Thread: Questions about christianity, I have answers.

I see, I see...forgive me, I'm pretty slow today, having not had entirely adequate sleep...but yea I see what you're saying now.

Except one more thing I need to clarify, are you just seeing the fire as ice, or is it actually fire and ice at the same time?

Okay we both have our defintion and understanding of Logic.

Now just because it's beyond our comprehension and our ideas of logical reasoning doesn't make it illogical by no means. Exmp: People in the 4th and 5th centuries knew for a fact that the Earth was flat because thinking otherwise was well beyond their comprehension. (i.e., Spherical Earth). Just because something is beyond our current comprehension doesn't make it illogical by definition.

Originally Posted by Kael Seoras

I see, I see...forgive me, I'm pretty slow today, having not had entirely adequate sleep...but yea I see what you're saying now.

Except one more thing I need to clarify, are you just seeing the fire as ice, or is it actually fire and ice at the same time?

No need for apologies you're fine. Yup you are right. You are seeing fire as ice and fire and ice at the same time.

Ok so this object in question is existing as fire and ice at the same time.

Would you say that the laws of this universe, created by omnipotent God, are perfect as is?

But then how could man know God at all?

Seismosaur, which post is your question directed at? Mine with a question presenting an idea of a universe with perfect laws or the whole fire-being-ice thing?

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

Would it not make sense for logic on an Omnipotent level to supersede this form of low-level logic, considering being Omnipotent would naturally be above logic?

So you're saying that god made a universe where bad things happen, where we don't like these bad things and your response is that even though he didn't have to do it this way he did because it doesn't have to make sense to us (which he knew it wouldn't)? What kind of point is that? That humans don't like suffering is a plain fact. About as plain as the fact that it happens. Your point is a non-argument. god's creation is causing itself to hurt. Obviously he screwed up somewhere.

Wait, nevermind. That's only obvious on a human level. god has the power to not make sense and so that's a pretty good reason to not make any sense. Even if it wasn't a good reason to not make sense, it wouldn't matter! he's god! he doesn't need a good reason to not make sense!

Originally Posted by StephenT

Thanks for answering the questions. I'll get to comments.



Yeah, it's a kind of confusing topic unless you get my whole story. Here's a thread I made a while back, with the whole concept.


http://www.dreamviews.com/community/showthread.php?t=53674

My answer remains the same though I will further clarify if you so desire.

Originally Posted by StephenT

I must have forgotten to put "all-forgiving" in the question also. If God always forgives, then there is no need for a hell.

All forgiving means that he will forgive any sin of course but you must come seek forgiveness, you must truely mean it.

Originally Posted by StephenT

Is it sin if we do not know of God's love, yet commit acts that are viewed as sins by Christians, even if they are not very morally wrong? What if somebody knows of God's love, and sins, but not for the sake of sin, but to get by in life?

A sin is a sin and is never acceptable. If the person who sins doesn't know of God it is still a sin. This person who has never heard of God may or may not go to hell depending on who you ask. Even if you commit the sin just to get by it is still a sin and still requires you to seek forgiveness.

Originally Posted by StephenT

So you view them as wrong or mistakes made by the Church and many Christians or you neglect them? I'm confused from your wording a little bit.

If the first, then you agree that Christianity is enshrouded in hypocrisy. (Not necessarily directed at you or bad for you, just for the religion as a whole.) If the latter, then you are obviously ignorant.

I believe that the church has some black marks on it's record, yes.

Originally Posted by StephenT

That is exactly my point. Because it was written so long ago and has lost so much meaning and interpretation, as well as how to interpret, it leaves it as a very unreliable source of any historical relevance. When it turns completely metaphoric, it is only a set of morals

Not much I can say to this, it was a long time ago and things get lost in the ebb and flow of time. I agree that it can be confusing at times.

Originally Posted by StephenT

I never knew or heard of them being denounced. Is there any scripture showing this? I remember mostly hearing and reading scriptures where Jesus had said something about the lines of the Torah being completely correct.

As far as adultery goes the scribes and pharisees brought a woman to jesus acused of adultery thinking they could trap him in conversation and when they asked him what to do he replied let he who has not sin cast the first stone.The woman was not harmed. For the full story see john8 1-12 in the bible or type it into your favorite search engine.
As far as slavery goes here is a bit from paul's letter to philemon, it is verses 15-16 "Perhaps this is why he was away from you for awhile, that you might have him back forever, no longer as a slave but more than a slave, a brother, beloeved especially to me but even more so to you, as a man in the lord."
As for Jesus and the Torah he basically said that he was not here to destroy it, just that he was going to fullfill a few prophecies, he meant that he wasn't going to throw out the old law, just make some changes. This is one of the most misinterpreted verses in the bible.

Originally Posted by StephenT

So, is there any chance that you are in the wrong religion, and will consequently go to Hell because the right religion says so?

This is the sad part about Christianity. The arrogance, ignorance, and hypocrisy surpass any other group of people.

If my religion is incorect, which I don't think it is, and another was right then I could end up going to hell.

Don't forget Islam or even Judaism, most religions have something like this in their doctrine

Originally Posted by StephenT

K.

I like the smiley

Originally Posted by StephenT

It sounds like a highly distorted form of scripture that keeps getting twisted as science furthers itself.

it is, it is what works for me.

Originally Posted by StephenT

Homosexuals are humans just as you and I are. It's not a voluntary thing, and although it may not obviously be the normal, it's not controllable. Just as you and I have sexual urges for women and straight girls have sexual urges for men, they have the same urges, but for opposite genders. Acting upon something that seems only natural to your physiology can't be considered morally wrong, because your body makes it chemically right.

I don't think that homosexuality should be considered wrong by my religion but it is, Like I said if you truely believe then you will have to try to resist the urge. It's not fair, I don't like it, but thats the way it is. Finally I am done with your comments, I tried to answer like five times but kept getting computer crashes from the old and junky computer I'm working with.

Originally Posted by Omega Weapon

If God is omnipotent, why can't he create us with the experience of real love and free will as well as not having any suffering or evil?

because to have free will you have to have the ability to do things that are against what God commands, otherwise you are just a puppet.

Originally Posted by Omega Weapon

If god needs to permit the possibility of evil and suffering for us to experience true love, then doesn't that make him not omnipotent?

How can you say that it is True love when the only emotion you can feel is love? You must be able to experience hate or anti-love to truely love someone or else it is forced love. Anti-love leads to bad choices. God wanted us to have free will because he loved us and any creature that has truely free-will has the ability to make bad decisions or else free will doesn't exsist.

Originally Posted by Mark75

So you're saying that god made a universe where bad things happen, where we don't like these bad things and your response is that even though he didn't have to do it this way he did because it doesn't have to make sense to us (which he knew it wouldn't)? What kind of point is that? That humans don't like suffering is a plain fact. About as plain as the fact that it happens. Your point is a non-argument. god's creation is causing itself to hurt. Obviously he screwed up somewhere.

Wait, nevermind. That's only obvious on a human level. god has the power to not make sense and so that's a pretty good reason to not make any sense. Even if it wasn't a good reason to not make sense, it wouldn't matter! he's god! he doesn't need a good reason to not make sense!

That point flew right pass you huh Mark75? However Im curious to know something.

What is the fundamental principles of human suffering? and what causes it?

Originally Posted by Kael Seoras

Ok so this object in question is existing as fire and ice at the same time.

Would you say that the laws of this universe, created by omnipotent God, are perfect as is?

Perfect is an aesthetic or moral value. It is not a relevant adjective to apply to the laws of the universe. The laws are what they are.

Our theories about the universe may be more or less accurate in their descriptions of the data. Nevertheless, the laws are not subject to our ethical judgments.

Originally Posted by Freeman Dyson

the more we examine the universe and study the details of its architecture, the more evidence we find that the universe in some sense must have known that we were coming

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

Okay we both have our defintion and understanding of Logic.

Now just because it's beyond our comprehension and our ideas of logical reasoning doesn't make it illogical by no means. Exmp: People in the 4th and 5th centuries knew for a fact that the Earth was flat because thinking otherwise was well beyond their comprehension. (i.e., Spherical Earth). Just because something is beyond our current comprehension doesn't make it illogical by definition.

Your missing my point; thats not what I was arguing.


The point is if you criticise Seismosaur for using logic in the problem of evil; then you admit you can never use logic about God; but you must have used logic in order to rationalise your belief in God.

Basically you can't say its ok to use logic to justify the existence of God, but then criticise it when it brings up a fundamental problem with God.

If you stick to what you said about seismosaur's argument then you get trapped in that you have used the veryt hing you tell him he cannot use in order to come up with the idea he is criticising in the first place.

Originally Posted by Lucid_boy

because to have free will you have to have the ability to do things that are against what God commands, otherwise you are just a puppet.


How can you say that it is True love when the only emotion you can feel is love? You must be able to experience hate or anti-love to truely love someone or else it is forced love. Anti-love leads to bad choices. God wanted us to have free will because he loved us and any creature that has truely free-will has the ability to make bad decisions or else free will doesn't exsist.

So God isn't omnipotent. OK?


Because an all-powerful all-loving being could give us free will and no possibility for sin and evil, if he truly was all powerful.

Originally Posted by Omega Weapon

Your missing my point; thats not what I was arguing.

How is that not what you are arguing? I thought we found some common ground in regards to logic. The whole reason why I posted the definition regarding logic is so that we can get a general understanding that you and I were on the same page. How is the point missed when you mentioned this:

Basically yeah, the study of principles by correct reasoning, but I just wanted to throw these out there as not to get completely bogged in the wording.

Remember Principles by Correct Reasoning?

Originally Posted by Omega Weapon

The point is if you criticise Seismosaur for using logic in the problem of evil; then you admit you can never use logic about God; but you must have used logic in order to rationalise your belief in God.

Speculative, this argument is pointless you're assuming you have knowledge regarding why I believe in God when you don't know anything about me.

Originally Posted by Omega Weapon

Basically you can't say its ok to use logic to justify the existence of God, but then criticise it when it brings up a fundamental problem with God.

Refer back to my statement, an Omnipotent Being breaks Logic.

Originally Posted by Omega Weapon

If you stick to what you said about seismosaur's argument then you get trapped in that you have used the veryt hing you tell him he cannot use in order to come up with the idea he is criticising in the first place.

And what exactly did I use?

Yet your only reason in believeing in this deity is your immediate family and a 10k year old book which some how trumps the hundreds of other religions by default because your parents said so?

But wait-- I can't say that because that argument involves logic!

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

Yet your only reason in believeing in this deity is your immediate family and a 10k year old book which some how trumps the hundreds of other religions by default because your parents said so?

But wait-- I can't say that because that argument involves logic!

Once again "Speculation" Is this really factual in regards to my reason in believeing? What's the basis of your evidence to why and how I believe?

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

What is the fundamental principles of human suffering? and what causes it?

That humans were designed to be receptive to suffering, designed to want to caused suffering to other humans and that they were created in a universe where it is quite convenient for them to cause it.

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

Once again "Speculation" Is this really factual in regards to my reason in believeing? What's the basis of your evidence to why and how I believe?

Because only someone severely mad in the head or someone who had been indoctrinated (brainwashed) would believe such asinine garbage and then defend it with Omnipotence > Logic.

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

severely mad .

Severely mad? Please elaborate.

Severely not right in the head.

Or brainwashed. Usually the latter but sometimes the first-- See westboro Baptists group.

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

Perfect is an aesthetic or moral value. It is not a relevant adjective to apply to the laws of the universe. The laws are what they are.

Our theories about the universe may be more or less accurate in their descriptions of the data. Nevertheless, the laws are not subject to our ethical judgments.

You got me there

Ok, I just wonder, God created the universe with the laws of logic that it has, why would he do something above his own laws?

Perfect is flawless.

Creating something flawed on accident is a flaw.

Yes, I neglected to think of that yesterday I think maybe I shouldn't be posting here until I've gotten some sleep

Anyway, certainly there is a flaw: evil.

Or Satan, as some like to term it.

Ok Ne-yo.


How did you come to believe in God then?


I hope you aren't gonna be usin' logic, for your sake.