), than the religions themselves. XD

THIS. Exactly, :)

[JazzieAussie]

Because he is all powerful, and knows the outcome of everything, our outcome has already been decided. Because of him, things are the way they are, and because they're like that, we're going to follow our one predetermined path through them, reaching our conclusion.


It conflicts because it supposedly exists. He knows exactly how you're going to die, and why, and what he can do to change it, and that before you were born, you were going to die that way, and that every involvement he's ever had with anything affected that.

Every little thing he had created, every root, pebble, he knew it's destination, and how it would effect others. He knew it at the time of it's creation. See, the thing is, he knew exactly what it would do to others. He intervened. As he created everything, any possible free will ceased. With the conclusion of God, there is no free will, as everything he has done, he has made you move along a set path that he knew you would take.
Granted, no one was ever given the chance to opt out of existing. We're here whether we like it or not; we're born to mothers we can't choose, we inevitably die, and in the meantime we can't walk through other people or survive very long without water or jump 700 feet into the air on our own. There are boundaries and limitations and certain "laws" that govern how things generally work.

However, having a framework doesn't mean everything's already been absolutely determined. Actually, it seems like the system is structured to not only allow for variation, but encourage it.

People can not only think, but also think about what they're thinking: we can analyze our own thoughts. We're capable of introspection and inference and imagination and creativity. If this were not the case, we would only be able to react to our environment -- which, since God created in the first place and determined how it functions/would affect us, would in fact mean that God directly dictates our thoughts and behaviors. The mere suggestion of anything would either be enough to compel someone to do it, or, because it's not an instinct, the idea would never have occurred in the first place.

Instead, we essentially have the ability to decide what we'll do within the constraints of our environment, and that seems about as close to free will as anything.


And reading over this again:
There are people om both sides of this question who live happy and fulfilled lives, so no advantage at all can be found in life, this is a part of the fact that God refuses to be provable. For if believers lived happier and more fulfilling lives then that fact could be used as proof.

But consider this fact, In life it is a tie. Neither side has an advantage.I seem to remember the Bible mentioning several times stuff about believers being "new creatures" with different/better perspectives, or at least having peace and such. Sounds like that would be a bit of an advantage.

[Taills]

Granted, no one was ever given the chance to opt out of existing. We're here whether we like it or not; we're born to mothers we can't choose, we inevitably die, and in the meantime we can't walk through other people or survive very long without water or jump 700 feet into the air on our own. There are boundaries and limitations and certain "laws" that govern how things generally work.

However, having a framework doesn't mean everything's already been absolutely determined. Actually, it seems like the system is structured to not only allow for variation, but encourage it.

People can not only think, but also think about what they're thinking: we can analyze our own thoughts. We're capable of introspection and inference and imagination and creativity. If this were not the case, we would only be able to react to our environment -- which, since God created in the first place and determined how it functions/would affect us, would in fact mean that God directly dictates our thoughts and behaviors. The mere suggestion of anything would either be enough to compel someone to do it, or, because it's not an instinct, the idea would never have occurred in the first place.

Instead, we essentially have the ability to decide what we'll do within the constraints of our environment, and that seems about as close to free will as anything.


Yay Jazzie! :D You got it! Now, for the whammy. :P

How does religion effect someone's free will?

Well, you can program a character to choose everything it does itself, but, with the enviroment you place it in, and you knowing how you scrpited all the other A.I.s, and know what is going to happen, and pretty much, the enviroment it starts out in is the determining factor in whatever it does, and in that sense, and concerning humans, who decides who is born, and where, when?

Well, concerning that, it all stems from parents in a way, right? So, their parents, and theirs, all the way back to Adam and Eve... Meaning, God did script this all out to being with.

[JazzieAussie]

...Hoo boy. XD Hope I'm not just rambling here.
How does religion effect someone's free will?
"Religion" in terms of a set of rules or philosophies or prescribed practices would only affect free will if the will freely chose to allow it to do so; basically, religion would only be presented as yet another option.

Let me put it this way: Someone could offer you a thousand bucks for eating an apple. If you want the money, you'd have to submit to that condition...but that "restriction of your free will," as it were, would only come into play after you have chosen to allow it to. You would have to choose to suspend or adapt your will in order to comply with the stipulation, but you'd still be doing just that: choosing. It would be an act of free will, entirely up to you to decide whether you want to go along with it and whether or not it would be worth the risk. :P


Well, you can program a character to choose everything it does itself, but, with the enviroment you place it in, and you knowing how you scrpited all the other A.I.s, and know what is going to happen, and pretty much, the enviroment it starts out in is the determining factor in whatever it does, and in that sense, and concerning humans, who decides who is born, and where, when?

Well, concerning that, it all stems from parents in a way, right? So, their parents, and theirs, all the way back to Adam and Eve... Meaning, God did script this all out to being with.

Yep, for A.I., that's the case; what it does is determined by the initial environment, coupled with how it's been programmed to react to that environment. The thing that sets humans apart from A.I., though, and allows for varying results is the introduction of other factors such as will and reasoning.

A.I. has neither. Robots and computer programs can't decide to act in any way other than how they're designed to, or for that matter, even decide to act as they should. They don't "decide" at all. They're not capable of considering what it is that they're forced to do or whether it's worthwhile or what they might prefer to do instead. They might be able to collect information and sort it and use it to further carry out their purpose, but they can't use it to their own advantage or manipulate it according to their own goals.

People, on the other hand, have every capacity for being fickle and arbitrary and acting on whim. We do also have some "programming" in the form of instincts and preferences and such, but we can, and often do, go against it. We can assess a situation and figure out what might be the best course of action, but we can go even another step further and go against our "better judgment." We can form conclusions; we can have inclinations; we can also choose to ignore them. Even when a certain impulse is clearly stronger than another, we can elect to act upon the weaker of the two.

So ultimately, we were programmed with certain predispositions, but those alone don't dictate our behaviors. I think this allows that just because the starting point has already been determined, it isn't necessarily true that the entire thing has been mapped out.

-----

As far as the difficulty goes about God's omniscience eliminating any possibility for free will, let me see if I understand it correctly.

God knows everything, sees what happens and what leads to it and what could happen instead and how everything will ultimately end.

This would seem to mean that if everything is going a certain way, that is what God knows, and it's going that way because God knows it...and for it to go any differently would also mean that God would have to know something different. So, in other words, to change one would require changing the other.

However, if God operates outside of Time, the entire thing's moot

Without Time, there is no concept of change. Change requires one moment for things to be a certain way, and another moment for them to be different.

So it's not necessarily that God would "have" to know something different, or changing one would "require" changing the other -- it's simply that God would know something different, and that changing one automatically causes the other to be synced with it. Whatever God knows is what happens, and whatever happens is what God knows.

Furthermore, by creating a world in which Time exists -- in which limitations exist, yet change is possible -- He gave us the opportunity and freedom to more or less direct things without contradicting the very nature of God. Since we are confined to Time, we can't change anything that happened before we existed. Therefore, what God began with his knowledge remains intact and causes no conflict. However, after that point, we're free to kind of "add on to it" -- with whatever we change/choose being seamlessly incorporated into the overall design.

It's uncertain how limited the options are or how restrictive the environment is, but that's not the point. The point is that choices -- in whatever quantity or quality or frequency or desirability -- exist, and we have freedom to choose among them. And in fact, we can actually choose as to what our choices are, to an extent.

In a sense, decisions are like intangible "creations," since they often rely on "creative" thinking in trying to figure out all the possibilities. However, even though the raw materials for the decision might differ from one person to the next, that doesn't mean either person has less of a choice -- they're just different choices.

A scribble a kid makes with sidewalk chalk on a driveway is no less a creation than a painting of fruit made in a fully equipped art studio. The kid might be said to be at a "disadvantage" because of relatively limited resources, but that doesn't mean what the kid makes out of them will automatically be "inferior." A "good" chalk scribble can be made from mere chalk just as easily as a "bad" painting can be made from the highest quality paints. It's not nearly as important what the thing's made out of, as it is what's done with it.

But then someone might wonder "Oh, what about the poor kid across the street who doesn't have any sidewalk chalk? Isn't he being deprived of the opportunity to make what he wants?" Well, for one, the kid with the chalk might be inclined to share it, thereby solving that dilemma.

If, on the other hand, Sidewalk Chalk Kid is a stingy little brat, then there could be a problem. His mother might tell him he should be nice and share with the other kid, but that doesn't mean he will. However, Chalkless Kid is resourceful and discovers that he can find certain rocks and use them the same way. Or he can go find other friends that will share their chalk with him. Or if he can't find either, mud will work, too. By increasing his understanding (probably through effort, implying choice) of how things work, he can figure out how to use them to his advantage and suit his purposes...thereby expanding his options.

[Tuff Ghost]

tl;dr

Can you shorten that down for me a bit?

[Mike Arcanum]

Jesus' second coming happened in the 1700s. He was burned as a witch.

Then we should kill us some proddies in revenge!


Also, what I said had nothing to do with what anyone responded to it with. It was more to do with there were ancient civilizations that could do things we couldn't. A citizen of Rome didn't live a much different life from any of us. Running water, plumbing, markets just around the corner. They may not have had the internet, or tv, or flew to the moon, but we haven't changed much since then. We don't know how to create Greek fire. We could probably reason it out, but I doubt we'll ever be able to do it as the Byzantines did, holding the Turkish hordes at bay for thousands of years. They might have even been able to continue doing it if the Turks didn't have a greater weapon at their disposal. The first cannon.

The Mayans, the Incans, the Aztecs. All much more civilized than we give them credit, all very advanced in their own rights. No, we've not come too far at all.

[JazzieAussie]

tl;dr

Can you shorten that down for me a bit?
Yeah: We have free will.

[Tuff Ghost]

Yeah: We have free will.

You're pro-Christian right?

[JazzieAussie]

You're pro-Christian right?Yep, I'm a Christian. I'd been back and forth all over the place, though, "believing" it at first because I was told to, then finding so many holes in what I was told that I ditched the entire thing for a while. I'm not really sure how my way of seeing it now compares to anyone else's, but it's what makes the most sense to me. :/

[Tuff Ghost]

Yep, I'm a Christian. I'd been back and forth all over the place, though, "believing" it at first because I was told to, then finding so many holes in what I was told that I ditched the entire thing for a while. I'm not really sure how my way of seeing it now compares to anyone else's, but it's what makes the most sense to me. :/

Awesome, I have your back on this. I would help, but I always get lost whenever I type long things.

[Toue]

Atheist, raised Christian but I don't think I ever believed it.

[JazzieAussie]

Awesome, I have your back on this. I would help, but I always get lost whenever I type long things.Nah, it's cool. I'm mostly just throwing stuff out there to try to pick it apart, 'cause to assume I'm right would undermine my entire philosophy. XD

[Tuff Ghost]

Nah, it's cool. I'm mostly just throwing stuff out there to try to pick it apart, 'cause to assume I'm right would undermine my entire philosophy. XD

So you're not sure if you're right?

[Yuri]

She's posting what she believes is right. She's still unsure about a lot of things, like we are. :O

The post was awesome, Jazzie. Totally worth the long-ness.

[Crazy]

I would certainly hope that she doesn't have everything figured out. Why, if she did, she'd be godly!

[JazzieAussie]

I would certainly hope that she doesn't have everything figured out. Why, if she did, she'd be godly!Exactly. XD

And thank you, Yuri! :D

[Tuff Ghost]

I would certainly hope that she doesn't have everything figured out. Why, if she did, she'd be godly!

Really good point.

[Taills]

"Religion" in terms of a set of rules or philosophies or prescribed practices would only affect free will if the will freely chose to allow it to do so; basically, religion would only be presented as yet another option.

Let me put it this way: Someone could offer you a thousand bucks for eating an apple. If you want the money, you'd have to submit to that condition...but that "restriction of your free will," as it were, would only come into play after you have chosen to allow it to. You would have to choose to suspend or adapt your will in order to comply with the stipulation, but you'd still be doing just that: choosing. It would be an act of free will, entirely up to you to decide whether you want to go along with it and whether or not it would be worth the risk. :P


Yesssssssss. God ultimately knows if you will take the apple or not (which, is humorous with the concern of Eve; God appearing to not be able to forsee it, despite omnieverything/ battle with Satan and the angels that turned against him, blah blah), and... well...

... I think it's not that you know of how unlimited his powers are, its that, you don't seem to believe how a teensy, tiny, itty bitty, smallest speck of sand can drastically effect someone, and that if having been placed differently, COULD have turned someone's whole outcome around in whatever effect it could have had on it. With that mentioned, God, who made everything, and knows the outcome of everything, placed everything exactly how (not currently, because we could have, but with the beginning being how it is, caused us to place it there) they are which disables free will because he knows which will cause certain things to happen.

Yep, for A.I., that's the case; what it does is determined by the initial environment, coupled with how it's been programmed to react to that environment. The thing that sets humans apart from A.I., though, and allows for varying results is the introduction of other factors such as will and reasoning.

If God is as powerful as he is, then we pretty much are A.I. This, being coupled with what I stated above at how much we are affected by the little things.


People, on the other hand, have every capacity for being fickle and arbitrary and acting on whim. We do also have some "programming" in the form of instincts and preferences and such, but we can, and often do, go against it. We can assess a situation and figure out what might be the best course of action, but we can go even another step further and go against our "better judgment." We can form conclusions; we can have inclinations; we can also choose to ignore them. Even when a certain impulse is clearly stronger than another, we can elect to act upon the weaker of the two.


As far as the difficulty goes about God's omniscience eliminating any possibility for free will, let me see if I understand it correctly.

God knows everything, sees what happens and what leads to it and what could happen instead and how everything will ultimately end.

This would seem to mean that if everything is going a certain way, that is what God knows, and it's going that way because God knows it...and for it to go any differently would also mean that God would have to know something different. So, in other words, to change one would require changing the other.

However, if God operates outside of Time, the entire thing's moot

Without Time, there is no concept of change. Change requires one moment for things to be a certain way, and another moment for them to be different.

So it's not necessarily that God would "have" to know something different, or changing one would "require" changing the other -- it's simply that God would know something different, and that changing one automatically causes the other to be synced with it. Whatever God knows is what happens, and whatever happens is what God knows.

Furthermore, by creating a world in which Time exists -- in which limitations exist, yet change is possible -- He gave us the opportunity and freedom to more or less direct things without contradicting the very nature of God. Since we are confined to Time, we can't change anything that happened before we existed. Therefore, what God began with his knowledge remains intact and causes no conflict. However, after that point, we're free to kind of "add on to it" -- with whatever we change/choose being seamlessly incorporated into the overall design.

It's uncertain how limited the options are or how restrictive the environment is, but that's not the point. The point is that choices -- in whatever quantity or quality or frequency or desirability -- exist, and we have freedom to choose among them. And in fact, we can actually choose as to what our choices are, to an extent.

In a sense, decisions are like intangible "creations," since they often rely on "creative" thinking in trying to figure out all the possibilities. However, even though the raw materials for the decision might differ from one person to the next, that doesn't mean either person has less of a choice -- they're just different choices.

A scribble a kid makes with sidewalk chalk on a driveway is no less a creation than a painting of fruit made in a fully equipped art studio. The kid might be said to be at a "disadvantage" because of relatively limited resources, but that doesn't mean what the kid makes out of them will automatically be "inferior." A "good" chalk scribble can be made from mere chalk just as easily as a "bad" painting can be made from the highest quality paints. It's not nearly as important what the thing's made out of, as it is what's done with it.

But then someone might wonder "Oh, what about the poor kid across the street who doesn't have any sidewalk chalk? Isn't he being deprived of the opportunity to make what he wants?" Well, for one, the kid with the chalk might be inclined to share it, thereby solving that dilemma.

If, on the other hand, Sidewalk Chalk Kid is a stingy little brat, then there could be a problem. His mother might tell him he should be nice and share with the other kid, but that doesn't mean he will. However, Chalkless Kid is resourceful and discovers that he can find certain rocks and use them the same way. Or he can go find other friends that will share their chalk with him. Or if he can't find either, mud will work, too. By increasing his understanding (probably through effort, implying choice) of how things work, he can figure out how to use them to his advantage and suit his purposes...thereby expanding his options.

The fickle, whimsical attitudes and actions can all stem from predetermined environmental construction placed there by a higher being. There are enough "no choice" moments to see that many of the things that happen to us aren't by choice, and something that carries that much influence in our lives leaves to us questioning how much control we are in.

To attempt to clear the point up, I'm going into the slight magnitude of the notion.

You decide to walk down the sidewalk to the store. There's an uneven crack in the pavement, you trip. You scrape your arm falling, and consider to bother cleaning it up, but decide against it, even though you're heading to the store regardless. The fall wasn't a decision on your part. The crack was there due to an uneven plate in the earth's surface on which it eroded and caused the cement to be laid unevenly, forcing the crack. Another result of tripping, was that your shoelace was loosely fitted, and the shoe size was slightly too big, which caused you to drag your feet. Though being told not to your whole life, you happen to whenever you daydream. The daydreaming stemmed from reading books in your youth. You shy away from others because of obsessive bullying that took place in your childhood by another kid with the name of Horace, who was often beaten by his father, and this experience led you to take an interest in reading. Horace's father was in an car accident from swerving off an icy slope which caused it, the minor erosion in the tires from driving for too long at a given time with heated rubber from months past was one of the minute things that led to the accident, and he was disabled after crashing into a tree. Being out from work, he took up alcoholism, which led to the beatings of Horace. Horace's dad died of liver cancer soon after he started preschool though, and effected Horace in a major way. He carried a jealousy of finer lifestyles, and subliminally had an unconscious loathing of it, which caused most of the bullying. With the bullying in hand though, you learned to tolerate pain more than others, parting with your decision to not treat your current abrasion. However, by passing someone in the store, you inadvertently brushed someone with the scraped arm, and left some minute blood on their business suit. The blood congealed, but not before picking up the just right chemicals to create an isolated, by very deadly virus in the blood smear, with regards to your AB blood type. The chemicals that reside in the blood blotch, were caused from a stocker losing grip of a bottle of ammonia because the cap wasn't 3/4ths turned tight. In which was caused by the gear at the factory that seals the bottles being rusted, and currently much more so to the feeble eye of Eunice, a factory worker, who failed to recognize the fault. Eunice was subjected to too much bleach contact, and had degraded her eyes to a state which wasn't necessarily blindness, but a notch above blurry. See, she worked as a cleaning lady in a hospital, and one night one of the nurse's tumbled backwards due to the irrational behavior of a particular car crash victim, in regards to subsiding pain with morphine, and the nurse who crashed into the open bottle of bleach on the cart Eunice had and was pushing, splashed into her eyes. Luckily, she was in a hospital and got immediate care and was saved from blindness, but wasn't completely unaffected by the accident. She sought work in a factory line months after the incident with the bleach, having left for the reason she wasn't able to clean as efficiently and was tired of being told such, and remained in said factory ever since. Getting back to the blotched blood that now contained a strange, metaphorical deadly isolated virus, the man in which the blotch resides on went home to his loving wife, which in their embrace, her lips touched the very mark on the suit which contained the blood. Months pass, and degrading health of the woman takes it's toll, and she dies due to the exposure of the contaminated blotch.

Wait a second. The rock that faulted out of the tire which caused the crash of Horace's dad was pried out from the tire by the road one second earlier. The tire lost the one slight friction it needed to maintain stance on the road, and Horace's dad still crashed, yet he didn't hit the tree, instead skidding to a halt a few yards past it.

I don't think I need to go any further for my point.

But then someone might wonder "Oh, what about the poor kid across the street who doesn't have any sidewalk chalk? Isn't he being deprived of the opportunity to make what he wants?" Well, for one, the kid with the chalk might be inclined to share it, thereby solving that dilemma.

Annnnd I'll use this to remind of the harshness of one's birthplace. What about the availability of the "correct religion" to the people born where it is not/seldom encountered? Especially with what the religions require to ascend into Heaven.

I would certainly hope that she doesn't have everything figured out.

Hehe, Agnosticism. XD

[Chuck]

In an attempt to clear it up.. I think Taills is saying we're AI in a more figurative destiny-related sense, and Jazzie's talking about AI on a personal everyday action kind of level?

[Crazy]

I don't really believe in destiny. I believe in free-will, while moving towards or away from a purpose.

[Taills]

I don't really believe in destiny. I believe in free-will, while moving towards or away from a purpose.

Me too. It may seem otherwise, but I'm justifying it all in the view of omnipotence. But in the end, I dunno.

[Crazy]

Here's the kicker, guys; nobody actually knows what happens to you after you die! LOL

[Taills]

Exactly! :P

[JazzieAussie]

Yesssssssss. God ultimately knows if you will take the apple or not (which, is humorous with the concern of Eve; God appearing to not be able to forsee it, despite omnieverything/ battle with Satan and the angels that turned against him, blah blah), and... well...

... I think it's not that you know of how unlimited his powers are, its that, you don't seem to believe how a teensy, tiny, itty bitty, smallest speck of sand can drastically effect someone, and that if having been placed differently, COULD have turned someone's whole outcome around in whatever effect it could have had on it. With that mentioned, God, who made everything, and knows the outcome of everything, placed everything exactly how (not currently, because we could have, but with the beginning being how it is, caused us to place it there) they are which disables free will because he knows which will cause certain things to happen.

I see now. I was just taking it for granted that we're multifaceted enough to counteract that, so I'll try to explain what I've been assuming. XD

If God is as powerful as he is, then we pretty much are A.I. This, being coupled with what I stated above at how much we are affected by the little things.

Basically, if God's really as powerful as alleged, He would be able to implement a compromise. I can't honestly say I've got it all figured out, but it could be like the potential for us to have immortal souls. If we can have immortal souls, that means there can be a part of us that doesn't fall under the constraints of the rest of our environment. It's not subjected to the same restrictions as the rest of what we're made of, and is free to exist and function above at least some of the influence of our environment -- since everything else must die eventually. Likewise, it could be that our wills (or whatever they are) can act independently of the environment to an extent. Afterall, the thing that chooses between the choices or factors can't be one of those choices/factors; the thing that decides to go with one impulse over another can't itself be an impulse. It would need to be something on some kind of higher level.

Or if the example about souls is too abstract and hypothetical, what about a person's mind? What is that? There's nothing really to indicate that the brain is conscious of itself, so the mind has to be somewhat of a separate mechanism. What's it made out of? Or even just the very fact that we can consider anything hypothetical at all might illustrate this. Why or how do we imagine things that "could be" but aren't? Logic tells us we can't just will ourselves into flying on our own, but we can still imagine it anyway as if it were possible. We can draw from something outside available information (the things that are restricted to exist as they do, which we can observe), to imagine scenarios in direct contradiction with it. So whether it's our brains or some kind of separate "mind" doing it, there's something that enables us to perceive the world based on something other than itself. We can hold the world to a standard other than what's been included in it.

The fickle, whimsical attitudes and actions can all stem from predetermined environmental construction placed there by a higher being.

I couldn't agree more that it's possible. It's just that, based on other things, I think it's unlikely that's all there is to it.

There are enough "no choice" moments to see that many of the things that happen to us aren't by choice, and something that carries that much influence in our lives leaves to us questioning how much control we are in.

Yeah, like I said before, no one knows how limited our control might be, but just because there are some restrictions doesn't mean that they're infinite and cover every aspect of existence.

So, for one, we could still have a free will that allows us to alter our circumstances.

Or it could be that we only have an illusion of free will in many cases...maybe to help us sort of practice or build up the ability to choose "correctly" when it really matters, while at the same time keeping us from being able to do ourselves any real harm (or any real good, either).

Or it may just as easily be the case that no matter what we decide, it'll never have any real effect on physical circumstances at all. For example, for somebody playing a simulator, what happens in the game only has an indirect effect on the player. It doesn't matter whether the player himself decides to actively destroy his fake little city, or if he destroys it accidentally, or if his little brother comes up and pushes the wrong button for him. Any way it happens, the same thing's accomplished -- the city's destroyed -- and the only way it affects the player at all is in how the player reacts to it. So, in a sense, the effect on the player is independent of what happens in the game; the player isn't forced by the game to react in any particular way to whatever happens, even if he has to play it according to the way the game was made. If the player was completely enveloped in the environment of the game, though, it would just pretty much be a matter of cause-and-effect.


To attempt to clear the point up, I'm going into the slight magnitude of the notion.

You decide to walk down the sidewalk to the store. There's an uneven crack in the pavement, you trip. You scrape your arm falling, and consider to bother cleaning it up, but decide against it, even though you're heading to the store regardless. The fall wasn't a decision on your part. The crack was there due to an uneven plate in the earth's surface on which it eroded and caused the cement to be laid unevenly, forcing the crack. Another result of tripping, was that your shoelace was loosely fitted, and the shoe size was slightly too big, which caused you to drag your feet. Though being told not to your whole life, you happen to whenever you daydream. The daydreaming stemmed from reading books in your youth. You shy away from others because of obsessive bullying that took place in your childhood by another kid with the name of Horace, who was often beaten by his father, and this experience led you to take an interest in reading. Horace's father was in an car accident from swerving off an icy slope which caused it, the minor erosion in the tires from driving for too long at a given time with heated rubber from months past was one of the minute things that led to the accident, and he was disabled after crashing into a tree. Being out from work, he took up alcoholism, which led to the beatings of Horace. Horace's dad died of liver cancer soon after he started preschool though, and effected Horace in a major way. He carried a jealousy of finer lifestyles, and subliminally had an unconscious loathing of it, which caused most of the bullying. With the bullying in hand though, you learned to tolerate pain more than others, parting with your decision to not treat your current abrasion. However, by passing someone in the store, you inadvertently brushed someone with the scraped arm, and left some minute blood on their business suit. The blood congealed, but not before picking up the just right chemicals to create an isolated, by very deadly virus in the blood smear, with regards to your AB blood type. The chemicals that reside in the blood blotch, were caused from a stocker losing grip of a bottle of ammonia because the cap wasn't 3/4ths turned tight. In which was caused by the gear at the factory that seals the bottles being rusted, and currently much more so to the feeble eye of Eunice, a factory worker, who failed to recognize the fault. Eunice was subjected to too much bleach contact, and had degraded her eyes to a state which wasn't necessarily blindness, but a notch above blurry. See, she worked as a cleaning lady in a hospital, and one night one of the nurse's tumbled backwards due to the irrational behavior of a particular car crash victim, in regards to subsiding pain with morphine, and the nurse who crashed into the open bottle of bleach on the cart Eunice had and was pushing, splashed into her eyes. Luckily, she was in a hospital and got immediate care and was saved from blindness, but wasn't completely unaffected by the accident. She sought work in a factory line months after the incident with the bleach, having left for the reason she wasn't able to clean as efficiently and was tired of being told such, and remained in said factory ever since. Getting back to the blotched blood that now contained a strange, metaphorical deadly isolated virus, the man in which the blotch resides on went home to his loving wife, which in their embrace, her lips touched the very mark on the suit which contained the blood. Months pass, and degrading health of the woman takes it's toll, and she dies due to the exposure of the contaminated blotch.

Wait a second. The rock that faulted out of the tire which caused the crash of Horace's dad was pried out from the tire by the road one second earlier. The tire lost the one slight friction it needed to maintain stance on the road, and Horace's dad still crashed, yet he didn't hit the tree, instead skidding to a halt a few yards past it.

I don't think I need to go any further for my point.

First of all, nice example. :cool2: And I couldn't agree more on how we have absolutely no control over physical phenomena like Earth's tectonic plate shifting and whatnot.

However, just like it illustrates things beyond anyone's control, it also has other factors that seem like they could have been more or less arbitrary. For instance, why were the shoes too big? Does every person subjected to bullying develop a higher tolerance for pain? Was Horace's dad forced to take up alcoholism just because he lost his job? Might he just as easily not have?

I guess the point I was trying to make in my other posts is that there's no reason why there couldn't be some level of "randomness" intentionally programmed into the design. Maybe part of the regularity of it all is designed to specifically allow for irregularities; part of the goal is to have no goal. That's not at all to say that I don't believe there's a distinct purpose to life or anything (I definitely do), but just that we aren't -- simply by merit of it existing -- automatically forced to comply with it.

Annnnd I'll use this to remind of the harshness of one's birthplace.

That's pretty much what I was trying to get at. XD There are obviously some default circumstances set at the beginning, but it also seems like there could be ways around them later.

What about the availability of the "correct religion" to the people born where it is not/seldom encountered? Especially with what the religions require to ascend into Heaven.

I guess those that do know of it could be held responsible for those that don't, since God specifically commanded His followers to "go into all the world and preach the gospel" and all that. I mean, no one can be held accountable for not choosing something that was never made available to him as an option. So, as someone else once put it, "we do know that no man can be saved except through Christ; we do not know that only those who know Him can be saved through Him."



But regardless, I guess the whole thing pretty much boils down to whether we're strictly physical entities or not. There's nothing that demands we have to be (and there are some things that may suggest that we're not), and it would be completely within God's power to make us "multidimensional" or more versatile in that sense.

I'm not saying this is necessarily the case, but it seems like a feasible explanation...and actually, as much as I personally love for things to make sense, if everything fit neatly into logic, I think there'd be something wrong. Even with as much as we can process and try to understand the world, there are still anomalies. We can more or less conclude how something "should" be, given what we have observed in similar cases, but there are always exceptions.

So if our observations are the basis for logic, then logic also demands that we should be willing to consider the possibility that what we see/know isn't the whole story. There are patterns in nature, but there are also exceptions -- or at least things that we wouldn't have expected. Otherwise, no one would ever "discover" anything. You'd never hear about a group of researchers "discovering" some new species of insect in the rainforest or something; it'd just be "Hey, we finally found one of those bugs that we knew was there all along and should have already found anyway because we know everything about it." If there was some kind of logical evidence that showed the bug couldn't possibly exist, then yeah, it'd be reasonable to assume it didn't. But otherwise, just because we didn't know about it beforehand doesn't mean it wasn't there all along.

So, yes, if it's a fact that what we see is all there is to it, then meeting the requirements of Christianity (and the entire belief system itself) is impossible; God couldn't be good, yet hold us accountable for things we are powerless to influence. On the other hand, since no one knows for sure, there won't be anything able to irrefutably debunk it. It's just a matter of which possible explanations seems most likely to be true.

I don't really believe in destiny. I believe in free-will, while moving towards or away from a purpose.
Depending on what you mean by purpose, I'm pretty sure I do, too. :o

Here's the kicker, guys; nobody actually knows what happens to you after you die! LOLDead people know. http://www.hmotaku.net/forums/picture.php?albumid=89&pictureid=1366