I wonder what a Libertarian would say about absolute measures regardless of religious background. Oh yeah, they are bad. I did just say that, two posts up.
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
ITT: We Discuss our Religious Backgrounds/Ideas
- Thread starter sonickid01
- Start date
- Status
I think you are misinterpreting God's omniscience. He's all knowing but he gave us free will. As a result he may know the results of the choices we can make but it's our decision whether or not we make them. This life would be meaningless if god already knew which choices we would make. Free will has to be just that, free will. So he didn't create you knowing you would become an atheist. Just that you could become one along with every other possible outcome for you.
Isn't it possible that god is everything other than life Morm? He knows what we will be when we are born, and when we die, but he knows nothing of the world in between? Rather, 'god' is just a term for everything that can't be observed.
Edit: I'm laughing at how wrong Masakis post is. There are MANY religions that have lasted longer than Christianity.
Edit: I'm laughing at how wrong Masakis post is. There are MANY religions that have lasted longer than Christianity.
Not for nothin but, Judaism? There's more than that but that's pretty obvious when you're talking Christianity.
So...many...things wrong here.
First of all...Hinduism has existed for far longer than Christianity. And that's not the only religion to do so, either.
Many many many many many things in the Bible have been proven to be wrong. It cannot, for instance, rain for 40 days and 40 nights across the entire planet. That is meteorologically impossible. The earth also cannot "stand still", as described in Joshua, without everyone flying off at ~500,000 MPH. There's also minor things like the entire bloody fossil record.
There is nothing in the bible about atoms...and uh, I hope you realize that Galileo was prosecuted precisely because the Bible gave extremely inaccurate ideas of astronomy to the Church at the time.
I'm going to stop there. It's apparent, from your lack of desire to source your ludicrous claims, that you have no desire to engage in reasoned debate. I just wanted to write the above in case some poor pliable person was swayed by your abhorrent disregard for reality.
you missed the point entirely.He created you with you fully in charge of the fate you choose. He knows every possible outcome but not what you yourself will choose because you have free agency. Hence the reason he is always sad or angry when his children choose the wrong path.
EDIT: And perhaps fully in charge is not the best choice of words due to outside influences and such.
So he doesn't know what decisions I will make? Sounds to me like he doesn't know everything.
Heromasaki, please, tell me what it is that I don't know what I'm talking about. To arm wave and say that atheists don't know anything about christianity is so hideously naive. Personally, I find issue with it in both the logical and occam's razor standpoint.
Heromasaki, please, tell me what it is that I don't know what I'm talking about. To arm wave and say that atheists don't know anything about christianity is so hideously naive. Personally, I find issue with it in both the logical and occam's razor standpoint.
Hinduism, the third largest religion in the world, is over 3000 years old. Buddhism is over 2000 years old. Judaism is the oldest surviving monotheistic religion. Christianity is one of the youngest religions, for fuck's sake.
According to science, the world is billions of years old. The oldest traces of human civilization are older than the Bible's estimate as to the creation of the world. And I'm not even talking about the virtually universally accepted theory of evolution.HeroMasaki said:
Any vague statement can be interpreted in such a way that it becomes a fulfilled prophecy. This is like astrology, where each sign is carefully described so that anybody can see themselves in any sign. Confirmation bias will make you believe anything.HeroMasaki said:
Of course, nobody figured out the Bible was describing these facts before they independently discovered them. In some instances, they thought the Bible said the opposite. All you are doing is mining the Bible for statements that seem to confirm what you know, conveniently ignoring that this process can be used to confirm any statement and its contrary.HeroMasaki said:
Your lack of intellectual rigor is astounding.
I'd like to weigh in on a few things covered in the past few pages.
First, the whole "free will" thing. The very concept of free will is debatable, but I'll leave that aside for now. What I'd like to address is...why doesn't God protect us from the consequences of our actions? Some of you might say "this is a silly question", but...why? A common analogy employed is that we are God's "children"; this denotes a certain degree of ignorance on our part, and a certain degree of paternal responsibility on God's part. Would you let your children play with loaded guns? And if you do, would you not stop them from shooting themselves with it, given the opportunity? Hell, let's even assume that your children grow up, and become "adults"...if it were in your power, as a loving parent, would you not prevent them from suffering the consequences of their actions?
I think most of us, given the opportunity, would not let ANYONE suffer, regardless of whether they "deserve" it or not. But perhaps I'm just a bit more compassionate than most religious people, so I'll stick within the boundaries of the analogy for now...I don't think most of us would let our kin suffer, even if that suffering is caused by their own behavior.
Ultimately what I'm driving at here is that "free will" is not an appropriate response to the Problem Of Evil. Even with free will, if God were truly benevolent, evil would not exist, because he has the ability to make sure none of his children suffer, an option even us "imperfect" humans would take.
There was also some argument made about how God cannot show himself, because it would "destroy faith". I have extremely difficulty accepting this argument. I think it is apparent that, if God proved his existence and laid down commands without any room for doubt, people would be far more likely to follow his word and avoid sin. Is that not what he wants? Is that not what Christians want?
To me, this argument is essentially saying "well we're going to believe in God without any evidence at all, and if God offered actual evidence that he exists it would invalidate our 'real' way of believing in him because people who actually like to know things and believe them based on reason would also start believing in God". It reeks of dissonance and religious tribalism.
First, the whole "free will" thing. The very concept of free will is debatable, but I'll leave that aside for now. What I'd like to address is...why doesn't God protect us from the consequences of our actions? Some of you might say "this is a silly question", but...why? A common analogy employed is that we are God's "children"; this denotes a certain degree of ignorance on our part, and a certain degree of paternal responsibility on God's part. Would you let your children play with loaded guns? And if you do, would you not stop them from shooting themselves with it, given the opportunity? Hell, let's even assume that your children grow up, and become "adults"...if it were in your power, as a loving parent, would you not prevent them from suffering the consequences of their actions?
I think most of us, given the opportunity, would not let ANYONE suffer, regardless of whether they "deserve" it or not. But perhaps I'm just a bit more compassionate than most religious people, so I'll stick within the boundaries of the analogy for now...I don't think most of us would let our kin suffer, even if that suffering is caused by their own behavior.
Ultimately what I'm driving at here is that "free will" is not an appropriate response to the Problem Of Evil. Even with free will, if God were truly benevolent, evil would not exist, because he has the ability to make sure none of his children suffer, an option even us "imperfect" humans would take.
There was also some argument made about how God cannot show himself, because it would "destroy faith". I have extremely difficulty accepting this argument. I think it is apparent that, if God proved his existence and laid down commands without any room for doubt, people would be far more likely to follow his word and avoid sin. Is that not what he wants? Is that not what Christians want?
To me, this argument is essentially saying "well we're going to believe in God without any evidence at all, and if God offered actual evidence that he exists it would invalidate our 'real' way of believing in him because people who actually like to know things and believe them based on reason would also start believing in God". It reeks of dissonance and religious tribalism.
im not sure whether i should just delete heromaskis post for at least hopefully being an intentional troll of a relatively serious thread or edit his post into a giant penis under the new forum rules or what
look, things are laxer now but posting a bunch of obvious misinformation like the LONGEST STANDING RELIGION IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANITY!!! and then mentioning an unwillingness to post (non-existent) sources really isn't going to work. pretty sure youre trolling but if not youre gonna have to try harder to post things that aren't bs presented as fact and if so im going to edit your post into a penis
look, things are laxer now but posting a bunch of obvious misinformation like the LONGEST STANDING RELIGION IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANITY!!! and then mentioning an unwillingness to post (non-existent) sources really isn't going to work. pretty sure youre trolling but if not youre gonna have to try harder to post things that aren't bs presented as fact and if so im going to edit your post into a penis
I'm not sure what's funnier: HeroMasaki's original post (as immortalized by FlareBlitz) or cookie's edit.
It only takes one or two people that can't argue properly to screw up a thread. ;_; I really don't think he's a troll, guys but meh, it's pretty funny.
Heromasaki, I'm rather taken aback by the fact that you just belittled the entire span Sumerian culture, Babylonian culture, Egyptian mythology, Greek mythology, Roman mythology, Buddhism and Hinduism, the latter of which I grew up on, by simply ignoring it. I dunno what else to call it.
Perhaps on a completely different note I'll delve a little further into exactly where the seed for my current state was planted. It probably started down in private school as a kindergartner. We were required to attend religion class and the school was notably rather open and dare I even say more liberal than many religious organizations are notorious for. They welcomed me coming from a Hindu background and my mother used to converse with the religion teacher on the subject. I tried to point out parallels and similarities between the two religions based on what I'd been told, not really understanding what they were (as I was only, what, 4 or 5?). I would however ask certain questions that I still ask today, although now the questions are a bit more refined obviously. The one I remember asking was if there had to be a god, then who made that god. I was told that He was infinite and immortal and required no creator. The exact words I was told were, "he always just was." I remember getting a very strange feeling, physically or psychologically; it was like looking into infinity. That's the only way I can describe it. Occasionally I get the same feeling trying to comprehend down an infinite regress sort of argument. It's like your mind falling into a hole that stretches forever for just a split second. If anyone else knows what that was, please explain because it still sort of bugs me even now that I could never explain it fully.
One other question with a nonsense answer I remember asking was to my mother when I was a little older. I'd always been told that Hinduism accepts every religion and declares that every way of life is equally valid and good and all that stuff that sounds eerily pc+. However I'd also been told at least once or twice by then, and waved it off casually, that I was going to hell for worshipping the wrong religion or god(s), and that I had to save my mother as well, etc. I asked how every religion could be correct if Hinduism declares every other religion as A-OK while everyone condemns Hinduism as going to hell or false or whatever. The contradiction was plain. My mother gave some weird non-answer and I don't remember what it was. But similar answers cropped up for a lot of answers and I realized only recently that injecting the conjunctions "but" and "also" together in a sentence does not remedy a cognitive dissonance. :/
If anyone else had similar experiences trying to argue with people or experiences in the reverse where someone badgered them in proselytizing (non)religion I think that'd be interesting to hear about as well.
Heromasaki, I'm rather taken aback by the fact that you just belittled the entire span Sumerian culture, Babylonian culture, Egyptian mythology, Greek mythology, Roman mythology, Buddhism and Hinduism, the latter of which I grew up on, by simply ignoring it. I dunno what else to call it.
Perhaps on a completely different note I'll delve a little further into exactly where the seed for my current state was planted. It probably started down in private school as a kindergartner. We were required to attend religion class and the school was notably rather open and dare I even say more liberal than many religious organizations are notorious for. They welcomed me coming from a Hindu background and my mother used to converse with the religion teacher on the subject. I tried to point out parallels and similarities between the two religions based on what I'd been told, not really understanding what they were (as I was only, what, 4 or 5?). I would however ask certain questions that I still ask today, although now the questions are a bit more refined obviously. The one I remember asking was if there had to be a god, then who made that god. I was told that He was infinite and immortal and required no creator. The exact words I was told were, "he always just was." I remember getting a very strange feeling, physically or psychologically; it was like looking into infinity. That's the only way I can describe it. Occasionally I get the same feeling trying to comprehend down an infinite regress sort of argument. It's like your mind falling into a hole that stretches forever for just a split second. If anyone else knows what that was, please explain because it still sort of bugs me even now that I could never explain it fully.
One other question with a nonsense answer I remember asking was to my mother when I was a little older. I'd always been told that Hinduism accepts every religion and declares that every way of life is equally valid and good and all that stuff that sounds eerily pc+. However I'd also been told at least once or twice by then, and waved it off casually, that I was going to hell for worshipping the wrong religion or god(s), and that I had to save my mother as well, etc. I asked how every religion could be correct if Hinduism declares every other religion as A-OK while everyone condemns Hinduism as going to hell or false or whatever. The contradiction was plain. My mother gave some weird non-answer and I don't remember what it was. But similar answers cropped up for a lot of answers and I realized only recently that injecting the conjunctions "but" and "also" together in a sentence does not remedy a cognitive dissonance. :/
If anyone else had similar experiences trying to argue with people or experiences in the reverse where someone badgered them in proselytizing (non)religion I think that'd be interesting to hear about as well.
Well by mormon teachings the point of coming to earth is as a test. We had grown as much as we could as only spirits and we needed to get a body of flesh and blood and come to Earth as a test in order to work towards eternal life and becoming like god. So for God to step in and stop evil people defeats the purpose of letting people make their own choices. At the second coming christ comes back bringing the resurrection and then judgement happens. The point of existence is to be judged based on how we do. So God doesn't really step in. It wouldn't make sense. And justice will be dished out appropriately at the end.
@Morm He purposely put our decisions in our own hands outside the realm of his omniscience. Like i said he knows everything but he had to give us the freedom of choice or else it would be pointless. Quit getting stuck on semantics.
The terms "ideal" and "perfect" are too subjective to base discussion on imo. I at least can't espouse to know what a perfect world is.
so he is choosing to remain ignorant of that info? I'd like to know where it says that in the Bible.
I guess this is where the cop out "you just can't understand his majesty" bullshit comes in to play, but I'd like to know what I'm missing in this paradox of freewill/omniscience so bear with me
I guess this is where the cop out "you just can't understand his majesty" bullshit comes in to play, but I'd like to know what I'm missing in this paradox of freewill/omniscience so bear with me
you are obviously missing the whole point. I've explained it a few times now but it can't seem to pass through the wall in your brain that blocks anything changing your understanding of religion. You are so transfixed on your completely literal interpretation of omniscience to mean every thing no matter the circumstances that you can't see that god gave us free will knowing all possible outcomes but allowing us the decision. He still knows all knowledge. Which is what omniscience is. I'm not going to explain it again.
mattj
blatant Nintendo fanboy
The God of the Bible gives you the exact same opportunity as anyone else. That's a pretty good example of how he loves you in my opinion. If you want to know God, he'll make whatever provisions necessary (Acts 8:26-40, etc...). If not, he won't. I fail to see how that's anything but loving.
And I agree, nothing to get upset about here.
[edit]
And oh, I just realized I never discussed my religious background. It might help some people understand why I act and post the way I do maybe.
Well, for starters, I guess I'm the resident Heretic of smogon? Maybe not, this is a pretty liberal crowd. I'm a very active member of The United Pentecostal Church. It's considered a cult by several large mainstream denominations mainly because we reject the doctrine of the Trinity. It's one of those "Bible Thumpin', Tongue Talkin', Holy Roller, Shoutin' Amen, Pentecostal Churches". A few quick things that differentiate us from some other well known Christian denominations is
- We reject the doctrine of the Trinity. Instead we are Modalists.
- Stemming from the above, we only baptize in the name of Jesus, never the titles "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit".
- Our salvation message can be summed up by Acts 2:38 "...repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost..."
- The majority of our men keep their hair cut short, and don't wear shorts.
- The majority of our women don't cut their hair, and only wear dresses, not pants.
- The majority of our members don't drink any alcohol.
- We talk in tongues and prophesy on a regular basis in church.
- We usually have loud, boisterous, exciting services.
I guess I come from a pretty un-religious family. I grew up only knowing my father's side because of a bad divorce. None of them were religious in any way. My father married my wonderful Step Mom, who did have some religious background (United Church of Christ as a kid, as well as many many other churches throughout her young adulthood). After a while we started trying this and that church here and there. We pretty much settled on the United Pentecostal Church in the next town and went there for several years. I guess I got hooked, but my Mom and Dad and Siblings really didn't. I've been active there since I was about 14 and I'm 26 now. Don't have any plans on changing.
I'm 100% convinced that the Bible is the inspired word of God. I'm also convinced, after reading the Bible, listening to sermons, and reading our church's literature, that our particular church (while not by any means the ONLY church) does a good job of conveying that word. I feel that God has done so much in my life, that I can't not serve him.
I'll quit being a baby sorry.
But as for omniscience he does know things in the future just not which one of the things in the future it is since we have free will to choose.
- Status