Attributes of God

My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
Attributes of God

For the sake of argument:

Stipulation 1: The universe had a beginning
Stipulation 2: This beginning was caused by a creator.
Stipulation 3: The first life on earth was created.
Stipulation 4: The creator created, no other traits are stipulated. I.e. Any further interaction, intervention or attributes must be proven.

I am interested in having a polite rational discussion with theists about why they believe what they believe about god.
Here are questions I have but feel free to ignore them and address a topic that is near and dear to your heart.
Do you believe god is loving? Why?
Do you believe god is omniscient/omnipotent/omnipresent? Why?
Do you believe god listens to and acts on petitions (prayer)? Why?
Do you believe god is infallible? Why?

Warnings:
I am not interested in debating whether atheists “believe” there is no god. I am not interested in debating evolution. I am not interested in debating burden of proof. So if you bring any of that up I am likely to ignore it. Not necessarily because I agree with you or can’t prove you wrong. I just don’t want this discussion to get too terribly far off track.

I am not stipulating the veracity of any religious text. So if you believe something about god because a book says I would appreciate any other observations that support your belief.

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


newmodeltheist
Theist
newmodeltheist's picture
Posts: 105
Joined: 2007-02-20
User is offlineOffline
My Name is Chelsea

My Name is Chelsea wrote:

Do you believe god is loving? Why?
Do you believe god is omniscient/omnipotent/omnipresent? Why?
Do you believe god listens to and acts on petitions (prayer)? Why?
Do you believe god is infallible? Why?

Hi Chelsea

I believe god is compassionate certainly. I believe he is loving towards his girlfriend. To ignorant people like us however I believe compassionate is a more appropriate term. The word ‘loving’ suggests a real mutual bond and personal knowledge and since sinful people do not have that with god by definition then I would not really use the word loving.

I believe that god is all knowing in his personal form. I think that his impersonal form is transcendent to all things including mind, time and space so I wouldn’t use all knowing to describe gods transcendent being, although his personal being is all knowing through his impersonal being. Likewise ‘all-powerful’. I think god is not all present in is personal form by definition. In his personal form he has locality in time and space. But his impersonal being is transcendent to space and time yet space and time have their existence through him. Therefore is transcendent to space and time yet immanent. In other words he could be said to pervade the cosmos.

I do not believe god acts on prayers. I believe that prayer should be used in order to bring yourself closer to god so to speak so that you can act in accordance with his will and with his power. God is not here at the moment, and it is our job to do what we can in this world.

Yes I believe god is infallible. He is the original, supreme personality who does not fall into sin. Created beings might misunderstand and fall into sin but they will not be abandoned.


l.mcbryar
Theist
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-02-22
User is offlineOffline
Thank you

for once there is a person wanting a discussion without the crap. granted ill give the answers, these are the questions that i find truely important.
taking into all of your stipulations:

i do believe God is loving. Why? Through all of the times that i have been in a place where i was nearing death, and nearing the place in my thoughts where i was willing to commit suicide, no person was able to help me. it took me falling onto my face and crying out to God. I was given a comfort i wasnt able to find anywhere else. I could feel his presence and love.

Omnipresent/omnipotent/and omniscient? yes Why? because no matter where i go, what i do, i still feel Him there. and not only myself, but everyone else who truely believes. He is there for all, not just me. Hope that ansewers all three.

believe in prayer? very much so. i have seen and been apart of the power of prayer. my looking into is just as this: God has responded to the prayers i have given. Best example would be with the ministry that God has shown to me, to be mine. i have asked to know more about it, and i do. God has also given the beginnings of this ministry in my own church. i know the name, generality of place, and the doors to open it. i have the contacts to help me when that day comes, that i truely believe He placed in my life for that reason.

And infallible, yes. thing is, if he created me, and created the heavens, and everything else, he designed it all. he created it that way, therefore, no imperfections, and no blemishes. infallible.

Hope that helps. but now i have a question or two.

I would like you to answer your own if you would, and then these:

Do you believe in alternate life, i.e. aliens?
What made you disbelieve in a God, not necesarilly the Christian God?

This seems like it will be a good thread, and im interested in seeing all that you have to say. feel free to ask anything. im an open book. and like the whole suicide things, ill tell you anything you want, just ask. i want my mistakes to be someone elses saving graces.

Psalms 74:10


l.mcbryar
Theist
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-02-22
User is offlineOffline
hello again

newmodeltheist,

not to be sinical or critical, but what religion are you? i personally find your views interesting and i cant place where they come from. also, what are your beliefs on creation?

And why do you say love cannot be from God to person solely? can one not love a person and not be loved in return? does that make it compassion because it is not two ways? Again not looking to criticize, just want your view. and what is your definition of love?

Chelsea

and i apologize. i did not realize you felt like i was ignoring your comments because they have a irrationality, its just that i want them to see the truth. You have questions and are willing to view all stands, as seen by your stipulations for this thread. now we can talk on this level and i promise that i will answer all questions the best and most informative way i can, if youll do me the same honor.

Psalms 74:10


newmodeltheist
Theist
newmodeltheist's picture
Posts: 105
Joined: 2007-02-20
User is offlineOffline
l.mcbryar

l.mcbryar wrote:
newmodeltheist, not to be sinical or critical, but what religion are you? i personally find your views interesting and i cant place where they come from. also, what are your beliefs on creation? And why do you say love cannot be from God to person solely? can one not love a person and not be loved in return? does that make it compassion because it is not two ways? Again not looking to criticize, just want your view. and what is your definition of love? 

I.mcbryar.

I can only give a quick response now as I have to go out, i'm already late.  (funnily enough i'm going to my home church although i'm not a christian)

I say not a christian because the evangelicals who I hang out with would never describe me as such although like most people my principle form of religious expression is based on the christian tradition, ie christmas etc.

My own theism is just that, my own.  Meaning that I base my views on god etc on reasoning.  I have a subtle belief in certain revalations (my definition of religion) but my theism is principally philosophical I would say.

I am quite attracted to the vedic scriptures and krsna conciousness.  Some of my views are rooted here, hence the picture of krsna and radha (his consort) to the left.

You are right about love though.  Love can be one way.  I agree with you then.  But my view is that the nature of our sinful position has something profound to do with who we actually are!!  The nature of existance itself.  So saying that God loves us for me tends to muddy the water.  I choose the word compassionate because it is more neutral.  I may need to elaborate on this I feel, but not now as I have to go out. 


My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
newmodeltheist wrote: Hi

newmodeltheist wrote:

Hi Chelsea

I believe god is compassionate certainly. I believe he is loving towards his girlfriend. To ignorant people like us however I believe compassionate is a more appropriate term. The word ‘loving’ suggests a real mutual bond and personal knowledge and since sinful people do not have that with god by definition then I would not really use the word loving.


God has a girlfriend? Why do you think he is loving?

newmodeltheist wrote:
I believe that god is all knowing in his personal form. I think that his impersonal form is transcendent to all things including mind, time and space so I wouldn’t use all knowing to describe gods transcendent being, although his personal being is all knowing through his impersonal being. Likewise ‘all-powerful’. I think god is not all present in is personal form by definition. In his personal form he has locality in time and space. But his impersonal being is transcendent to space and time yet space and time have their existence through him. Therefore is transcendent to space and time yet immanent. In other words he could be said to pervade the cosmos.


Again, why do you believe that this is how god is?

newmodeltheist wrote:
I do not believe god acts on prayers. I believe that prayer should be used in order to bring yourself closer to god so to speak so that you can act in accordance with his will and with his power. God is not here at the moment, and it is our job to do what we can in this world.


Prayer would then be a sort of meditation rather than a petition?
This was one thing that when I really thought about it as a Christian didn’t really make sense. I figured God obviously didn’t need my advice and he would just do what he thought was best so what was the point?

newmodeltheist wrote:
Yes I believe god is infallible. He is the original, supreme personality who does not fall into sin. Created beings might misunderstand and fall into sin but they will not be abandoned.


I will agree that if god is omni-everything that it would logically follow that he was infallible.

I take it that you do not believe there is a hell?

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


newmodeltheist
Theist
newmodeltheist's picture
Posts: 105
Joined: 2007-02-20
User is offlineOffline
My Name is Chelsea

My Name is Chelsea wrote:

God has a girlfriend? Why do you think he is loving?

Yes to the first part.  As for the second I would say that love is the feeling of oneness between self and other.  In other words, that which is loved is felt to be an aspect of oneself.  Since all things derive from God then love is an automatic extension of his character.


Quote:
Again, why do you believe that this is how god is?


Because I have to reconcile the attributes of God with logic.  My theism is principally philosophical.  I had the same problem as I suspect many atheists do.  But rather than reject God outright (I am naturally theologically inclined) I had to make sense of this matter by reason.  I must say, the traditional vedic teachings were invaluable in this regard but one has to come to a reasoned understanding oneself as well.

Quote:
Prayer would then be a sort of meditation rather than a petition?
This was one thing that when I really thought about it as a Christian didn’t really make sense. I figured God obviously didn’t need my advice and he would just do what he thought was best so what was the point?


I do not pray because it is plain to me that God does not answer prayer.  It may help people to pray from a certain point of view but that is not the same as prayer being answered.  It is grossly unreasonable, almost offensive actually, to say that God will help heal a headache or this or that, but not help an abused child or whatever when they pray.


Quote:
I take it that you do not believe there is a hell?

If by that you mean a place of eternal torment or punishment where souls go if they do not accept Jesus or whatever, then NO I don't believe in hell. 


My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
l.mcbryar wrote: for once

l.mcbryar wrote:
for once there is a person wanting a discussion without the crap. granted ill give the answers, these are the questions that i find truely important. taking into all of your stipulationAm I correct in assuming you are Christian?

l.mcbryar wrote:
for once there is a person wanting a discussion without the crap. granted ill give the answers, these are the questions that i find truely important. taking into all of your stipulations: i do believe God is loving. Why? Through all of the times that i have been in a place where i was nearing death, and nearing the place in my thoughts where i was willing to commit suicide, no person was able to help me. it took me falling onto my face and crying out to God. I was given a comfort i wasnt able to find anywhere else. I could feel his presence and love.


Wow that is personal stuff, not quite sure I am so brave, kudos for that.
I can understand why such an experience would be convincing. Convincing for you. Unfortunately if I told you I had such an experience I would not expect you to merely take my word for it, though it would be very convincing to me. Do you feel it is possible that feeling could have come from something other than god?

l.mcbryar wrote:
Omnipresent/omnipotent/and omniscient? yes Why? because no matter where i go, what i do, i still feel Him there. and not only myself, but everyone else who truely believes. He is there for all, not just me. Hope that ansewers all three.


I can see where that would lead you to believe that he is omnipresent, but not as much omnipotent or omniscient. For me if there is some sort of god omnipresent seems to be on of the more believable attributes he could have. Perhaps that is because for me it is easiest to think of a possible god as a sort of force, rather than a person.

l.mcbryar wrote:
believe in prayer? very much so. i have seen and been apart of the power of prayer. my looking into is just as this: God has responded to the prayers i have given. Best example would be with the ministry that God has shown to me, to be mine. i have asked to know more about it, and i do. God has also given the beginnings of this ministry in my own church. i know the name, generality of place, and the doors to open it. i have the contacts to help me when that day comes, that i truely believe He placed in my life for that reason.


Clarification: you are saying god told you what your ministry was and how to accomplish it? Could you be more specific?

Prayer has always seemed one of the more unlikely things about Christianity. God will do what he is going to do, nothing I say will change it. Fulfillment of prayer always seemed like coincidence to me since there are so very many prayers that go unanswered. Prayer for enlightenment seems very like meditation to mean and I think enlightenment can come from within as well as without.

l.mcbryar wrote:
And infallible, yes. thing is, if he created me, and created the heavens, and everything else, he designed it all. he created it that way, therefore, no imperfections, and no blemishes. infallible.


Infallibility is another trait I have had difficulty reconciling with the Christian god. Jesus’ sacrifice always seemed to be god’s way of changing his mind.

Quote:
i do believe God is loving. Why? Through all of the times that i have been in a place where i was nearing death, and nearing the place in my thoughts where i was willing to commit suicide, no person was able to help me. it took me falling onto my face and crying out to God. I was given a comfort i wasnt able to find anywhere else. I could feel his presence and love. Omnipresent/omnipotent/and omniscient? yes Why? because no matter where i go, what i do, i still feel Him there. and not only myself, but everyone else who truely believes. He is there for all, not just me. Hope that ansewers all three. believe in prayer? very much so. i have seen and been apart of the power of prayer. my looking into is just as this: God has responded to the prayers i have given. Best example would be with the ministry that God has shown to me, to be mine. i have asked to know more about it, and i do. God has also given the beginnings of this ministry in my own church. i know the name, generality of place, and the doors to open it. i have the contacts to help me when that day comes, that i truely believe He placed in my life for that reason. And infallible, yes. thing is, if he created me, and created the heavens, and everything else, he designed it all. he created it that way, therefore, no imperfections, and no blemishes. infallible. Hope that helps. but now i have a question or two. I would like you to answer your own if you would, and then these: Do you believe in alternate life, i.e. aliens? What made you disbelieve in a God, not necesarilly the Christian God? This seems like it will be a good thread, and im interested in seeing all that you have to say. feel free to ask anything. im an open book. and like the whole suicide things, ill tell you anything you want, just ask. i want my mistakes to be someone elses saving graces.

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
l.mcbryar wrote: Hope that

l.mcbryar wrote:
Hope that helps. but now i have a question or two. I would like you to answer your own if you would, and then these: Do you believe in alternate life, i.e. aliens? What made you disbelieve in a God, not necesarilly the Christian God? This seems like it will be a good thread, and im interested in seeing all that you have to say. feel free to ask anything. im an open book. and like the whole suicide things, ill tell you anything you want, just ask. i want my mistakes to be someone elses saving graces.


Answer my own questions? Since I don’t believe in a god that would be a bit difficult. I will attempt to answer in light of my stipulations, as best as possible.

Quote:
Do you believe god is loving? Why?
Do you believe god is omniscient/omnipotent/omnipresent? Why?
Do you believe god listens to and acts on petitions (prayer)? Why?
Do you believe god is infallible? Why?


I think I covered my thoughts on prayer above. I do not think that a creator need be any of these things. I think a being or force could create or catalyze the creation of the universe without being loving or omni-anything. I have trouble reconciling these traits with each other and with god as he is portrayed in many religious texts.
Do I believe in aliens? Well I have seen no evidence of their existence, so I can’t say I believe in them. I do believe that it is more probable that life exists elsewhere in this universe than that it doesn’t.

What made me disbelieve in god? A number of things. I didn’t really think about the question of god’s existence until high school. It was then that I began to be trouble by many aspects of the Christian god, though I still considered myself Christian. The concept of hell was a big problem for me once I really thought about it. Partly for a very personal reason, my father is not Christian =  my father would go to hell. For obvious reasons I was not happy with that thought. From there I thought about all the other people who were doomed to hell, who really didn’t deserve (I don’t think anyone does) and it really wasn’t their fault. This seemed mammothly unfair, as well as difficult to reconcile with the idea of a loving god. So then I was a Christian who didn’t believe in hell.

Another difficult point for me was guilt. Church bored me, reading the Bible bored me, praying bored me. So I didn’t read the Bible nor pray much (I still went to church but didn’t pay much attention). This made me feel a bit guilty. I also never had a personal experience with god. Why didn’t god like me? Probably because I was such a poor Christian. More guilt. The end result being that religion was not making me happy.

Then I started college. I stopped going to church but I thought about god more than ever. I realized that many things about my faith made very little sense. Prayer seemed pointless, Omni-everything seemed irreconcilable with a loving god and the world as it was. Many stories concerning god in the Bible did not put him in the best light. I began to find contradictions in the Bible. And in the end I realized that all I had was blind faith based on nothing more than teachings since I was a small child. I decided that wasn’t enough.

I think that reading, especially Robert Heinlein, is partly responsible. Many of his books made me think about my religion in a new way but because it was fiction I wasn’t automatically in a defensive frame of mind, as one might be when reading “The God Delusion” by Dawkins.

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
newmodeltheist wrote:

newmodeltheist wrote:

Yes to the first part. As for the second I would say that love is the feeling of oneness between self and other. In other words, that which is loved is felt to be an aspect of oneself. Since all things derive from God then love is an automatic extension of his character.


Sorry I don’t want to sound like a broken record, but god has a girlfriend? Undecided Could you explain what you mean. I am assuming that you don’t mean that god is cruising the dating scene. Do you mean more of a consort? A female half? Is she a god?

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


newmodeltheist
Theist
newmodeltheist's picture
Posts: 105
Joined: 2007-02-20
User is offlineOffline
My Name is Chelsea wrote: I

My Name is Chelsea wrote:
I am assuming that you don’t mean that god is cruising the dating scene.

LOL Smiling

I suppose this question must really be answered by first explaining why god is habitually referred to as male. It is not so much the case that god is male but rather that which we call male, the form and function and various qualities, is the personification of the impersonal spirit. The impersonal spirit is god, but in his transcendent mode. When the transcendent impersonal spirit is made manifest, or personified, along with his home and friends and hobbies etc, then this is god proper so to speak, the fully revealed spirit, yet at the same time, the image of the transcendent spirit. This image is male, or rather as stated, male is the quality of the spirit in personified form. The fully revealed godhead however does not simply include the personified god himself. Alone the spirit forever transcendent, or unmanifested. This is a paradox. How can something be existent in any meaningful way yet be above all things, time, space, form, mind etc. In other words, how does a transcendent being become manifest. The answer is that godhead consists of two aspects, both co-existent yet one primary, spirit itself, and the other secondary, the means of becoming. (or that which brings forth that which is, the material aspect of god). The material aspect is a function of the spiritual aspect of godhead. It ‘reflects’, so to speak, the unseen. Remember, this is not some arbitrary add-on, but an essential component of god himself. The fullness of godhead is therefore rendered by the personification of his spirit, and the personification of his means of becoming. Female is the personification of this material aspect, and female qualities are derived from this secondary aspect of godhead. One can call this personified form goddess.

In the Christian tradition we see this played out in the virgin birth. The invisible father (spirit) is made manifest in flesh (son) via the agency of the blessed virgin Mary. Mary is the name of Christ’s consort later on (certainly in gnostic texts), the same name suggesting a mythic connection with the blessed virgin.

The most perfect depiction of god then is when he is with his eternal goddess. The picture attached to my posts depicts this according to Vedic tradition as I like the picture. I think that western religion must rediscover the fullness of godhead and worship god by also honouring his goddess. Catholic virgin cults do this to a degree but do not fully realise her significance. This needs to be rectified in western religion along with other things if it is to survive and be a force for good. Western theism needs to be reconstructed according to a new model. This is the meaning of the name newmodeltheist.


newmodeltheist
Theist
newmodeltheist's picture
Posts: 105
Joined: 2007-02-20
User is offlineOffline
P.S. Chelsea. My favouite

P.S. Chelsea.

My favouite verse in the whole BIble is one which I think is misunderstood and underestimated in its significance.  It is found in Genesis and according to tradition supposedly is a converstion between aspects of the trinity.  I however believe it to be God talking to Goddess.  Note, 'Us' as a singular.

"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:.......So God greated man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."   Gen 1;26-27

 


l.mcbryar
Theist
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-02-22
User is offlineOffline
newmodeltheist i understand

newmodeltheist

i understand where you would go by saying the gen 1:26-27 verse being singular. but if i am not mistaken in the original greek, this scripture does mean multiple. and i must also ask this question to that in response: if god has a female consort, gf, or female counterpart, why would he use mary to have given birth to christ, the son of God?

Chelsea

definately think the responses are valid. i ask you though, where and what contradictions do you find? maybe i can do some more research to see what i find. and i also ask this, if you told someone working for you to do something and they didnt, would you punish them in some way? i would hope, for the sake of the company or otherwise it would be yes. but this is the same concept that God is using. it is punishment for not doing as it is commanded. A loving God would punish to show what is right and wrong just as you would to someone you love.

Psalms 74:10


My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
l.mcbryar wrote: Chelsea

l.mcbryar wrote:

Chelsea
definately think the responses are valid. i ask you though, where and what contradictions do you find? maybe i can do some more research to see what i find. and i also ask this, if you told someone working for you to do something and they didnt, would you punish them in some way? i would hope, for the sake of the company or otherwise it would be yes. but this is the same concept that God is using. it is punishment for not doing as it is commanded. A loving God would punish to show what is right and wrong just as you would to someone you love.


Here is a list by someone else of various contradictions in the Bible. I know I found a longer list elsewhere but can’t find it now. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html  

I also have difficulty reconciling an omni-god, benevolent god, the Bible and the world as it is. I can’t seem to get all of these factors to reconcile with each other. I could reconcile a loving and omnipresent god but not if he is also ominiscient. I can reconcile the omni’s but not if he is loving.

The way I read Christianity is that God created Adam and Eve. Then told them not to eat a certain fruit. They ate the fruit and God punished, not only Adam and Eve, but all of humanity. This alone seems a bit unfair. If one child misbehaves I punish the child, I do not punish all children. If one employee screws up that employee is punished not all employees.

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


newmodeltheist
Theist
newmodeltheist's picture
Posts: 105
Joined: 2007-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Hi I.mcbryar  l.mcbryar

Hi I.mcbryar 

l.mcbryar wrote:
newmodeltheist i understand where you would go by saying the gen 1:26-27 verse being singular. but if i am not mistaken in the original greek, this scripture does mean multiple. and i must also ask this question to that in response: if god has a female consort, gf, or female counterpart, why would he use mary to have given birth to christ, the son of God? 

 Yes regarding the use of God (singular) and Us (plural).  Chuck Missler, a well respected American Bible scholar, refers to this as a divine grammatical error.  In other words a purposeful mistake if you know what I mean.  He regards this as evidence of the trinity but my own view is that is it evidence of the divine couple.  I think this because the image of god is described as male and female.  Much like 'man' is used to describe both men and mankind.  God here I think is used to denote god and godhead.

As for your other point, I hold to the view that much of scripture is mythologically true if not historically true.  But at any rate, if you don't hold to that then Christ's birth to Mary was in order to be clothed in earthly flesh rather than to be made manifest in his original heavenly form.  Same in principle but on a lower level so to speak.


newmodeltheist
Theist
newmodeltheist's picture
Posts: 105
Joined: 2007-02-20
User is offlineOffline
My Name is Chelsea

My Name is Chelsea wrote:

The way I read Christianity is that God created Adam and Eve. Then told them not to eat a certain fruit. They ate the fruit and God punished, not only Adam and Eve, but all of humanity. This alone seems a bit unfair. If one child misbehaves I punish the child, I do not punish all children. If one employee screws up that employee is punished not all employees.

I know the above was not directed at me but I thought I might comment if thats ok.   I think that the true nature of sin is very difficult to grasp, if we understood the true nature of sin we wouldn't be under its spell.  It is part of being in sin that we do not understand our condition if you get me, necessitating redemption from without.  I believe that sin has something profoudly to do with who we are, our realisation of who and what god is and our relationship with him.  The snake if you will recall based its questions on these issues.

It is sin that chains us to decay and makes us suffer.  Adam and Eve were beguilled and becames slaves to sin.  thus condemming the whole of humanity to sin much like being infected with a disease.  Sin is its own punishment.  Hell is being in a state of sin rather than a punishment for being sinful.  


jmm
Theist
jmm's picture
Posts: 837
Joined: 2007-03-03
User is offlineOffline
My Name is Chelsea

My Name is Chelsea wrote:
For the sake of argument:

Stipulation 1: The universe had a beginning
Stipulation 2: This beginning was caused by a creator.
Stipulation 3: The first life on earth was created.
Stipulation 4: The creator created, no other traits are stipulated. I.e. Any further interaction, intervention or attributes must be proven.

I am interested in having a polite rational discussion with theists about why they believe what they believe about god.

Chelsea, I'm going to have to tweak your stipulations before I can continue.  I agree with stipulations 1, 2, and 4, but stipulation 3 is slightly problematic.  It is a stretch to assume that just because the beginning of the universe was caused by a creator that the first life on earth was "created".  I believe that life on earth (and elsewhere) probably evolved in the ways that scientists have observed.  In other words, I do not interpret the Genesis creation myth literally.  

My Name Is Chelsea wrote:
Do you believe god is loving? Why?

I typically don't personally associate God with love.  I associate him more with fear, trembling, paradox, reverence, and sometimes even comfort.  I don't believe that God is loving to his creation in the same way that a mother is loving to her child.  I'm in my late 20's and I still keep in touch with my mother.  God on the other hand is distant and cruel by human standards.  But God is not a human, therefore I try not to hold him to any type of human standards - tempting as it may be. 

My Name Is Chelsea wrote:
Do you believe god is omniscient/omnipotent/omnipresent? Why?

No, no, and no, respectively.  

God is not omniscient because the concept of "knowledge" is inherently human, and therefore cannot be applied to God.  The concept of knowledge presupposes an acquisition process in many cases, and if we apply this to God, we then have a God that learns, which is highly illogical, since he would be the source of all "knowledge", as we've come to know it.  While from our perspective God may seem to "know" everything, he really must transcend the very realm of knowledge itself in order to be himself.

My Name Is Chelsea wrote:
Do you believe god listens to and acts on petitions (prayer)? Why?

Yes, but much less frequently than most christians would have you believe.  

To me, prayer and contemplation do not serve the purpose of pleasing God, getting God's "attention" (so to speak), or fulfilling some sort of cosmic quota.  I believe that prayer is, for the most part, the work of the believer on himself.  Does God ever listen and act?  I've never personally experienced an "answered prayer", but I'm okay with that.  Christian prayers are often reducible to amazon wish lists and wishful thinking anyway, and are typically wrought in a spirit of extreme narcissism and selfishness.  

So I've come to a point where I do not believe in "praying for things".  Sometimes I (selfishly) ask God for mental and emotional strength, but what I'm saying probably doesn't matter, it's the act of prostrating myself towards God that is beneficial to me, and me alone.  He never grants my wishes, though, and i'm fine with that.  

My Name Is Chelsea wrote:
Do you believe god is infallible? Why?

This is an extremely vague question, but I'll go ahead and take a stab at it.   

No, God is not infallible.  God is extremely fallible by human standards.  He makes no sense at all.  He is forever and right now, everywhere and nowhere, the author of both harmony and discord, love and hate, good and evil, and a host of other seemingly contradictory things.  If he were a human being, he would be put to death.  But I think that's the potential danger of embodying and humanizing the divine - we then begin to hold him to human standards.  


My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
jmm wrote: Chelsea, I'm

jmm wrote:

Chelsea, I'm going to have to tweak your stipulations before I can continue. I agree with stipulations 1, 2, and 4, but stipulation 3 is slightly problematic. It is a stretch to assume that just because the beginning of the universe was caused by a creator that the first life on earth was "created". I believe that life on earth (and elsewhere) probably evolved in the ways that scientists have observed. In other words, I do not interpret the Genesis creation myth literally.


3 isn’t really important. I just don’t want to get into any abiogenesis debates.

jmm wrote:

I typically don't personally associate God with love. I associate him more with fear, trembling, paradox, reverence, and sometimes even comfort. I don't believe that God is loving to his creation in the same way that a mother is loving to her child. I'm in my late 20's and I still keep in touch with my mother. God on the other hand is distant and cruel by human standards. But God is not a human, therefore I try not to hold him to any type of human standards - tempting as it may be.

My Name Is Chelsea wrote:
Do you believe god is omniscient/omnipotent/omnipresent? Why?


No, no, and no, respectively.

God is not omniscient because the concept of "knowledge" is inherently human, and therefore cannot be applied to God. The concept of knowledge presupposes an acquisition process in many cases, and if we apply this to God, we then have a God that learns, which is highly illogical, since he would be the source of all "knowledge", as we've come to know it. While from our perspective God may seem to "know" everything, he really must transcend the very realm of knowledge itself in order to be himself

My Name Is Chelsea wrote:
Do you believe god listens to and acts on petitions (prayer)? Why?


Yes, but much less frequently than most christians would have you believe.

To me, prayer and contemplation do not serve the purpose of pleasing God, getting God's "attention" (so to speak), or fulfilling some sort of cosmic quota. I believe that prayer is, for the most part, the work of the believer on himself. Does God ever listen and act? I've never personally experienced an "answered prayer", but I'm okay with that. Christian prayers are often reducible to amazon wish lists and wishful thinking anyway, and are typically wrought in a spirit of extreme narcissism and selfishness.

So I've come to a point where I do not believe in "praying for things". Sometimes I (selfishly) ask God for mental and emotional strength, but what I'm saying probably doesn't matter, it's the act of prostrating myself towards God that is beneficial to me, and me alone. He never grants my wishes, though, and i'm fine with that.

My Name Is Chelsea wrote:
Do you believe god is infallible? Why?


This is an extremely vague question, but I'll go ahead and take a stab at it.

No, God is not infallible. God is extremely fallible by human standards. He makes no sense at all. He is forever and right now, everywhere and nowhere, the author of both harmony and discord, love and hate, good and evil, and a host of other seemingly contradictory things. If he were a human being, he would be put to death. But I think that's the potential danger of embodying and humanizing the divine - we then begin to hold him to human standards.


Sorry for the vagueness. What I am trying to get at is, can god make a mistake? Though from what you have said I think your answer would be no.

To me this seems one of the more rational ways to view god. I have to ask then are you Christian? Or?

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


jmm
Theist
jmm's picture
Posts: 837
Joined: 2007-03-03
User is offlineOffline
Christian, yes, but I must

Christian, yes, but I must admit, the older I get the farther I find myself from traditional christianity.  I wouldn't be surprised if my path one day led me to agnosticism or atheism. 


l.mcbryar
Theist
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-02-22
User is offlineOffline
wow

chelsea,
thanks and i will check into those.

jmm
another person to add spice to the mix. I now have to ask something, what is causing you to move more towards agnosticism or atheism?

Psalms 74:10


l.mcbryar
Theist
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-02-22
User is offlineOffline
newmodeltheist Wow that is

newmodeltheist

Wow that is personal stuff, not quite sure I am so brave, kudos for that.
I can understand why such an experience would be convincing. Convincing for you. Unfortunately if I told you I had such an experience I would not expect you to merely take my word for it, though it would be very convincing to me. Do you feel it is possible that feeling could have come from something other than god?

i have thought on this many times. but i keep coming back to this one statement "what else could pull me from that place?"
Mentally i was ready to die. my only intent was death. therefore what else could have possible stopped me? ive found myself to not be afraid of death, doing some of the stupid things i have done, so that conclusion left my mind long ago.

I can see where that would lead you to believe that he is omnipresent, but not as much omnipotent or omniscient. For me if there is some sort of god omnipresent seems to be on of the more believable attributes he could have. Perhaps that is because for me it is easiest to think of a possible god as a sort of force, rather than a person.

i see why that would be a thought. and i dont really think that God is meant to be classified as human. not saying that is what you are saying, but just because it is how He is refered to. He may be something closer to that of a force, but i think He does have the attributes of a human. kinda contradictory? Hes not human, but making us in the image, Hed showed a glimpse of how we will precieve Him.

Clarification: you are saying god told you what your ministry was and how to accomplish it? Could you be more specific?

Prayer has always seemed one of the more unlikely things about Christianity. God will do what he is going to do, nothing I say will change it. Fulfillment of prayer always seemed like coincidence to me since there are so very many prayers that go unanswered. Prayer for enlightenment seems very like meditation to mean and I think enlightenment can come from within as well as without.

Sure on the first part. Simply, yes... sorta. Not that he gave me a mental handbook complete with map, but that a general idea was given. The primise on how it would look, who would be there, generally, and where it may be located. I know things and how that they will happen. I see them already beginning. Second part, it is meditation, and communication. we have to focus on God to hear Him. His voice is subtle, as seen with a very young samuel, and david, and also with Christ himself. I can give scripture if needed. I also believe enlightenment is different from God. I believe it is more of person freedom from thought and present feeling. Most people think im saying your just getting high. im not. i believe its almost another form of conscious. Like the subconscious, but you just have to want to "unlock it", for lack of a better term,

Infallibility is another trait I have had difficulty reconciling with the Christian god. Jesus’ sacrifice always seemed to be god’s way of changing his mind.

Not really. All throughout the Bible, in the old testiment, God gives commandments on sacrifice for the cleansing of sins. Christ came as the ultimate sacrifice so that all may be forgiven, reference to chelsea's comment on a loving God punishing the entirety of mankind. God, being all knowing, and in my views solely, saw one of two things: 1. that all of man kind would behave the same and therefore punished them or 2. the opportunity to show that only He can keep you from your own sins. Again, my personal thoughts.

Psalms 74:10


l.mcbryar
Theist
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-02-22
User is offlineOffline
Chelsea I also have

Chelsea

I also have difficulty reconciling an omni-god, benevolent god, the Bible and the world as it is. I can’t seem to get all of these factors to reconcile with each other. I could reconcile a loving and omnipresent god but not if he is also ominiscient. I can reconcile the omni’s but not if he is loving.

why can you not see all of them together? what keeps you from understanding how all can be one?

The way I read Christianity is that God created Adam and Eve. Then told them not to eat a certain fruit. They ate the fruit and God punished, not only Adam and Eve, but all of humanity. This alone seems a bit unfair. If one child misbehaves I punish the child, I do not punish all children. If one employee screws up that employee is punished not all employees.

the only thing i can say other than what i said to newmodeltheist is that God did what he did for a reason. Jeremiah 29:11
For I know the thoughts and plans that I have for you, says the Lord, thoughts and plans for welfare and peace and not for evil, to give you hope in your final outcome.
why would he tell Jeremiah that and not have ment it from the beginning? Also, it also says that He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Therefore His plans never changed, He knows what is best.

Psalms 74:10


l.mcbryar
Theist
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-02-22
User is offlineOffline
jmm I typically don't

jmm

I typically don't personally associate God with love. I associate him more with fear, trembling, paradox, reverence, and sometimes even comfort. I don't believe that God is loving to his creation in the same way that a mother is loving to her child. I'm in my late 20's and I still keep in touch with my mother. God on the other hand is distant and cruel by human standards. But God is not a human, therefore I try not to hold him to any type of human standards - tempting as it may be.

i have to disagree with you here. God is not one to cause fear. in the many places that God sends angels to deliver a message, or He himself spoke, the first thing usually said is fear not. i can understand the paradox, most people find God to be a paradox, as represented an innumerous amount of times on this site. Allah on the other hand is all of the things you described. That is in thier holy bookm dealing with muhammed.

ill speak on the others later as i have more time. i am curretnly leaving. i hope i could be of more help in the future.

Psalms 74:10


jmm
Theist
jmm's picture
Posts: 837
Joined: 2007-03-03
User is offlineOffline
l.mcbryar wrote: chelsea,

l.mcbryar wrote:
chelsea, thanks and i will check into those. jmm another person to add spice to the mix. I now have to ask something, what is causing you to move more towards agnosticism or atheism?

When I first became a christian, I was a fairly straight down the line fundamentalist.  I believed that the bible was infallible, that Genesis was to be read literally, that the earth was 6000 years old, that homosexuality was an abomination to God, that abortion was murder, and other such things that I think are silly now.

Now I believe that the bible is riddled with contradictions and inaccuracies, that Genesis is a myth, that the earth is billions of years old, that homosexuality is a legitimate sexual orientation, and that abortion is reasonable in some cases and is not always murder. 

I just find myself drifting farther and farther away, and there's no end in sight.   


newmodeltheist
Theist
newmodeltheist's picture
Posts: 105
Joined: 2007-02-20
User is offlineOffline
I.mcbryar   just to avoid

I.mcbryar

 

just to avoid confusion, my name is atop one of your posts above.  this was not a conversation that I was having with you. regards.Smile 


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
jmm wrote: Now I believe

jmm wrote:

Now I believe that the bible is riddled with contradictions and inaccuracies, that Genesis is a myth, that the earth is billions of years old, that homosexuality is a legitimate sexual orientation, and that abortion is reasonable in some cases and is not always murder.

I just find myself drifting farther and farther away, and there's no end in sight.

You're absolutely right on all counts.  

I'll bet you're even somewhat surprised that you ever believed otherwise because it just makes sense

Isn't it amazing what rational thinking can do for you?  Laughing

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: When I first became

Quote:
When I first became a christian, I was a fairly straight down the line fundamentalist. I believed that the bible was infallible, that Genesis was to be read literally, that the earth was 6000 years old, that homosexuality was an abomination to God, that abortion was murder, and other such things that I think are silly now.

jmm, you've done something that a lot of theists never can, and for that, I think you ought to be very proud. I, too, was raised in a fundamentalist church, so I know how difficult it is to even question some of the church dogma.

Quote:
Now I believe that the bible is riddled with contradictions and inaccuracies, that Genesis is a myth, that the earth is billions of years old, that homosexuality is a legitimate sexual orientation, and that abortion is reasonable in some cases and is not always murder.

A lot of people, myself included, still want to know why you still consider yourself a christian. Again drawing a parallel from my life, I did kind of the same thing you're doing. I became a quasi-agnostic-spiritual-something-or-other, and believed that there must be some kind of supernatural, but that it definitely wasn't the god the christians were portraying.

I tinkered around for a while with a kind of fluffy spiritualism, learned how to read tarot cards, and explored deism. By the way, learning Tarot cards took me a long way towards atheism, because once I learned how to do them, it became obvious that the cards are constructed in a way to make cold reading work hand in hand with the desires of the person getting a reading. Once I saw there was no supernatural part of that, it became easier to see the natural explanations for many other things that were supposedly evidence for the spiritual world's existence.

I don't want to burden you with my whole life story, but I will tell you one more thing. I have had three life changing experiences that were accompanied by a feeling of (forgive me) transcendent happiness. By leaps and bounds, the most profound was the exact moment that I realized that I am just an animal, and that my life is my own. I literally almost jumped out of my own skin I was so happy. To say that my life improved from there would be akin to saying that Bill Gates has a little extra spending cash.

Clearly you're not afraid to ask the hard questions. Just know that nearly every atheist here has been through the same thing, and obviously, we're quite happy having made the leap away from religion.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
jmm wrote: When I first

jmm wrote:

When I first became a christian, I was a fairly straight down the line fundamentalist. I believed that the bible was infallible, that Genesis was to be read literally, that the earth was 6000 years old, that homosexuality was an abomination to God, that abortion was murder, and other such things that I think are silly now.

Now I believe that the bible is riddled with contradictions and inaccuracies, that Genesis is a myth, that the earth is billions of years old, that homosexuality is a legitimate sexual orientation, and that abortion is reasonable in some cases and is not always murder.

I just find myself drifting farther and farther away, and there's no end in sight.

 

LOL. There really never is an 'end in sight' once the questions start coming. As soon as one is answered to our satisfaction then another one comes.

In my opinion, skepticism gives a whole new 'purpose' other than just simply existing. Applying a 'set' answer to anything closes those questions off from yourself and others.

Arriving at the point where a person 'doesn't' believe is predicated upon the questions that lead to assertions such as "I can't believe THAT without evidence."

So when we analyze the alleged attributes of this 'god' then we must also analyze what it would we require as proof of these attributes. An atheist simply does not believe in a 'god' just for the sake of 'faith'.

Another interesting thing is that when we begin to negate the attributes of this 'god' through examination, we see that it becomes increasingly more difficult for this god to exist or to have ever existed.

This might sound corny and/or faulty, but by virtue of the unanswered questions then the root question can be answered for some of us.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
jmm wrote: l.mcbryar

jmm wrote:


l.mcbryar wrote:
chelsea, thanks and i will check into those. jmm another person to add spice to the mix. I now have to ask something, what is causing you to move more towards agnosticism or atheism?


When I first became a christian, I was a fairly straight down the line fundamentalist. I believed that the bible was infallible, that Genesis was to be read literally, that the earth was 6000 years old, that homosexuality was an abomination to God, that abortion was murder, and other such things that I think are silly now.

Now I believe that the bible is riddled with contradictions and inaccuracies, that Genesis is a myth, that the earth is billions of years old, that homosexuality is a legitimate sexual orientation, and that abortion is reasonable in some cases and is not always murder.

I just find myself drifting farther and farther away, and there's no end in sight.


Sounds about like me, except I was never fundamentalist. Lutheran is pretty far from fundamental. I never believed the earth was 6000 years old. If you do leave Christianity, you might miss it at first, but I am happier now then I was before.

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
I had a bit of trouble

I had a bit of trouble picking what you said from what I think is quoting me. Let me know if I erred.

l.mcbryar wrote:
why can you not see all of them together?
what keeps you from understanding how all can be one?


I think that they conflict. God as omnipotent and loving conflicts with the gratuitous suffering in the world. He could have done a better job with his creation and eliminated much suffering. That he didn’t is not loving. However if he is not omnipotent or not loving then the conflict is gone.

Quote:
the only thing i can say other than what i said to newmodeltheist is that God did what he did for a reason. Jeremiah 29:11 For I know the thoughts and plans that I have for you, says the Lord, thoughts and plans for welfare and peace and not for evil, to give you hope in your final outcome. why would he tell Jeremiah that and not have meant it from the beginning? Also, it also says that He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Therefore His plans never changed, He knows what is best.


That the Bible says god has a plan is not a convincing argument for me because the bible is not a convincing book. Why would he tell Jeremiah that? I can’t imagine, but then I don’t believe that he did. I guess I just don’t understand why unnecessary suffering is best.

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


l.mcbryar
Theist
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-02-22
User is offlineOffline
hmm

Chelsea
I do have a question though. While you were a "Christian," and i put it like that based on my belief, did you ever just try to let go of your own capabilities and rely on God? Why I am asking is because I was skeptical, for over a year. And it was not until I went to a convention with my youth group and actually decided I would quit thinking along the lines of myself and let this God prove himself. I know the Bible says not to test God, but I did it more as a reassurance. So, did you let God have a chance? A real chance?

It reminds me of Abraham and Lot. Lot in the old Hebrew means a veil. Until God removed Lot from Abraham's life, Abraham never really saw the promise in his life that God had for him. Did you let your own desires, as Abraham did with Lot, keep you from realizing these things? After a year of dealing with questions and just giving up on the lack of answers, I took a chance. It's one I would do all over again. I know no other thing. I do not see how feeling like you can just happen would make sense. I heard a great quote that I use today: " I just don't have the faith to believe in evolution and a chance appearance." I kinda changed it to my own version which only states Darwinism. I believe species change and work to better themselves, but I just can not believe in one creature becoming another, or that all animals came from one cell.

Let me pose another interesting question, or two really. Why is it that if there is so much evidence and lack of answers, that atheism is the fastest shrinking religion there is? This is coming from a national survey done by the government. I wonder this because it makes me think that this proof is not what people are finding necessary.

But more importantly, why is it that thousands of people are willing to give their lives to this God that they don't see, at once, with no regard for science, and then stay with it faithfully for the rest of their natural lives? What could cause that? ( I know, I asked a third, just came to me as I was going.) I would hope that you wouldn't say an emotional setting, or something based on emotions, because most of the time this happens in a place like a soccer stadium.

Thx

Psalms 74:10


l.mcbryar
Theist
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-02-22
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit I would like to

Hambydammit
I would like to know something along the lines of your believing in tarot cards. Do you also believe in fortune tellers and psychics? I ask in hopes to get a better understanding. And to ask a more relivent question.

Psalms 74:10


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
I suspect you need to read

I suspect you need to read Hambydammit's post again.  The part about the Tarot cards, etc. is all in the past tense.  

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
l.mcbryar wrote: Chelsea I

l.mcbryar wrote:
Chelsea I do have a question though. While you were a "Christian," and i put it like that based on my belief, did you ever just try to let go of your own capabilities and rely on God? Why I am asking is because I was skeptical, for over a year. And it was not until I went to a convention with my youth group and actually decided I would quit thinking along the lines of myself and let this God prove himself. I know the Bible says not to test God, but I did it more as a reassurance. So, did you let God have a chance? A real chance? It reminds me of Abraham and Lot. Lot in the old Hebrew means a veil. Until God removed Lot from Abraham's life, Abraham never really saw the promise in his life that God had for him. Did you let your own desires, as Abraham did with Lot, keep you from realizing these things? After a year of dealing with questions and just giving up on the lack of answers, I took a chance. It's one I would do all over again.


Short answer: Yes. Let me know if you want the long answer.

l.mcbryar wrote:
I know no other thing. I do not see how feeling like you can just happen would make sense. I heard a great quote that I use today: " I just don't have the faith to believe in evolution and a chance appearance." I kinda changed it to my own version which only states Darwinism. I believe species change and work to better themselves, but I just can not believe in one creature becoming another, or that all animals came from one cell.


I can see why you would like that quote. I don’t have faith in evolution. I have looked at the facts and in my eyes the facts support evolution. I too have trouble imagining the change from a single-celled organism to a multi-celled organism but I see that more as a defect of my understanding and imagination than a defect in the theory. It may turn out that something other than evolution is responsible for that change but I don’t think that the assumption that it is the Christian (or other) god is justified.
As for populations developing into a separate species, scientists have observed this with in my lifetime so I don’t find it difficult to believe.

l.mcbryar wrote:
Let me pose another interesting question, or two really. Why is it that if there is so much evidence and lack of answers, that atheism is the fastest shrinking religion there is? This is coming from a national survey done by the government. I wonder this because it makes me think that this proof is not what people are finding necessary.


Well, it would be easier to answer this question if I knew more about the survey. Surveys can be found to support just about every position. I recently saw a survey that showed that Christians would be a minority around 2040 or so.
Without the data in front of me I would first say that atheism is not a religion. Then I would say there could be many reasons for this. One it could be that the number of atheists is not actually decreasing (if the survey reports percentages) rather other religions are increasing. If you are asking why atheists might convert to a religion, I am not sure. Religion is a source of strength and comfort for many people it could be that they have been unable to find it elsewhere.

I could throw in my own quote from Karl Marx:
Quote:
“Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again.”


In short I don’t know why that survey had the results it did.

l.mcbryar wrote:
But more importantly, why is it that thousands of people are willing to give their lives to this God that they don't see, at once, with no regard for science, and then stay with it faithfully for the rest of their natural lives? What could cause that? ( I know, I asked a third, just came to me as I was going.) I would hope that you wouldn't say an emotional setting, or something based on emotions, because most of the time this happens in a place like a soccer stadium. Thx

 
I don’t know. Maybe a capacity for blind faith. Maybe because believing in God makes them feel good, gives direction to their lives. This is a question you are better suited to answer than I. I do not understand their faith because I do not share it. All I know is I am convinced that a personal god exists.

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


ShaunPhilly
High Level ModeratorSilver Member
ShaunPhilly's picture
Posts: 473
Joined: 2006-03-15
User is offlineOffline
l.mcbryar wrote: But more

l.mcbryar wrote:
But more importantly, why is it that thousands of people are willing to give their lives to this God that they don't see, at once, with no regard for science, and then stay with it faithfully for the rest of their natural lives? What could cause that? ( I know, I asked a third, just came to me as I was going.) I would hope that you wouldn't say an emotional setting, or something based on emotions, because most of the time this happens in a place like a soccer stadium. Thx

Emotions can be drawn in any setting.  What is important is the state of the individual, not where they are.  If one is in a position of emotional need, desire, etc, then that experience can happen in many places.

Why do millions of people give their lives to Allah whom they don't see, at once, with no regard for science, and then stay with it faithfully for the rest of their natural lives?

Shaun 

I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Susan is correct. Tarot

Susan is correct. Tarot cards/psychics/paranormal beliefs, etc. were kind of a stop on the way to atheism. It would have been illogical for me to say that just because Christianity was obviously false, all religion and/or spiritual belief was false. So, I experimented with some other ideas until I demonstrated for myself that they, too, were false. After quite a few years of exploration, I realized that spirituality was batting about 0 for 50, and decided that the most logical position is the assumption that spirituality is false until it is demonstrated to be true.

(If I'd been a little better at logic, I could have just skipped all of that and gone straight to the conclusion, but "live and learn," as they say.)

I'm not trying to be mean here, but one of your earlier posts had two very important statements, and I'd like you to examine them.

You said,

Quote:
I was skeptical, for over a year.

Then, you said,

Quote:
I went to a convention with my youth group and actually decided I would quit thinking along the lines of myself and let this God prove himself.

I was tempted to edit your statement to "{I} decided I would quit thinking..." but I know that would cause you some consternation. That is what your sentence boils down to, but I don't want to be accused of taking your words out of context.

Let me ask you a question. If you weren't thinking, how could you know that this "proof" was real?

You admit you stopped being skeptical and just believed because you wanted to. What exactly does "thinking along the lines of myself" mean? You mean you felt guilty for having your own desires, so you decided to suppress them and do what others told you you should do? Without thinking about why you were doing it?

I think, mcbryar, that you have failed yourself by not giving yourself enough credit as a capable thinker. Maybe you should re-examine your motives and be brave enough to accept the answer, even if it's not what you want it to be.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


l.mcbryar
Theist
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-02-22
User is offlineOffline
i apologize to begin with. i

i apologize to begin with. i read your post in a rush, seeing as i read it at school. i did miss the past tense portion. But i want to explain what i meant as you qouted. ill do my best.

Quote:

You said,

Quote:
I was skeptical, for over a year.

Then, you said,

Quote:
I went to a convention with my youth group and actually decided I would quit thinking along the lines of myself and let this God prove himself.

I was tempted to edit your statement to "{I} decided I would quit thinking..." but I know that would cause you some consternation. That is what your sentence boils down to, but I don't want to be accused of taking your words out of context.

i disagree with you saying that i quit thinking. realistically what i did was stop letting my personal fears, thoughts, and any other thing inhibite God from doing the things in my life He wanted. i let go of what i wanted and gave God the thing He wanted, me. There is a great book i am reading called Drawing Nearer. This book discusses the things we must do to draw nearer to God. There is a great example of what i was trying to say, that was brought up in this book. in the book of Samuel, God calls to the young Samuel 3 times before Samuel answers God. Samuel believed that his mentor was calling him. On the second calling, the mentor told Samuel to reply back and not to come back to see him. When Samuel did, God was able to become closer to Samuel and tell him that he would later judge Israel. Im the same way. I kinda ignored God, and didnt listen to what He had to say. I finally "amswered" and am now where i am today.

Quote:

Let me ask you a question. If you weren't thinking, how could you know that this "proof" was real?

You admit you stopped being skeptical and just believed because you wanted to. What exactly does "thinking along the lines of myself" mean? You mean you felt guilty for having your own desires, so you decided to suppress them and do what others told you you should do? Without thinking about why you were doing it?

I think, mcbryar, that you have failed yourself by not giving yourself enough credit as a capable thinker. Maybe you should re-examine your motives and be brave enough to accept the answer, even if it's not what you want it to be.

 


Again, i disagree. I was guilty that i had sinned against a God who loved me enough to give everything for me. I was guilty that all that He wanted was all of me, and i wouldnt give it to him. i had thought about this many times. i knew what i was doing. i just finally decided that it was time that i do what i knew i needed to. if i wanted to move further in my walk, i had to let go of the things holding me back. i didnt quit thinking, just quit trying to hold on to things holding me back.

Psalms 74:10


l.mcbryar
Theist
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-02-22
User is offlineOffline
Chelsea about giving God a

Chelsea
about giving God a chance, i would like a little information. part of my question comes from not knowing anything about your religious history. but i ask this question because i have trouble believing that someone would give God a chance and then leave Him. this is why i ask.

on the transformation of species, i mean the claims that Darwin himself made: lizard to bird, monkey to man. There is no proof to these links. The findings so far to date have all been proven false. These "missing links" are crucial to the evidence. And about the evolution. when a single cell splits, the cell is weakend, and needs to get energy, or eat. my question with evolution lies with the question, what came first, the need for food, ability to consume food, or want for food. if one exists and the others do not, then there is no need for the existing trait, and would therefor be lost in the gene pool. So therefor the first cell would have not been able to survive long enough to keep reproducing to create mulitple celled organisms.

and the survey... forgot to mention that it was only for numbers in religion. a census really. not asking any opinion, but just to see where religions lie in number.

and the one thing here that throws me for a huge loop is your claim that a personal God exists. if you believe this, how can you say that you cannot share peoples views because you do not share their faith? wouldnt this mean you have a God you have created and believe solely in Him/Her? wouldnt this be your faith, as i have mine in Christ and the trinity?

Psalms 74:10


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Wow. So much to respond

Wow. So much to respond to.

Quote:
i let go of what i wanted and gave God the thing He wanted, me.

Who told you that what you wanted was bad? I'm not saying it wasn't, but this is a worthwhile question. Did you just know it was bad without being told? Why? My point is there are good, logical reasons for "bad" things being bad. You didn't need god to know that something wasn't going to get you very far in life, so why did you need god to stop doing it? Emotional crutches happen to everybody. It's just when you start calling it god, other people who happen to believe their emotional crutch is real and yours isn't start getting pissed. Why not just rely on your family and friends to hold you accountable. That's what all the atheists in the world do, and statistically, there is a much lower percentage of atheists in prison than theists. (In the U.S.... and I do mean percentage, not actual numbers.)

Quote:
I was guilty that i had sinned against a God who loved me enough to give everything for me. I was guilty that all that He wanted was all of me, and i wouldnt give it to him.

First, I don't know what horrible sin you committed, but if the sin made you feel guilty, then again, you didn't need god to feel guilty. You could just stop doing it on your own like all the other atheists in the world. Doing bad things that harm other people causes guilt because we are social animals, and damage to your reputation is extremely hard to live down. We know this, so we feel very bad when we screw up. It's a built in survival mechanism.

Quote:
but i ask this question because i have trouble believing that someone would give God a chance and then leave Him. this is why i ask.

Believe it or not, I understand this statement completely. I felt exactly the same way before I left Christianity. And before you ask if I was a true Scotsman (See this link to know what I mean) please take a step back and realize that probably 90% of the Americans on this site were true believers. Not only was I a Christian, I was an apologist, doing exactly what you're doing now, trying to convince atheists to believe in God.

I believe your question is an honest one, and I don't know any other way to answer it than to say that I know from first hand experience that it's difficult to believe that the world makes sense without a deity until you realize that the deity is the thing that doesn't make sense. Sounds contradictory, I know, but it's not. Everything in the universe happens for a very sound, logical reason, but these reasons contradict the bible, and don't agree with the model of the universe presented by Christianity. If you begin with the assumption that God exists, of course logic will seem illogical! The problem is, the assumption that God exists is a fundamental logical error, and everything that follows from it just keeps spiralling down the toilet of irrationality and irrelevance.

(Realize that "logic" is not a science. It's a description. Logic is the word we use to refer to the existing, universal process by which humans process information and reach conclusions. There is no way to argue that logic is not valid. There have been many threads dealing with this issue.)

Quote:
on the transformation of species, i mean the claims that Darwin himself made: lizard to bird, monkey to man. There is no proof to these links. The findings so far to date have all been proven false. These "missing links" are crucial to the evidence.

No, they're not crucial, and no, the findings have not been proven false. You are ignorant of the scientific method, and particularly ignorant of the theory of evolution if you believe that. Many of the theories you hold dear have gaps. Electricity, for instance, is not completely explained, yet we know that it works, and we can describe the effects of it. The theory of gravity has gaps. We are nowhere near to understanding every bit of the DNA sequence, yet we can describe with great accuracy that which we do understand.

I.mcbryar, I suspect that you are not interested in truth. Rather, I think you've found something you believe to be true, and you are going to cling to it despite the fact that there is a wealth of evidence to the contrary at your fingertips. If you'd like to learn about evolution, there are hundreds of very detailed textbooks available, as well as good links online. If you'd like to know about atheism, there are plenty of great books you can buy from this very site. Logic? Again, plenty of textbooks.

Having said that, if you're just going to post unfounded claims, like "evolution has been disproven," you're not going to garner very much respect around here. Are you seriously trying to say that thousands and thousands of scientists who've devoted years of their life to earning PhDs in their respected fields are either so dumb that they can't see that evolution is false, or they're all lying because... um... actually I can't think of a reason why they'd all lie....

and because you read a few websites, and listened to a few preachers, you know the truth?

Please.

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
l.mcbryar wrote: Chelsea

l.mcbryar wrote:
Chelsea about giving God a chance, i would like a little information. part of my question comes from not knowing anything about your religious history. but i ask this question because i have trouble believing that someone would give God a chance and then leave Him. this is why i ask.


I was a true believer for most of my life. Then I ran into questions. So I researched. But I didn’t look very hard. I would find an argument and because I wanted to believe it sounded good. I argued with an atheist friend, trying to convince him. I know all the answers. Then I researched a bit more and thought more about who God was and the more I thought the less I liked but I still wanted to believe. If god had given me a sign at that point any sign I would have taken it. A good feeling, an answered prayer anything probably would have convinced me because that is what I wanted to believe. I gave god his chance but I didn’t leave him because I realized there was no god to leave.

l.mcbryar wrote:
on the transformation of species, i mean the claims that Darwin himself made: lizard to bird, monkey to man. There is no proof to these links. The findings so far to date have all been proven false. These "missing links" are crucial to the evidence. And about the evolution. when a single cell splits, the cell is weakend, and needs to get energy, or eat. my question with evolution lies with the question, what came first, the need for food, ability to consume food, or want for food. if one exists and the others do not, then there is no need for the existing trait, and would therefor be lost in the gene pool. So therefor the first cell would have not been able to survive long enough to keep reproducing to create mulitple celled organisms.


At first I had a lot of trouble with the idea that something as different as a lizard could become a bird, why would it do that. Eventually I realized that I needed to broaden my time scale and realize that the changes were very, very gradual. The changes we see happening now to create new species seem inadequate but give them a few million years and they will add up. These changes are so gradual that there isn’t a point where you can say that is where the lizard became a bird. It is true we haven’t seen any drastic changes like that so we cannot absolutely prove they are possible but we haven’t been around long enough to observe these changes. A population can’t change very much in so short of a time.

As to missing links, am I correct in assuming you mean in the fossil record? I am not really disturbed by the lack of many intermediate fossils. Fossilization is an incredibly unlikely event, especially for softer creatures (internal skeletons), we are lucky that we find the fossils that we do. Just because we haven’t found a fossil doesn’t mean that no such creature existed. If every creature that lived became a fossil the ground would be nothing but fossils.

I am curious how you explain fossil creatures that are no longer alive today and that animals around today aren’t in fossils. Where did current organisms come from? Elephants weren’t around at first, so were they created later on or did they evolve? Or do you believe in a young earth created with fossils intact?

Food: At some point an organism (proto-bacteria most likely) developed the ability to assimilate “food” from its environment, this ability gave it an advantage. Prior to this there was no “need” for food but the ability to “eat” was advantageous.

To ask about “need” is to create a problem where none existed. To ask about want is to give sentience where none existed. Adaptation does not have to arise from need. It can arise when a mutation occurs allowing an organism to move into a new niche. Adaptation can arise from a species preference.

Hypothetical example: Fish could evolve a different color merely because a population of lady fish like that color better. Then later after the new color is established conditions might arise that make the new color a survival trait. This is just to illustrated that the appearance of new traits is not always driven by “need” or survival.

l.mcbryar wrote:
and the survey... forgot to mention that it was only for numbers in religion. a census really. not asking any opinion, but just to see where religions lie in number. and the one thing here that throws me for a huge loop is your claim that a personal God exists. if you believe this, how can you say that you cannot share peoples views because you do not share their faith? wouldnt this mean you have a God you have created and believe solely in Him/Her? wouldnt this be your faith, as i have mine in Christ and the trinity?


I don’t believe that a personal god exists. If I ever said that it was a typo. I am willing to stipulate that a creator may have existed but that is only because I can’t prove it one way or the other. I do not believe in a personal god, a god that cares what we do or intervenes in our lives.

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


l.mcbryar
Theist
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-02-22
User is offlineOffline
ah, i understand a little

ah, i understand a little better now. thanks. but i do want to know something, what do you see as an answered prayer? Do you see it as a yes? or maybe a no? or maybe a physical manifestation? i ask to try to see where you come from here.

you were correct in assuming i mean fossi evidence. i go from here because time is held in these fossils. this is the best record of our earth that we have. and about answering things about extinct species and "new" species. i never said species couldn't go extinct. it is obvious they have. there is proof of creatures that are no longer here. dont dismiss that at all. but new? that i have to disagree with. just because it is new to us does not mean it is new to the earth. elephants, to continue your example, were in India long before the Germanic tribes of Europe, the ancient Romans, or even the Chinese learned of. does that mean that they were not there? another example is when the U.S. patent office made the claim that everything had been invented and that there was nothing more to be created. later on, cars, trains, computers, ect, all exist. the technology just had not been found. we find new species of insects everyday, but does that mean they were just recently created? or the creatures we have known about for centuries?

i have to question your thoughts on the idea of food. would it not take, as evolution itself claims, a large time, for these single celled organisms to adapt to eating? so how does it become a quick thing? and also, food is a basic need for survival. energy is passed from one creature to another, so therefore, eating would have had to have been a need from the begining. this is another part of the cell that would have had to come together from the beginning. many accredited scientists today say the chances of all of these parts of a cell comming together randomly would be astronomical. virtually impossible.

and the god issue, so what do you believe about this creator? i have heard many theories on creation, about what the God is doing, or not doing. for instance, he/she is just watching the world, that they created it and then left it, or some that i dont understand at all. just curious.

Psalms 74:10


l.mcbryar
Theist
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-02-22
User is offlineOffline
hambydammit granted, im not

hambydammit

granted, im not saying that religion told me something was bad, because, and christianity in particular, most religions teach good behavior. this is based on us being social creatures, as you stated. but what about the personal things. for instance, i discussed my past with cutting. that hurt noone but me. yes emotionally i was hurting people, but i was willing to kill myself. i didnt care. their pain, as i believed, was no where near my own. all i could think about was dying.

and why wouldnt i feel guilty? i had committed a wrongful act. take the cutting again. that was a personal act. i felt bad for doing it. This God is, in my belief, the one who created me. He made me to be His. this is a mistake i made. if you are told to do something by your boss and you fail to do it, do you not feel bad? do you not want to appologize and get forgiveness? i understand it is also a survival techinique, but just to keep you job? y? there are more out there. i quit mine knowing i will get another because there are plenty out there.

your comments on logic and illogic. that being a christian i would see with this illogic that seems logical because it has all "the answers" or "is the only thing i know." the only thing is, i have only been a christian for nearing five years. i spent the first 14 years of my life trying to justify myself through logic. i know that it is not a science, but it also goes to show that the human mind is willing to bend beyond the realm of convetional. its like picking the ncaa bracket before the tourny begins. most people pick an upset. y? because they believe something is going to make them be better. you make a claim and hold to it. you can give all the stats you want, but unitl the game is played, no proof can be given. sort of like religion, eh? for now the game is being played. eventually we will know the final results.

amd now i have to really diagree with you. i understand science very well. and if you believe you have linking proof to Darwins claims, please give me a creditable site. so far every link that has been found has been deemed a fake. our cromagnum brothers, hince "Lucy," was a major scientific revolation. that is, until it was later found that the bones were fake. the link between birds and reptiles was a bird fossil that had been remade with a tail of a recently parished lizard... disproved. please find me these links. i will gladly look further into them.

i also have to say your claim that there is an overwhelming proof is invalid. i do not have the faith to believe in atheism (as i stated in an earlier post) becuase of the lack of proof to Darwin's theory. especially when many of your devoted scientist say that they have a hard time believing in it. and these are not christian scientists, but major researchers in the fields that would prove these theories correct. im sorry, when there is doubt like that, it would take more faith to believe in that than a God who created you.

by the way, no i have done alot more research than the little you give me credit for. honestly, my pastors dont typically preach on these subjects. this is my personal research on the Bible, God, and Darwinism. And i have a vrey large, and increasing list of people whom i have spoken with personally.

Psalms 74:10



My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
l.mcbryar wrote: ah, i

l.mcbryar wrote:
ah, i understand a little better now. thanks. but i do want to know something, what do you see as an answered prayer? Do you see it as a yes? or maybe a no? or maybe a physical manifestation? i ask to try to see where you come from here.


I would have taken anything. A feeling. A coincidence. A physical manifestation. I wasn’t being picky if that is what you are wondering.

l.mcbryar wrote:
you were correct in assuming i mean fossil evidence. i go from here because time is held in these fossils. this is the best record of our earth that we have.


Well I guess I answered your question then.

l.mcbryar wrote:
and about answering things about extinct species and "new" species. i never said species couldn't go extinct. it is obvious they have. there is proof of creatures that are no longer here. dont dismiss that at all. but new? that i have to disagree with. just because it is new to us does not mean it is new to the earth. elephants, to continue your example, were in India long before the Germanic tribes of Europe, the ancient Romans, or even the Chinese learned of. does that mean that they were not there? another example is when the U.S. patent office made the claim that everything had been invented and that there was nothing more to be created. later on, cars, trains, computers, ect, all exist. the technology just had not been found. we find new species of insects everyday, but does that mean they were just recently created? or the creatures we have known about for centuries?


My point was that there are animals alive today that couldn’t have been alive since the earth began. I am curious where you thought they came from?

l.mcbryar wrote:
i have to question your thoughts on the idea of food. would it not take, as evolution itself claims, a large time, for these single celled organisms to adapt to eating? so how does it become a quick thing? and also, food is a basic need for survival. energy is passed from one creature to another, so therefore, eating would have had to have been a need from the begining. this is another part of the cell that would have had to come together from the beginning. many accredited scientists today say the chances of all of these parts of a cell comming together randomly would be astronomical. virtually impossible.


I am not sure what you mean by how does it become a quick thing? Food is a basic need for all organisms alive today. This does not prove that “food” was always a basic necessity.
Many scientists do believe that evolution is not a good explanation for the beginning of life, many experts believe it is. Further even if evolution isn’t the answer that doesn’t make god the answer. Anyway I want to avoid that discussion in this thread which is why I stipulated a creator starting evolution.

l.mcbryar wrote:
and the god issue, so what do you believe about this creator? i have heard many theories on creation, about what the God is doing, or not doing. for instance, he/she is just watching the world, that they created it and then left it, or some that i dont understand at all. just curious.


I don’t believe anything about that creator. He is a stipulation only. All I am stipulating about him is that he got the universe started. Maybe he died after that, or got bored and went elsewhere or maybe he is just sitting back to enjoy the show, I don’t know. What I am saying is that if this creator exists his existence doesn’t matter to us because he is no longer involved. His stipulated existence in no way affects how I live my life.

I stipulated this so that we could discuss why religious people believe that their god has the attributes they believe him to. For example you believe god is loving but why? Because the bible says so? Or do you have further evidence this is true?
Or take omniscience or omnipotence and explain why. I was hoping some one might have an argument beyond personal experience or their Holy book.

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


ShaunPhilly
High Level ModeratorSilver Member
ShaunPhilly's picture
Posts: 473
Joined: 2006-03-15
User is offlineOffline
l.mcbryar wrote: your

l.mcbryar wrote:
your comments on logic and illogic. that being a christian i would see with this illogic that seems logical because it has all "the answers" or "is the only thing i know." the only thing is, i have only been a christian for nearing five years. i spent the first 14 years of my life trying to justify myself through logic. i know that it is not a science, but it also goes to show that the human mind is willing to bend beyond the realm of convetional.

So, you are around 19, then? OK.  Here's the problem I have with thisclaim of trying logic for the first 14 years of life.  When you are 14 (and younger) your cerebral cortex has not sufficiently developed to process many tasks necessary to even be capable of certain logical conclusions.  When does our cortex develop fully?  Well, that depend from person to person, but anywhere from the 17-early 20's for most people.  

Thus, even if you are being truthful in trying to use logic to figure things out until the age of 14, then accepted Christianity for the next 5 years, you would not have been sufficiently intellectually mature (let alone emotionally and psychologically) enough to really consider the logical ramifications of these theological questions at 14.  

Granted, there are exceptions, and you may have been one of them.  But frankly, your grasp of the issues that i have seen from this discussion are not quite sufficient to grant that 5 years ago you were intellectually developed enough to have grasped all of the ramifications of these questions.  That is, unless you've somehow gone from logical prodigy to what I see in your questions and arguments now, I sincerely doubt that you have really considered all of the implications of your questions.

Thus, I hope you stay to follow the arguments along and are willing to allow yourself to be open to the community of people here who have a very good grasp of logic, history, theology, psychology, and the myriad of other topics that people here have varying levels of expertise on.  

Please do not take this post as an ad hominem attack, as I mean it in the sense of constructive criticism, and not an attack at all.

Shaun 

I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.


Pacific PanDeist
Theist
Posts: 2
Joined: 2007-03-05
User is offlineOffline
I'll give you my

I'll give you my perspective of PanDeism, the "rational" religion....

First, in PanDeism, your stipulations 2 and 3 are merged together in a way that totally differs from theism.... God created the Universe by the model of Deism, laying out a set of rules that would govern all matter for all time.... the origin of life and evolution by natural selection are results of these rules.

Even theists can't deny it, go ask any theist if it is within God's power to create a Universe where the only thing God does is set out rules at the very beginning, and where these rules lead to the origin of life via chemical interactions, and the ascent of man via evolution.... if the theist says that's not in God's power then he's not worshiping a particularly powerful God....

 As for the other things, God being loving or compassionate, or omnipotent or omniscient, these are different classes of attributions, and the powers are easier to address first.... everything in the Universe is part of God, and God is (or was) powerful enough to create the entire Universe with a thought.... so God may not have infinite power (which is probably not logically possible anyway) but God has immense power, and so far as we know God has absolute power over everything that is.... and at the same time God has knowledge of everything that is part of God, which is (so far as we can tell) everything that is.... but again, neither of these is absolute power or absolute knowledge, and in fact God can not know what it is like to not be God (unless God stops being God for a while and instead becomes something else, like, oh, say, a non-sentient Universe!!)

So as for loving and compassionate and kind to animals and answering of prayers, that is just wishful thinking, because it's kind of terrifying to think of being in a Universe with a malevolent God, and it's hard to conceive of one that is aware of us but just doesn't care.... but God can't care about us.... First, we're minute particles of God, really minute if you consider the scale of the Universe.... do you care about individual mitochondria in your cells? Would you answer their prayers if you heard them, even? Second, we're bits of energy, and so is everything else in the Universe, just in different forms.... what difference does it make to God whether these bits of energy are people or fragments of a supernova? Third, we are really, really messed up.... we steal and rape and torture each other on a daily basis, we exploit each other for petty gains, we make war, usually over silly differences in silly beliefs, we pollute, we slay our fellow life forms to eat their flesh in such quanities that some of us become grossly unfit.... if God is as smart as people say, then God's having nothing to do with us!! Eye-wink

 

//// Pacific PanDeist


My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
Pacific Pan Deist. Your

Pacific Pan Deist.

Your notion of god makes sense to me. I have considered that that might be "who" god is. I don't really feel it though.  Smiling Does this notion of god affect how you live your life?

 

Chelsea 

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


Jaden
Theist
Posts: 27
Joined: 2007-02-07
User is offlineOffline
My Name is Chelsea

My Name is Chelsea wrote:
For the sake of argument:

Stipulation 1: The universe had a beginning
Stipulation 2: This beginning was caused by a creator.
Stipulation 3: The first life on earth was created.
Stipulation 4: The creator created, no other traits are stipulated. I.e. Any further interaction, intervention or attributes must be proven.

I am interested in having a polite rational discussion with theists about why they believe what they believe about god.
Here are questions I have but feel free to ignore them and address a topic that is near and dear to your heart.
Do you believe god is loving? Why?
Do you believe god is omniscient/omnipotent/omnipresent? Why?
Do you believe god listens to and acts on petitions (prayer)? Why?
Do you believe god is infallible? Why?
.

This will not cover all your questions, but should be a good starting point for you to attack. 

The theist God created, and is distinguished from His creation (this is assumed.)

God is a Spirirt, not matter because matter is not self-maintaing. (I am willing to give an arguement for this, but for the sake of space, I have not)

God is eternal, (no begining, no end), because something must be eternal, and anything that is temporal, can not be considered God, because what ever is eternal would be superior to it. (see most ontological arguements). (Eternal things cannot have unique events) (I am willing to give an arguement for this as well to prove that something must be eternal)

God is inifinite: is without beginging, also must be non-quantative, and have no increase in abilities. (if there were an increase, why didn't it happen sooner).

God is unchanging: why would He change? if he is infinite and eternal and cannot go through unique events?

All-powerful: If He created, then he used some power, because He is infinite, infinitly powerful.

All-knowing/wise: If He created, then would have had to make the tiniest things and percision. This denotes some sort of intelligence, because He is infinite --all-wise.

(That is used in the design arguement)

 God is all-good: God cannot be creator and indifferent. Why would God create if He did not care about what He did? So God cannot be both indifferent and concerned. So the alternatives are all-good or all-evil.  Either God is moral or non-moral. Good for a being is based off the nature of a being. To do evil is to go against your being, God being Creator, to be all-evil, would not create, if He was inifinitly evil, he would self-destruct. Must be all-good. Cannot be both all-good and all-evil, inifintly both would not accomplish anything.

God is infalliable: If God is eternal, all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good, then would not/ could not break a promise.

(I am at work and do not have access to spell check or grammer check, I am very sorry)


My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
Infinite?

Jaden wrote:

This will not cover all your questions, but should be a good starting point for you to attack.

I do not plan on attacking. Questioning, searching, trying to understand but no malice is intended. : )

Quote:
The theist God created, and is distinguished from His creation (this is assumed.)

God is a Spirit, not matter because matter is not self-maintaining. (I am willing to give an argument for this, but for the sake of space, I have not)
Is god energy? Or something else?


Quote:
God is eternal, (no beginning, no end), because something must be eternal, and anything that is temporal, cannot be considered God, because what ever is eternal would be superior to it. (see most ontological arguments). (Eternal things cannot have unique events) (I am willing to give an argument for this as well to prove that something must be eternal)

I guess you lost me here, perhaps a bit more explanation might help. Not so much that I disagree but that I am not sure exactly what you mean.

Quote:
God is infinite: is without beginning, also must be non-quantitative, and have no increase in abilities. (if there were an increase, why didn't it happen sooner).

Sorry. What exactly do you mean by infinite?

Quote:
God is unchanging: why would He change? if he is infinite and eternal and cannot go through unique events?

All-powerful: If He created, then he used some power, because He is infinite, infinitely powerful.

All-knowing/wise: If He created, then would have had to make the tiniest things and precision. This denotes some sort of intelligence, because He is infinite --all-wise.

(That is used in the design argument)

God is all-good: God cannot be creator and indifferent. Why would God create if He did not care about what He did? So God cannot be both indifferent and concerned. So the alternatives are all-good or all-evil. Either God is moral or non-moral. Good for a being is based off the nature of a being. To do evil is to go against your being, God being Creator, to be all-evil, would not create, if He was infinitely evil, he would self-destruct. Must be all-good. Cannot be both all-good and all-evil, infinitely both would not accomplish anything.

I guess I can see that a creator would care about his creation but could it be that he cares about the universe he created as a whole but not the individual parts? I guess I still don’t see it as necessary that god cares about me.
I don’t see that god has to be either all-good or all-evil, could he not be neither? Could you explain that a bit more.

Quote:
God is infalliable: If God is eternal, all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good, then would not/ could not break a promise.

(I am at work and do not have access to spell check or grammer check, I am very sorry)


So basically god is all-____ because he is infinite. So I guess it would help if you could further explain what that means and how you know it to be true?

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein


Jaden
Theist
Posts: 27
Joined: 2007-02-07
User is offlineOffline
"I do not plan on

"

I do not plan on attacking. Questioning, searching, trying to understand but no malice is intended. : )"

I only meant that in jest Smiling

God is not energy, energy is matter.(e=mc2). There are 2 possible substances in the universe, matter and spirit. (one has to exist, but not necessarily both). Matter is size (or extent), no conscience. Spirit is no size (or no-extent) with conscience. Spirit, would be "pure thought." (this is presupposing that thinking does not JUST occur in the brain).

What is the most basic thing you could say about your computer monitor? You could say it is square, it shows pictures etc, but those would be its qualities, not the most basic thing. The most basic thing you could say about a thing is that it has existence. There is two types of existence, eternal and temporal.

Eternal has no beginging and no end, (think of a circle, where does it start, where does it end? just a simple example to get you started.)

Temporal has a begining (and not necissaraly an end). Your monitor at one point had a begining, and through the laws of entropy, it will have an end, you could deduce that it is temporal.

Infinite is harder to explain, mainly because we are finite, and think one thought after another, (if there was a God, He would not do this). Infinite has no limits, finite has limits.

I read this example years ago, I cannot remember who wrote it. But think of a hotel, this hotel has finite rooms, when it is full, they have to turn customers away. An infinite hotel, would simply move tenent 1, to room 2, tenent 2 to room 3, ad infintum. and at anytime be full, with room to spare...Or think of the largest number possible, now add one, same thing.

If God is the creator, then it is in His being to create. He would then create for a purpose. For a God to create in such a way (being infinite) would have enough thought to care about all parts, or else He would not create that part.

All-good or All-evil is based on choice. Choice assumes values and values assume a highest value. God being infinite, eternal and unchangable, would be either good or evil, both or neither.

God as the creator, creates according to His nature. The good (highest value) for a being is based off the nature of the being. So God is acting "good" because He is doing His nature.

So if God was going to act contrary to his nature (all-evil) he would not create. (And we would not exist therefore not ask this question). Think of the movie Dogma, when the Metradone (Alan Rickman) says to Bethany "if they do this they would contradict God, thus negating all of existence..."

If he was neither, He would not create, and if He was both, He could not create.

"So basically god is all-____ because he is infinite. So I guess it would help if you could further explain what that means and how you know it to be true?"

These are not "proofs" that God exists, it is the "proofs" if God is assumed. And these attributes would naturally follow, given the nature of the world, nothing in this world would make sense otherwise if these were untrue.

I would suppose that if I were to prove to you that God exists, I would have to dispprove all other options, so far that they would have to be absurd if they were true. (Zeno style?<sorry philosophical humor&gtEye-wink


My Name is Chelsea
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-02-23
User is offlineOffline
Questions

Jaden wrote:

Infinite is harder to explain, mainly because we are finite, and think one thought after another, (if there was a God, He would not do this). Infinite has no limits, finite has limits.

I understand infinity. What I don’t understand is why god has to be infinite. Unless you mean the Judeo-Christian/Muslim god. In which case I can see the textual basis for this necessity.

Quote:
If God is the creator, then it is in His being to create. He would then create for a purpose. For a God to create in such a way (being infinite) would have enough thought to care about all parts, or else He would not create that part.

I guess my difficulty is I can imagine a god that could create just for the heck of it. Or a god who could create for a purpose and that purpose could include not caring about the happiness of each individual creation. I think looking at the world around us it seems obvious that if there is an omni-god, he doesn’t care much about individual happiness.

Quote:
All-good or All-evil is based on choice. Choice assumes values and values assume a highest value. God being infinite, eternal and unchangable, would be either good or evil, both or neither.
I guess my difficulty here is understanding why god has to be all one or the other or even how he could be.

Quote:
God as the creator, creates according to His nature. The good (highest value) for a being is based off the nature of the being. So God is acting "good" because He is doing His nature.

So if God was going to act contrary to his nature (all-evil) he would not create. (And we would not exist therefore not ask this question). Think of the movie Dogma, when the Metradone (Alan Rickman) says to Bethany "if they do this they would contradict God, thus negating all of existence..."

If he was neither, He would not create, and if He was both, He could not create.
I would just have to disagree. I don’t see any reason why evil could not create.

Quote:

These are not "proofs" that God exists, it is the "proofs" if God is assumed. And these attributes would naturally follow, given the nature of the world, nothing in this world would make sense otherwise if these were untrue.

So basically if there is a god he has to be x,y and z because of the way the world is? I can understand that except that for me the world as it is (and many specific religious teachings) seem to contradict x or y or z or all three.

I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
Robert A. Heinlein