PDA

View Full Version : A Professor questions a Student's Belief In God



Ruthless4Life
04-15-2004, 02:26 PM
I got this in the email. But this time, it's actually worth reading.


>An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the
>problem science has with God, The Almighty.
>
>He asks one of his new (insert religion) students to stand and.....
>
>Professor: You are a (insert religion), aren't you, son?
>
>Student : Yes, sir.
>
>Prof: So you believe in God?
>
>Student : Absolutely, sir.
>
>Prof: Is God good?
>
>Student : Sure.
>
>Prof: Is God all-powerful?
>
>Student : Yes.
>
>Prof: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to God to heal
>him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But God
>didn't. How is this God good then? Hmm?
>
>(Student is silent.)
>
>Prof: You can't answer, can you? Let's start again, young fella. Is
>God good?
>
>Student :Yes.
>
>Prof: Is Satan good?
>
>Student : No.
>
>Prof: Where does Satan come from?
>
>Student : From...God...
>
>Prof: That's right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?
>
>Student : Yes.
>
>Prof: Evil is everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything.
>correct?
>
>Student : Yes.
>
>Prof: So who created evil?
>
>(Student does not answer.)
>
>Prof: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these
>terrible things exist in the world, don't they?
>
>Student :Yes, sir.
>
>Prof: So, who created them?
>
>(Student has no answer.)
>
>Prof: Science says you have 5 senses you use to identify and observe
>the world around you. Tell me, son...Have you ever seen God?
>
>Student : No, sir.
>
>Prof: Tell us if you have ever heard your God?
>
>Student : No , sir.
>
>Prof: Have you ever felt your God, tasted your God, smelt your God?
>Have you ever had any sensory perception of God for that matter?
>
>Student : No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't.
>
>Prof: Yet you still believe in Him?
>
>Student : Yes.
>
>Prof: According to empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol,
>science says your GOD doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?
>
>Student : Nothing. I only have my faith.
>
>Prof: Yes. Faith. And that is the problem science has.
>
>Student : Professor, is there such a thing as heat?
>
>Prof: Yes.
>
>Student : And is there such a thing as cold?
>
>Prof: Yes.
>
>Student : No sir. There isn't.
>
>(The lecture theatre becomes very quiet with this turn of events.)
>
>Student : Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat,
>mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don't have
>anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no
>heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing
>as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat.
>We cannot measure cold.Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of
>heat, sir, just the absence of it.
>
>(There is pin-drop silence in the lecture theatre.)
>
>Student : What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as
>darkness?
>
>Prof: Yes. What is night if there isn't darkness?
>
>Student : You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of
>something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light,
>flashing light....But if you have no light constantly, you have
>nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? In reality, darkness
>isn't. If it were you would be able to make darkness darker,
>wouldn't you?
>
>Prof: So what is the point you are making, young man?
>
>Student : Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.
>
>Prof: Flawed? Can you explain how?
>
>Student : Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue
>there is life and then there is death, a good God and a bad God. You
>are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can
>measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses
>electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully
>understood either one.. To view death as the opposite of life is to
>be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive
>thing. Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it.
>
>Now tell me, Professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved
>from a monkey?
>
>Prof: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes,
>of course, I do.
>
>Student : Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?
>
>(The Professor shakes his head with a smile, beginning to realize
>where the argument is going.)
>
>Student : Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at
>work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going
>endeavour, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a
>scientist but a preacher?
>
>(The class is in uproar.)
>
>Student : Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the
>Professor's brain?
>
>(The class breaks out into laughter.)
>
>Student : Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's
>brain, felt it, touched or smelt it?.....No one appears to have done
>so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable,
>demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, sir.
>With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?
>
>(The room is silent. The professor stares at the student, his face
>unfathomable.)
>
>Prof: I guess you'll have to take them on faith, son.
>
>Student : That is it sir.. The link between man & god is FAITH. That
>is all that keeps things moving & alive.

The Kurgan
04-15-2004, 02:33 PM
The Student's arguement isn't very strong, though.

BuckWyld
04-15-2004, 02:34 PM
not to mention it is easy to win an argument when you make up both sides.

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 02:37 PM
You can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a God. The student does not answer the question of an all-powerful and totally good god and then why is the world the way it is today.

Also evolution has evidence to support it, a vast amount of evidence. The professor having a brain has a vast amount of evidence to support that statement as well.

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 02:38 PM
Originally posted by The Kurgan
The Student's arguement isn't very strong, though.

No actually its pretty weak imo and is just the shifting of emphasis to something he can actually feasibly be capable of defending.

Jimineye
04-15-2004, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
No actually its pretty weak imo and is just the shifting of emphasis to something he can actually feasibly be capable of defending.

Explain please on why the argument is weak. If you are referring the fact about the brain of the professor, the student directed his argument to the class asking if they personally have seen the professors brain. If the students have touched the professors brain, smelled it, heard it, or tasted it. If they haven't done any of those things on a personal basis, then they have to rely on faith that the professor has a brain.

t0mmy
04-15-2004, 03:39 PM
it is like a sense of conciense (sp?). You can't hear it, touch it, smell it etc. but it's there.

Ruhanv
04-15-2004, 03:45 PM
Some people feel Elvis talk to them as well or convince themselves that God is telling them to kill their children. You cannot base your life on someone else's feelings.

The argument is wrong scientifically though and the story is made up to serve as an evangelical tool. Darkness is not always due to the absence of light. Dark matter has been proven to exist in the Universe and is not "nothing". ;)

derekmac
04-15-2004, 03:46 PM
Can anyone catch the wind or see a breeze?

Just because there is something that we can't put into our hands or quantify, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 03:54 PM
Originally posted by derekmac
Can anyone catch the wind or see a breeze?

Just because there is something that we can't put into our hands or quantify, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

you can feel the breeze as it goes against your skin, blows in your hair, etc.

derekmac
04-15-2004, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
you can feel the breeze as it goes against your skin, blows in your hair, etc.

Can you see it though?

You can see the evidence of a wind or breeze by both the feel of it on your skin and by the effects of the wind (leaves blowing, etc.)

Ruhanv
04-15-2004, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by derekmac
Can anyone catch the wind or see a breeze?

Just because there is something that we can't put into our hands or quantify, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

It also doesn't mean that its' what we think it is. It could be a breeze, air from a fan or fart. Trying to lable experience are dangerous as our minds can create ANY experience imaginable, especially when its' supported by larger groups of people. This phenomenon has been seen in so many cultures, religions and groups through time.

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 03:59 PM
Originally posted by Jimineye
Explain please on why the argument is weak. If you are referring the fact about the brain of the professor, the student directed his argument to the class asking if they personally have seen the professors brain. If the students have touched the professors brain, smelled it, heard it, or tasted it. If they haven't done any of those things on a personal basis, then they have to rely on faith that the professor has a brain.

The student's arguement is weak in defending how God can be all good despite how the world is (weak is an understatement he doesn't address it). Also the way the student argues is fairly superficial imo it doesn't get down into any of the nitty grity.

derekmac
04-15-2004, 04:00 PM
Originally posted by Ruhanv
It also doesn't mean that its' what we think it is. It could be a breeze, air from a fan or fart. Trying to lable experience are dangerous as our minds can create ANY experience imaginable, especially when its' supported by larger groups of people. This phenomenon has been seen in so many cultures, religions and groups through time.

The point is that you cannot see it, and yet you know that it is there. An imperfect metaphor, but that is somewhat similar of the evidence of an intelligent creator, i.e. God. All of nature screams of an intelligent design; of a creator.

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 04:01 PM
Originally posted by derekmac
Can you see it though?

You can see the evidence of a wind or breeze by both the feel of it on your skin and by the effects of the wind (leaves blowing, etc.)

Yes, you can see and hear its evidence but you can't see it, you can however feel it. None of your five senses will likely ever be able to directly prove to you there is a God.

Ak47
04-15-2004, 04:40 PM
Just a question because I'm curious. In the bible, in the story about adam and eve, it says (not a direct quote, but close) "So God said, 'Let there be a dome, to seperate the water above the dome, and the water below.' So it was, and God call the dome the sky" now if this is truly the word of God, who knows and sees all, wouldnt he have known about space and the solar system and so on, so the sky wasnt seperating to bodies of water? This just seems like the limited knowledge of the earth in the times that the bible was written.

Poor Excuse
04-15-2004, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
You can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a God. The student does not answer the question of an all-powerful and totally good god and then why is the world the way it is today.



god granted free will

15u
04-15-2004, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by derekmac
The point is that you cannot see it, and yet you know that it is there.

seeing is only one of your 5 senses. you know the wind is there because your sense of touch tells you it is there. there are very few things that all 5 senses pick up on. none of your 5 senses tell you that god is existent, all that tells you that there is god is belief.

derekmac
04-15-2004, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
Yes, you can see and hear its evidence but you can't see it, you can however feel it. None of your five senses will likely ever be able to directly prove to you there is a God.

No, but the evidence is all around you in creation, by virtue of the ordered and intelligent design of nature.

Do you realize that if the earth's orbit was off just a little bit, that this planet would be inhabitable? there is order in nature. Supposing a billion years ago there was chaos, how can one bring order from chaos?

derekmac
04-15-2004, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by 15u
seeing is only one of your 5 senses. you know the wind is there because your sense of touch tells you it is there. there are very few things that all 5 senses pick up on. none of your 5 senses tell you that god is existent, all that tells you that there is god is belief.

Again, there is evidence other than what I can see or feel or touch-that evidence is in creation itself.

bgzee
04-15-2004, 05:22 PM
The students argument is weak for a couple reason.

1. If you have no brain, you are dead. This is a fact. While you can't see, feel, hear, touch or taste it, we know it exists.

2. Arguing that cold is the opposite of heat is stupid. Of course they are not opposites. No one ever said they were. Heat = energy. Temperature = the measure of heat energy. Cold and Hot are adjectives describing temperature relative to a normal temperature.

Light and dark is a similar situation, only a bit different. That is because light is both a noun and an adjective. The student proves his "theory" by proving that the noun light is NOT the opposite of the adjective dark. The noun light is measured in lumens. The adjectives light and dark are describing light relative to a normal amount of lumens.

So basically, the student was comparing apples to oranges.

SteakNPotatoes
04-15-2004, 05:31 PM
Believe it or not, but all of those kinds of emails are fake! A shocker, I know. :0

P.S. That dying kid is not going to get 2 pennies for every person you forward the message to. The only thing forwarding those kinds of messages accomplishes is pissing off the recipients.

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by Poor Excuse
god granted free will

If your a christian, muslim, or jew then your theology and free will come into quite a bit of conflict via divine intervention and prophecies.

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 06:14 PM
Originally posted by derekmac
No, but the evidence is all around you in creation, by virtue of the ordered and intelligent design of nature.

Do you realize that if the earth's orbit was off just a little bit, that this planet would be inhabitable? there is order in nature. Supposing a billion years ago there was chaos, how can one bring order from chaos?

Ah the old first cause argument. Unfortunately this is preceeded by the question of "who made God?" As such we are back to square one.

Heavily Armed
04-15-2004, 07:08 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
The student's arguement is weak in defending how God can be all good despite how the world is (weak is an understatement he doesn't address it). Also the way the student argues is fairly superficial imo it doesn't get down into any of the nitty grity.

So if God forced us to be good, we'd be robots. No choice to choose. God allows this world to be exactly as we want it to be, the end result of a myriad of choices. The retched state of the world is our fault.

Heavily Armed
04-15-2004, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
If your a christian, muslim, or jew then your theology and free will come into quite a bit of conflict via divine intervention and prophecies.

How so?

CerealKiller
04-15-2004, 07:16 PM
Originally posted by Poor Excuse
god granted free will


Why do people always claim this ?

Heavily Armed
04-15-2004, 07:29 PM
Originally posted by CerealKiller
Why do people always claim this ?

It's a recurring Biblical theme.

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 07:37 PM
Originally posted by Heavily Armed
How so?

It is a contradiction to say that people have the right to choose between good and evil and then God steps down and makes a certain side prevail (e.g. the Israelites touncing the Canaanites whereas when God was not with them they got slaughtered). Also anything dealing with a prediction of exactly what someone is going to do at a certain time (e.g. peter denies jesus 3 times before cock crows) does not imply free will at all, but divine intervention and the two don't go together even if the divine intervention is for some "good".

CITADEL
04-15-2004, 07:38 PM
Originally posted by Heavily Armed
So if God forced us to be good, we'd be robots. No choice to choose. God allows this world to be exactly as we want it to be, the end result of a myriad of choices. The retched state of the world is our fault.

Doesn't God already have a plan made out for each person in their life, and he knows what we are going to do before we do it, hence we are actually robots if he already plans what we are going to do in our life. How do we have free will if God already has our life set out before us (this isn't what I believe at all, but it's what it sounds like when religious people explain it). So why would God let someone be born who will terrorize the innocent, (someone such as Hitler) if he already knows it's going to happen. Why is it worth it to 'God' to let one man have free will even if means the pain and death of so many?

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 07:38 PM
Originally posted by Heavily Armed
So if God forced us to be good, we'd be robots. No choice to choose. God allows this world to be exactly as we want it to be, the end result of a myriad of choices. The retched state of the world is our fault.

If we are totally free, and the christian religion is correct, then why has God continully thrust himself into the affairs of men?

fizzbob7
04-15-2004, 07:52 PM
i thought there was tons of evidence supporting evolution.....why else would a snake have skeletal remains of rear legs...hell, even some boids have the remains of rear legs that they will sometimes use to "tickle" the female during mating.....

as for cold/hot light/dark, that's really just a flaw in the definitions, not the actual idea of dark or cold......it's relative to our perception....we can only see in a certain amount of light....too little light, we can see dark, or not see light, same thing.........same thing with hot/cold......we're 98.6 degrees so less than that will be cold, etc.......if you were to sit in a hot ass, 95 degree ocean all day, you'd eventually die of a low body temp....and that's over the course of hours, not days.....it's all relative......

i've had no more contact with god than i have the easter bunny....no problem with what others believe, that's also relative.......i've never experienced miracles, and never will....it's all logical...not always explained, but who could explain our solar system 200 years ago.....wasn't any more "fantastic" than it is now......

it's all relative dammit.....i choose not to believe because it makes no sense (also relative) but that's all i can go by.....my relation to the world around me......

Heavily Armed
04-15-2004, 07:57 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
It is a contradiction to say that people have the right to choose between good and evil and then God steps down and makes a certain side prevail (e.g. the Israelites touncing the Canaanites whereas when God was not with them they got slaughtered). Also anything dealing with a prediction of exactly what someone is going to do at a certain time (e.g. peter denies jesus 3 times before cock crows) does not imply free will at all, but divine intervention and the two don't go together even if the divine intervention is for some "good".

You can still choose good or evil personally. The results may not be what you'd hoped, depending on whether God intervenes or not. Most of us aren't in a position to do world-changing things. God's plans will be fulfilled, despite what we want to do. Knowing what Peter would do was not making Peter do it. Even telling Peter what he would do, Peter still gave into his fear over his faith.

Heavily Armed
04-15-2004, 08:00 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
If we are totally free, and the christian religion is correct, then why has God continully thrust himself into the affairs of men?

We have free will. We are not what I'd call totally free since we are accountable to God for the life we lead. We can do what we want, as we can in society. But there are consequences for doing the wrong thing in both. We still live under His authority.

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 08:03 PM
Originally posted by Heavily Armed
You can still choose good or evil personally. The results may not be what you'd hoped, depending on whether God intervenes or not. Most of us aren't in a position to do world-changing things. God's plans will be fulfilled, despite what we want to do. Knowing what Peter would do was not making Peter do it. Even telling Peter what he would do, Peter still gave into his fear over his faith.

God intervening in a "choice" is nothing but a contradiction in the principle of free choice. A choice is not free if you are coerced (whether physically or in this case spirtuality) to it. If a thing has a contradiction then it can not be totally true. God by definition is absolute and totally just, he then can not do either evil or contradictory actions because he is all good and what is absolutely right (not a degree) is etched into the absolute moral code which we are to adhere to.

If God has a plan that interferes specifically with a choice, then the principle of the choice is either then false or a contradiction. Neither one bodes well for the christian faith.

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 08:05 PM
Originally posted by Heavily Armed
We have free will. We are not what I'd call totally free since we are accountable to God for the life we lead. We can do what we want, as we can in society. But there are consequences for doing the wrong thing in both. We still live under His authority.

We are not free if it rewards or punishes us in this life as opposed to doing so in the next. Freedom of choice requires being able to commit either absolute good or absolute evil otherwise it is not a choice at all. If that is the case then we are then nothing more than board pieces.

Heavily Armed
04-15-2004, 08:07 PM
Originally posted by CITADEL
Doesn't God already have a plan made out for each person in their life, and he knows what we are going to do before we do it, hence we are actually robots if he already plans what we are going to do in our life. How do we have free will if God already has our life set out before us (this isn't what I believe at all, but it's what it sounds like when religious people explain it). So why would God let someone be born who will terrorize the innocent, (someone such as Hitler) if he already knows it's going to happen. Why is it worth it to 'God' to let one man have free will even if means the pain and death of so many?

The Bible says God has a plan for each life, but, you are not required to follow that plan. I would dare say I've not fulfilled God's plan for my life, as I've chosen to do things my way at different times. Having a plan and following it are two different things.

God allows people to be. Hitler's rise to power didn't happen in a vacuum. The evil or indifference of other's allowed him to achieve power. Evil is always destructive.

Heavily Armed
04-15-2004, 08:13 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
We are not free if it rewards or punishes us in this life as opposed to doing so in the next. Freedom of choice requires being able to commit either absolute good or absolute evil otherwise it is not a choice at all. If that is the case then we are then nothing more than board pieces.

Board pieces are played by others. We are free to choose right or wrong. There are consequences for choosing wrong yet this doesn't seem much of a deterrent for most. Generally speaking, the morals God has given have consequences for disobedience. Sexual impurity for example: STDs, unwanted pregnancies, abortion, soiled reputations, conflicts, court battles, etc. You want choice without consequences. That doesn't happen anywhere. You just get choices.

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 08:18 PM
Originally posted by Heavily Armed
Board pieces are played by others. We are free to choose right or wrong. There are consequences for choosing wrong yet this doesn't seem much of a deterrent for most. Generally speaking, the morals God has given have consequences for disobedience. Sexual impurity for example: STDs, unwanted pregnancies, abortion, soiled reputations, conflicts, court battles, etc. You want choice without consequences. That doesn't happen anywhere. You just get choices.

What is a choice is you can't fulfil it? The Cananites decided to defend their homeland from the Israelites (who also had a claim to the land) yet they were destined to lose they had no chance of winning. That is not a choice that is a false sense of choice. If I said either give me your lunch money or fight for it, and either way you were ultimately going to lose the lunch money, then your fighting has no point, because you are going to lose it anyway with just more agony in the process.

Heavily Armed
04-15-2004, 08:26 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
What is a choice is you can't fulfil it? The Cananites decided to defend their homeland from the Israelites (who also had a claim to the land) yet they were destined to lose they had no chance of winning. That is not a choice that is a false sense of choice. If I said either give me your lunch money or fight for it, and either way you were ultimately going to lose the lunch money, then your fighting has no point, because you are going to lose it anyway with just more agony in the process.

Heck, I'll buy your lunch, my treat.

We all make choices in the hopes of seeing our choice come to fruition. But there are no guarantees. We don't know how our choices will come out. We've all made what we consider good choices and bad ones. The difference? How they ultimately turned out in relation to how we'd hoped they would turn out.

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 08:31 PM
Originally posted by Heavily Armed
Heck, I'll buy your lunch, my treat.

We all make choices in the hopes of seeing our choice come to fruition. But there are no guarantees. We don't know how our choices will come out. We've all made what we consider good choices and bad ones. The difference? How they ultimately turned out in relation to how we'd hoped they would turn out.

LOL :D. A better comparison would have been to being robbed at gunpoint and then either choosing to hand over your wallet or get shot and have it taken.

If your choices turn out for the better or worse without divine intervention then the doctrine of free will slides. But there are plently of cases in the Bible which involve divine intervention which means free will must either be compromised or flawed (probably a fallacy). The latter option points to the religion being false or fake. The former means that the doctrine is wrong but the rest of the faith may be sound (which is something I doubt, due to all those little questions of asking "why God why" now having quite a bit of relevance is choice is something that can just be compromised.)

M_D
04-15-2004, 08:33 PM
Originally posted by Heavily Armed
Board pieces are played by others. We are free to choose right or wrong. There are consequences for choosing wrong yet this doesn't seem much of a deterrent for most. Generally speaking, the morals God has given have consequences for disobedience. Sexual impurity for example: STDs, unwanted pregnancies, abortion, soiled reputations, conflicts, court battles, etc. You want choice without consequences. That doesn't happen anywhere. You just get choices.

God is all knowing, he already knows what any of us is going to do at any one time. If this is true, our "free choice" is really just an illusion, everything is already pre-determined when we are born.

Here's something I don't understand. Let's just suppose we have freedom of the will.

1) God gave man freedom because he believed it was an intrinsincally good thing to have. (I could be wrong, but wasn't Jesus was tempted by the devil to exchange human freedom for complete happiness?)

2) Because we have freedom moral evil exists in the world. We have the ability to choose between good and evil, and some of the time we choose evil.

3) Heaven is a place were no such moral evil exists (or physical evil) It is a perfect place.

4) Therefore Heaven is place where no free will exists, because in order to have it we need an opportunity to choose between good and evil, and at least some of the time we have to choose evil.


Now why would an all good God even bother creating a world with freedom (and therefore suffering) when he could simply cut to the chase and create Heaven for all of us. I mean if freedom is something so valuable to God, why would he take it away in Heaven (at least that's if my argument is correct).

Heavily Armed
04-15-2004, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
LOL :D. A better comparison would have been to being robbed at gunpoint and then either choosing to hand over your wallet or get shot and have it taken.

If your choices turn out for the better or worse without divine intervention then the doctrine of free will slides. But there are plently of cases in the Bible which involve divine intervention which means free will must either be compromised or flawed (probably a fallacy). The latter option points to the religion being false or fake. The former means that the doctrine is wrong but the rest of the faith may be sound (which is something I doubt, due to all those little questions of asking "why God why" now having quite a bit of relevance is choice is something that can just be compromised.)

I'm sure God has a hand in things in ways we don't even realize. Or understand. The very basic choice, the most relevent one we make is to follow him or not. "Or not" entails many different choices and paths but the same end results. Everything else but this one choice, at life's end, becomes extraneous. Ultimately, we belong to God. That may not seem fair to you in the freedom department, but that's how it is.

BigKazWSM747
04-15-2004, 08:41 PM
Originally posted by Heavily Armed
I'm sure God has a hand in things in ways we don't even realize. Or understand. The very basic choice, the most relevent one we make is to follow him or not. "Or not" entails many different choices and paths but the same end results. Everything else but this one choice, at life's end, becomes extraneous. Ultimately, we belong to God. That may not seem fair to you in the freedom department, but that's how it is.

If our "freedom" ammounts to being held at gun point with divine intervention threating every choice we make then why do the wicked succeed so often? First you say we will be punished here and in the afterlife. Yet, is it not worse to be punished in both than just one? Yet it is the most powerful men that are capable of committing the most evil (well at least on a much larger scale) yet their success depends on their choices going right. Which would mean say God stopped me from stealing from the church by having some guy spot me that wouldn't have otherwise, yet he allowed Hitler to come to power and mass murder millions.

You see all the problems at arise if you compromise choice?

And nice post M_D.

LordNeon
04-15-2004, 08:41 PM
Originally posted by Heavily Armed
We have free will. We are not what I'd call totally free since we are accountable to God for the life we lead. We can do what we want, as we can in society. But there are consequences for doing the wrong thing in both. We still live under His authority.

I see no reason to believe free will exists, and it's essentially impossible to prove that it does.

derekmac
04-15-2004, 09:17 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
Ah the old first cause argument. Unfortunately this is preceeded by the question of "who made God?" As such we are back to square one.

If there is no God, then who is the designer behind our ordered and structured universe?

The very law of probability and thermodynamics flies in the face of evolution. Ever see a piece of machinery left to rust in a field? It does not evolve, it decays.

Take our planet for instance. The very atmosphere is the perfect combination of elements to support human and animal life. We have sufficient amounts of oxygen and sunlight, plus an adequate water supply. This was all a result of chance? Think about that for a moment. That would be like a tornado going through a junkyard and coming out with a 747 on the other end (order out of chaos).

The fool says in his heart, "There is no God".

derekmac
04-15-2004, 09:27 PM
Originally posted by M_D
God is all knowing, he already knows what any of us is going to do at any one time. If this is true, our "free choice" is really just an illusion, everything is already pre-determined when we are born.

Here's something I don't understand. Let's just suppose we have freedom of the will.

1) God gave man freedom because he believed it was an intrinsincally good thing to have. (I could be wrong, but wasn't Jesus was tempted by the devil to exchange human freedom for complete happiness?) God gave men and angels free will, since it isn't much consolation to be worshiped by robots. Jesus was told that if he worshiped the devil, he would get the kingdoms of this world, since it was his to give. Notice Jesus did not contradict him on this.


2) Because we have freedom moral evil exists in the world. We have the ability to choose between good and evil, and some of the time we choose evil. Because of the fall of man, evil (sin) exists in the world, since we all have Adam's fallen nature. We sin because it is in our very nature to sin. Ever have ot teach a child how to lie?


3) Heaven is a place were no such moral evil exists (or physical evil) It is a perfect place. It is a perfect place where no evil or sin exists.


4) Therefore Heaven is place where no free will exists, because in order to have it we need an opportunity to choose between good and evil, and at least some of the time we have to choose evil. Here you are forgetting about the 2/3 of the angels who "kept their place" and did not follow Lucifer in his rebellion. Angels are non-coporial beings who also have free will. You also forget that the Bible says that "Unless you are born again, you cannot see the kingdom of God" Those that are born-again will eventually be perfected and will have victory over the sinful nature.



Now why would an all good God even bother creating a world with freedom (and therefore suffering) when he could simply cut to the chase and create Heaven for all of us. I mean if freedom is something so valuable to God, why would he take it away in Heaven (at least that's if my argument is correct). You are equating free will with suffering, which are two mutually exclusive things. God did create a paradise- it was called Eden, and was perfect until Eve, and then her husband, Adam, sinned. People ask why there is so much suffering in this world- we live in a fallen world that is under the curse of sin. This will not always be so.

M_D
04-15-2004, 10:11 PM
Originally posted by derekmac
God gave men and angels free will, since it isn't much consolation to be worshiped by robots. Jesus was told that if he worshiped the devil, he would get the kingdoms of this world, since it was his to give. Notice Jesus did not contradict him on this.

***But wasn't their also a stipulation that if Jesus did get all the kingdoms of this world, everyone would be under his power through miracle, mystery and authority, and that no one would have to suffer? This would also entail that humanity would not have freedom.

Because of the fall of man, evil (sin) exists in the world, since we all have Adam's fallen nature. We sin because it is in our very nature to sin. Ever have ot teach a child how to lie?

***The original sin was made by a free choice was it not? The freedom to choose between good and evil. Adam and Eve choose evil.

It is a perfect place where no evil or sin exists.

***agreed, but this world contains moral evil because of our ability to make free choices

Here you are forgetting about the 2/3 of the angels who "kept their place" and did not follow Lucifer in his rebellion. Angels are non-coporial beings who also have free will. You also forget that the Bible says that "Unless you are born again, you cannot see the kingdom of God" Those that are born-again will eventually be perfected and will have victory over the sinful nature.

***I don't know what you mean. (sorry, I was never a christian to begin with) So do you mean by being "born again" that you will once again be wiped clean of all you're sin, and placed in heaven with still the ability to make free choices? If this is the case, there should be some moral evil in Heaven.


You are equating free will with suffering, which are two mutually exclusive things. God did create a paradise- it was called Eden, and was perfect until Eve, and then her husband, Adam, sinned. People ask why there is so much suffering in this world- we live in a fallen world that is under the curse of sin. This will not always be so.

*** I don't see a huge problem with free will being the reason why we have moral evil. People freely make the choice whether or not the inflict pain on others. If people only chose intrinsincally good actions all the time, they wouldn't really have free will then.

Poor Excuse
04-15-2004, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by derekmac
God gave men and angels free will, since it isn't much consolation to be worshiped by robots. Jesus was told that if he worshiped the devil, he would get the kingdoms of this world, since it was his to give. Notice Jesus did not contradict him on this.

Because of the fall of man, evil (sin) exists in the world, since we all have Adam's fallen nature. We sin because it is in our very nature to sin. Ever have ot teach a child how to lie?

It is a perfect place where no evil or sin exists.

Here you are forgetting about the 2/3 of the angels who "kept their place" and did not follow Lucifer in his rebellion. Angels are non-coporial beings who also have free will. You also forget that the Bible says that "Unless you are born again, you cannot see the kingdom of God" Those that are born-again will eventually be perfected and will have victory over the sinful nature.


You are equating free will with suffering, which are two mutually exclusive things. God did create a paradise- it was called Eden, and was perfect until Eve, and then her husband, Adam, sinned. People ask why there is so much suffering in this world- we live in a fallen world that is under the curse of sin. This will not always be so.

great post :D

Al_Bundy
04-15-2004, 10:50 PM
God exists. Dan Swano is my God. I can see photos of him, I can hear him on many of my CDs - thats good enough for me :D

MNBULLDAWG
04-15-2004, 10:50 PM
Thre kids right, faith faith faith. I dont know there is a God, but i sure as hel* hope so. With out faith of God whats the point, there has to be a better place and or people then here "earth"

Thats all i got, you people are to smart for me! haha

God bless!


holla

derekmac
04-15-2004, 10:55 PM
Adam and Eve did not choose evil. They were tempted by Satan, and then Eve chose to eat the fruit. That is why Satan is judged in Genesis, where God tells him that he (the snake) is cursed, and that "you will bruise his heel" (the messiah to come) but he will "crush your head" (the ultimate victory of Jesus over Satan, expressed at the Cross and ensuing resurrection).

There was no stipulation that everyone would be under his power through miracle, mystery and authority, and that no one would have to suffer. Nowhere in the scriptures is this said. Satan said that he would give Jesus the kingdoms of the world in exchange for worship.

This world contains evil as a result of the fall of man in the garden. This nature has been passed on to every human being since. It is written, "There is no one who does right, not even one" "We are like sheep that has gone astray, and God has laid upon him the iniquity of us all".

Being "born again" means that a person puts their faith in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sin alone. As a result, God's spirit comes to live in that person's heart, so that they are transformed, slowly, but surely, into the image of Christ (i.e., becoming a christian "little Christ" ) It does not mean one is perfect, but it menas that you have been redeemed by the shed blood of Christ, since "Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sin"

People sin because it is in their very nature to sin. True, you can choose to do good, but we all have the bent toward evil, to be selfish, and to put our needs ahead of our fellow mans and the will of God.

Al_Bundy
04-15-2004, 11:11 PM
Adam and Eve? They had two children - Kane and Abel. One kills the other, and from this happy menage a trois, 6 billion people are created.

derekmac
04-15-2004, 11:13 PM
Originally posted by Al_Bundy
Adam and Eve? They had two children - Kane and Abel. One kills the other, and from this happy menage a trois, 6 billion people are created.

Actually, they had many more children than just Cain and Abel. Your point is noted, though.

Al_Bundy
04-15-2004, 11:55 PM
Originally posted by derekmac
Actually, they had many more children than just Cain and Abel. Your point is noted, though.

But even then - without inbreeding, my friend got bored when he couldn't sleep one night and set out to disprove the Bible - using that, a set of Encyclopaedias and a calculator. Apparently, in order for humans themselves to get to the number they were two years ago when he did it, we needed to start out as a race with something like 450,000 people assuming we are decended directly from Adam and Eve. Thats a lot of ribs.

He also said that we needed something like 40,000 years of non stop rain for the Noah story to be true :D

Whingman
04-16-2004, 12:09 AM
what is free will?
The ability or discretion to choose; free choice


Basically it is choice, very simple choice. don't complicate it or basterdise it anymroe then Choice that is what free will is the ability to choose.

To know you desicion is not, to make one for you. To know the world will end before it will begin is not making a decision for you, to know humans will sin and betray you is not makign the choice for them. To build a plan in which you take into consideration every single action a human will take before you have created them, and simply build a plan that complies with peoples actions and decisions does not violate free will, it works with it, God works by it and follows its rules. yes if we approach it as God is activley thinkign and changing things now then yes we could start to question free will. However this is a human perspective and clearly God is slightly above that perspective. Look at it from Gods perspective up in Nothignness for millions and billions of years, plenty of time to make his master plan, obviously he can see into the future, so he can encorporate your decisions of today into the master plan he created millions of years ago, Genisis 1:1 is simply God pushing the first dominoe of his master plan that works with your free will because it was designed to encorpate it. Now obviously this Master plan leads to a happy ending...Heeaven. Now someoen has comemnted that in Heaven there will be no free will, as there wilb e no Evil no alternative choice, but what you forget as that as we rewind the tape to millions of years ago and press play....people make choices...To reject God or to accept God, the choice, the free will, of heaven is played out on earth, once you get to heaven you ahve made the choice to be there, it is the final choice and the only important choice, the whole point of this pre concieved plan is to come down to that 1 choice, beyond that we are here to enjoy ourselves and have fun. The ultimate purpose of free will was in regards to God, Yes or No, after that decision free will irreverantly becomes obsolute, and not needed...we were given free will to choose between good or evil, it is one choice, Yes God, or No God. Once it has been made and life on earth is over, its existence is not neccasary, as the choice is final and not needed to be made continual..For God 1 yes is enough, if Yes is never said then obviously No was maintained to death and like the choice was 1 No, God isn;t a hyper active 6 year old, who continualy ask's are we there yet, 1 response is enough..once in heaven he sees no point in asking you every ten seconds if you want to be there you made the choice given the contractual terms so to speak, the contract was for ever, for eternity.

Heavily Armed
04-16-2004, 07:27 AM
Originally posted by M_D
God is all knowing, he already knows what any of us is going to do at any one time. If this is true, our "free choice" is really just an illusion, everything is already pre-determined when we are born.

Here's something I don't understand. Let's just suppose we have freedom of the will.

1) God gave man freedom because he believed it was an intrinsincally good thing to have. (I could be wrong, but wasn't Jesus was tempted by the devil to exchange human freedom for complete happiness?)

2) Because we have freedom moral evil exists in the world. We have the ability to choose between good and evil, and some of the time we choose evil.

3) Heaven is a place were no such moral evil exists (or physical evil) It is a perfect place.

4) Therefore Heaven is place where no free will exists, because in order to have it we need an opportunity to choose between good and evil, and at least some of the time we have to choose evil.


Now why would an all good God even bother creating a world with freedom (and therefore suffering) when he could simply cut to the chase and create Heaven for all of us. I mean if freedom is something so valuable to God, why would he take it away in Heaven (at least that's if my argument is correct).

We were given freedom to choose because God wanted us, His creation, to be independent souls. If we choose to accept and love him, we do so of our own accord. If you are a king, for instance, it is the difference between winning someone's love for who you are as opposed to commanding a person to love you by authority of what you are. The one love is warm and devoted, the other, if you could even call it love, is more duty than anything else.

Those who go to Heaven choose God over self. Love places the value of another over self.

Omnipotence is a concept we grasp but partially. We can't fully grasp the entire scope of it's meaning; the hows and whats. God knowing what we'll do in a given situation is not the same as making us do it. It is part of our ultimate choice to love or reject Him.

Heavily Armed
04-16-2004, 07:39 AM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
If our "freedom" ammounts to being held at gun point with divine intervention threating every choice we make then why do the wicked succeed so often? First you say we will be punished here and in the afterlife. Yet, is it not worse to be punished in both than just one? Yet it is the most powerful men that are capable of committing the most evil (well at least on a much larger scale) yet their success depends on their choices going right. Which would mean say God stopped me from stealing from the church by having some guy spot me that wouldn't have otherwise, yet he allowed Hitler to come to power and mass murder millions.

You see all the problems at arise if you compromise choice?

And nice post M_D.

Divine interevention is rare in the doings of the world. It is usually the result of the fervent prayer of belivers. The freedom we have allows people to choose to do evil. Some seemingly flourish, for a time. Who knows the personal trials they endure? We see only the outside trappings. This world is known as Satan's kingdom. Leader's often reflect the people they lead. In many cases, we get exactly the type of leadership we deserve. God has left man to his own devices, except in the cases of divine intervention, to choose for himself. He doesn't come running to bail us out when it comes time to suffer the consequences of our actions. In a world of free will, we will suffer when evil is chosen. People die every day all over the world. It is noteworthy when people die together by the actions of one or a few.

Heavily Armed
04-16-2004, 07:41 AM
Originally posted by LordNeon
I see no reason to believe free will exists, and it's essentially impossible to prove that it does.

Please explain. What keeps us from exercising free will?

dmbfan1
04-16-2004, 08:14 AM
Originally posted by derekmac

Being "born again" means that a person puts their faith in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sin alone. As a result, God's spirit comes to live in that person's heart, so that they are transformed, slowly, but surely, into the image of Christ (i.e., becoming a christian "little Christ" ) It does not mean one is perfect, but it menas that you have been redeemed by the shed blood of Christ, since "Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sin"

People sin because it is in their very nature to sin. True, you can choose to do good, but we all have the bent toward evil, to be selfish, and to put our needs ahead of our fellow mans and the will of God.

Actually i feel you are contradicting your self here. You cannot possibly say that it is in our nature to sin, and that only by being born again are we connected to God. If you are saying that, you are saying awe are not created in the image of God.

If God created all things, and all things God created are good, how can we, who are supposed to be his final accomplishment, be inherently evil? help me out on this one?

rather, i say. God created us and we are inherently good. He gave us the gift of free will so that we could CHOOSE to love Him. If we are forced to love him and follow his will, that means nothing. If he gives us the choice, and we, on our own come to him, then how much greater the love. God is with us at all times. he never loves us more or less. no matter what we do. (that is something people need to get though thier heads, you can't BUY God's love through good deeds.)

The way we live our lives is a response to God's love. You may not notice His presence in your life until you are open to Him, but that does not mean He is not there. you just haven't opened your eyes to Him.

Jcfreak_02
04-16-2004, 08:49 AM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
You can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a God. The student does not answer the question of an all-powerful and totally good god and then why is the world the way it is today.

Also evolution has evidence to support it, a vast amount of evidence. The professor having a brain has a vast amount of evidence to support that statement as well. When I have more time I can answer those questions, or anyone who has taken intro to philosophy could probobly answer these questions. The quick answer to those questions, free will is why the world is so messeg up. If God doesn't exist, how did the world start? I have not yet heard how the Big Bang Theory explains the laws of entropy or of creating matter. Science does not allow for matter to just appear, but somehow, for a bang to occur matter just had to exist. We can have fun with this more.

eru
04-16-2004, 09:38 AM
What's with all these stupid atheist professor stories floating around the web.

And JCFreak, please explain why the Christians thought it was right to murder hundreds of thousands of Muslims during the Crusades. :)

honeybbqgrundle
04-16-2004, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by CITADEL
Doesn't God already have a plan made out for each person in their life, and he knows what we are going to do before we do it, hence we are actually robots if he already plans what we are going to do in our life. How do we have free will if God already has our life set out before us (this isn't what I believe at all, but it's what it sounds like when religious people explain it). So why would God let someone be born who will terrorize the innocent, (someone such as Hitler) if he already knows it's going to happen. Why is it worth it to 'God' to let one man have free will even if means the pain and death of so many?

Wouldn't free will mean he didn't have a plan for everyone? If he did have a plan then why even bother with life? He could just get right to the reward or punishment. Couldn't he have given us free will and chosen not to interfere in our lives, and chosen not to look into the future to see what we would do? Maybe he willingly gave up his ability to see the future with regards to humanity, but he has a little red button that will reverse his decisions if he wants to. He'd still be all powerful and we'd still have free will.

Whingman
04-16-2004, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by Al_Bundy
But even then - without inbreeding, my friend got bored when he couldn't sleep one night and set out to disprove the Bible - using that, a set of Encyclopaedias and a calculator. Apparently, in order for humans themselves to get to the number they were two years ago when he did it, we needed to start out as a race with something like 450,000 people assuming we are decended directly from Adam and Eve. Thats a lot of ribs.

He also said that we needed something like 40,000 years of non stop rain for the Noah story to be true :D

wow your friend disprooved the bible, good job it took us a whiel and now it's been doen right? nope...

1.
ever here of the
mitochondrial Eve’ hypothesis....
it's the finding that all modern humans can be traced back to one woman. this is a scientific finding based on MTdna (atleast i am fairly sure it is) that basically states that all humans descended form one woman. Obviously this doesn;t proove that there was only one woman alive at the time, however it does show how the human species descended from 1 woman. Clearly if 1 woman is what started off the human chain in both evolutionary and creationist theories. So unless your friend is suggesting that there were 449,999 males and 1 female at the time, which would make no difference cause you can only have 1 baby a year pretty much...meanign that whiel his calculations were really cool and its nice he spent the time, he obviously is missing soemthing.


2. 40,000 years of non stop rain? Really? how did he calculate this I suppose he looked at how much rain could fall in a day right? took that and tried to multiply it up until it reached the highest point onthe Earths surface? correct?

so lets do some adding.....

highest recorded rainfall in a day is 608 mm

608*40,000 is 24,320 meters.

But now we get into something for arguements sake that isn't proveable but needs to be considered. The Earth is in pangea form lets say....and the center is sunken...the ocean surrounds the outside the outside is built like a wall to keep the ocean from coming into the center of this earth. however, after 40 days of rain the ocean has elavated its over 80 feet obviously the water woudl creep into the center of the circal, but wiht the constant flow of water a huge level of eriosion woudl take place on the wall of this high level in the earth...as the days increase, the amount fo oceanic water that slips into the center of this good old hard Earth would exponantiely increase...until the point where it could lift the water up in this sunken center point, and cover the Earth. Other additives could be things like liquafaction which in its self could literally cause the ground to sink a huge amount..as well as create sloshy ground from the amount of water released.

Clearly you msut realise the Earth has changed over tiem weather it has changed over 10,000 years or 10 million years is another quesiton but clearly the earth we see today is not the earth we saw even yesterday. Next the bible is written by humans not god, they write what they observe, and they observed rain, who says there wasn't a gian't flash flood of water poring over the brim? who says there wasn't a ton of earth quakes of magnitude 12 causing liquafaction...you can literaly be right above the focus of an earth quake and not even notice the water rise 200 meters....it would be almost...and unnoticable, and un-feelable. so yes for every perfect mathmatic calculation there is some crazy mother ****a like me who can come up with some crazy out there **** that can explain the un-explainable. After all the current excepted theory for atlantis is liquafication cause by an earth quake cause the island to sink.

Jcfreak_02
04-16-2004, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by eru
What's with all these stupid atheist professor stories floating around the web.

And JCFreak, please explain why the Christians thought it was right to murder hundreds of thousands of Muslims during the Crusades. :) I don't know why Christians would do that, I find the Crusades to be a dark section of our history in which many members claiming to be Christian embarked on an expedition to do completely un-Christ-like behavior in the name of Christ. It was wrong and there should be no excuse. I think I saw something a few months ago that publicly the pope denounced the Crusades. In addition, the Crusades were lead by Catholics, I am not Catholic nor do I share all the beliefs of Catholics.

Jcfreak_02
04-16-2004, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by Whingman
wow your friend disprooved the bible, good job it took us a whiel and now it's been doen right? nope...

1.
ever here of the
mitochondrial Eve’ hypothesis....
it's the finding that all modern humans can be traced back to one woman. this is a scientific finding based on MTdna (atleast i am fairly sure it is) that basically states that all humans descended form one woman. Obviously this doesn;t proove that there was only one woman alive at the time, however it does show how the human species descended from 1 woman. Clearly if 1 woman is what started off the human chain in both evolutionary and creationist theories. So unless your friend is suggesting that there were 449,999 males and 1 female at the time, which would make no difference cause you can only have 1 baby a year pretty much...meanign that whiel his calculations were really cool and its nice he spent the time, he obviously is missing soemthing.


2. 40,000 years of non stop rain? Really? how did he calculate this I suppose he looked at how much rain could fall in a day right? took that and tried to multiply it up until it reached the highest point onthe Earths surface? correct?

so lets do some adding.....

highest recorded rainfall in a day is 608 mm

608*40,000 is 24,320 meters.

But now we get into something for arguements sake that isn't proveable but needs to be considered. The Earth is in pangea form lets say....and the center is sunken...the ocean surrounds the outside the outside is built like a wall to keep the ocean from coming into the center of this earth. however, after 40 days of rain the ocean has elavated its over 80 feet obviously the water woudl creep into the center of the circal, but wiht the constant flow of water a huge level of eriosion woudl take place on the wall of this high level in the earth...as the days increase, the amount fo oceanic water that slips into the center of this good old hard Earth would exponantiely increase...until the point where it could lift the water up in this sunken center point, and cover the Earth. Other additives could be things like liquafaction which in its self could literally cause the ground to sink a huge amount..as well as create sloshy ground from the amount of water released.

Clearly you msut realise the Earth has changed over tiem weather it has changed over 10,000 years or 10 million years is another quesiton but clearly the earth we see today is not the earth we saw even yesterday. Next the bible is written by humans not god, they write what they observe, and they observed rain, who says there wasn't a gian't flash flood of water poring over the brim? who says there wasn't a ton of earth quakes of magnitude 12 causing liquafaction...you can literaly be right above the focus of an earth quake and not even notice the water rise 200 meters....it would be almost...and unnoticable, and un-feelable. so yes for every perfect mathmatic calculation there is some crazy mother ****a like me who can come up with some crazy out there **** that can explain the un-explainable. After all the current excepted theory for atlantis is liquafication cause by an earth quake cause the island to sink. Don't forget to mention theories about a water canopy that existed prior to the Flood and then fell in the form of rain and the theories about a water layer under the crust of the earth.

Whingman
04-16-2004, 10:53 AM
Originally posted by Jcfreak_02
Don't forget to mention theories about a water canopy that existed prior to the Flood and then fell in the form of rain and the theories about a water layer under the crust of the earth.

not sure waht you eman by water canopy but, as for a layer of water under the earth.....

rocks below the earth contain liquid, its called ground water. Earht quakes casue rock to release this ground water, or push it out..in many causes it can turn the gorund to mush, even cause it to sink- Liquefaction...causing the ground to become liquid.

BigKazWSM747
04-16-2004, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by Jcfreak_02
When I have more time I can answer those questions, or anyone who has taken intro to philosophy could probobly answer these questions. The quick answer to those questions, free will is why the world is so messeg up. If God doesn't exist, how did the world start? I have not yet heard how the Big Bang Theory explains the laws of entropy or of creating matter. Science does not allow for matter to just appear, but somehow, for a bang to occur matter just had to exist. We can have fun with this more.

"law of entropy" perhaps ought to be stated as "the law of a is not a." It defies the laws of non-contradiction and therefore must be false or not entirely true.

If you want to start a discussion on the creation of the universe then start another thread.

BigKazWSM747
04-16-2004, 11:03 AM
Originally posted by derekmac
If there is no God, then who is the designer behind our ordered and structured universe?

The very law of probability and thermodynamics flies in the face of evolution. Ever see a piece of machinery left to rust in a field? It does not evolve, it decays.

Take our planet for instance. The very atmosphere is the perfect combination of elements to support human and animal life. We have sufficient amounts of oxygen and sunlight, plus an adequate water supply. This was all a result of chance? Think about that for a moment. That would be like a tornado going through a junkyard and coming out with a 747 on the other end (order out of chaos).

The fool says in his heart, "There is no God".

Proving something can not be done by a line of questioning that has no real evidence to back it. It then is just a theory. I do not deny the existence of God or claim to know what he is like. I do not think, given what I know, that christianity is the correct portrait of God.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics is flawed because of its contradictions. You either have to accept the law and give up saying something is false because it contradicts itself or you give up the 2nd law of thermodynamics. IMO it is not a very difficult choice.

How many planets do we know that have life upon them outside of the earth? Zero. If the universe is infinite then there is a probability that somewhere life will arise as we are proof of and there is probably life elsewhere as well.

BigKazWSM747
04-16-2004, 11:17 AM
Originally posted by Heavily Armed
Divine interevention is rare in the doings of the world. It is usually the result of the fervent prayer of belivers. The freedom we have allows people to choose to do evil. Some seemingly flourish, for a time. Who knows the personal trials they endure? We see only the outside trappings. This world is known as Satan's kingdom. Leader's often reflect the people they lead. In many cases, we get exactly the type of leadership we deserve. God has left man to his own devices, except in the cases of divine intervention, to choose for himself. He doesn't come running to bail us out when it comes time to suffer the consequences of our actions. In a world of free will, we will suffer when evil is chosen. People die every day all over the world. It is noteworthy when people die together by the actions of one or a few.

How can you assume it (divine intervention) is rare if it is a reality? You have no way of knowing exactly how often God interfers in our lives if he in fact does. For example you may think you decided to marry a certain woman. Bbut God could just as easily have intervened making you too wed eachother as easily as he made the Egyptian pharoah refuse to free the Jews so he could further flex his mystical power over men via the plagues. Of course you won't have the "divinely inspired" scripture telling you this, but it doesn't mean it is not the case. And if during the Bible God thrusts himself into human affairs very frequently then it seems quite probable a lot would happen that was not documented.

So if God decides to allow a madman like Hitler to seize power because its his "choice" (although he doesn't seem to have a problem compromising the Pharoah's, Peter's, the Caananites', etc. choice) to punish the wicked then why does he allow the righteous to be hurt in the process. That does not have the smell of divine justice, but a rather twisted sense of justice that allows evil to create mass sin for a period that wounds both the wicked and the just.

Of course, you said the leaders reflect their people. Hitler then must have reflected all of Germany. However, it was the people that Hitler oppressed that suffered more than the Germans who elected him even after Hitler's defeat.

Poor Excuse
04-16-2004, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747

So if God decides to allow a madman like Hitler to seize power because its his "choice" (although he doesn't seem to have a problem compromising the Pharoah's, Peter's, the Caananites', etc. choice) to punish the wicked then why does he allow the righteous to be hurt in the process. That does not have the smell of divine justice, but a rather twisted sense of justice that allows evil to create mass sin for a period that wounds both the wicked and the just.

Of course, you said the leaders reflect their people. Hitler then must have reflected all of Germany. However, it was the people that Hitler oppressed that suffered more than the Germans who elected him even after Hitler's defeat.

why are you blaming god for hitler and the holocaust?.. you should blame HITLER.. maybe if he had god in his heart he would NOT have committed so many evil doings

people wanna blame God for all the wrongness in the world today.. blame the wrongdoers and the evildoers.. not God

The Kurgan
04-17-2004, 01:37 AM
I like to compare the Christian god to Big Brother out of Animal Farm- you are free, but if you disobey you're going to hell. In Christianity, it's not just deeds that god judges you on, it's your thoughts too. In Oceania (the state ruled by Big Brother) there was only one crime- Thoughtcrime. In both Christianity and Ingsoc, the thought is as bad as the deed. That's why, as well as "Do not commit Adultery" there is "Do not desire another man's wife". If my memory serves me correctly Jesus said that anger at another man is the root of violence, therfore it is just as bad. Quite an intersting analogy, I think, though it's flawed.

M_D
04-17-2004, 11:20 AM
Originally posted by derekmac
Adam and Eve did not choose evil. They were tempted by Satan, and then Eve chose to eat the fruit. That is why Satan is judged in Genesis, where God tells him that he (the snake) is cursed, and that "you will bruise his heel" (the messiah to come) but he will "crush your head" (the ultimate victory of Jesus over Satan, expressed at the Cross and ensuing resurrection).

***It was a choice though wasn't it? Eve "chose to eat the fruit", she could have also chosen not the eat the fruit. Hell, if it wasn't a free choice, then why are all of us being punished for it?

There was no stipulation that everyone would be under his power through miracle, mystery and authority, and that no one would have to suffer. Nowhere in the scriptures is this said. Satan said that he would give Jesus the kingdoms of the world in exchange for worship.

***Sorry, I'm referring to Dostoevsky's Grand Inquistor when I say miracle, mystery and authority. Basically, if he really wanted to Jesus could have performed an indisputable (spl) miracle for all of mankind to see, in order to unequivicolly prove that he was the son of God. Humanity would then follow him unquestionably, but Jesus didn't want faith based on a miracle, but rather from a free choice.

This world contains evil as a result of the fall of man in the garden. This nature has been passed on to every human being since. It is written, "There is no one who does right, not even one" "We are like sheep that has gone astray, and God has laid upon him the iniquity of us all".

***I'm not sure what you're trying to say? God created humans with a nature to be evil? Why would a good God do that? Unless God actually created humans with free will, which subsequently leads us to make evil choices some of the time.

Being "born again" means that a person puts their faith in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sin alone. As a result, God's spirit comes to live in that person's heart, so that they are transformed, slowly, but surely, into the image of Christ (i.e., becoming a christian "little Christ" ) It does not mean one is perfect, but it menas that you have been redeemed by the shed blood of Christ, since "Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sin"

***makes no sense to me. So does being "born again" mean we still have free will in Heaven? But Heaven is a perfect place with no moral evil, and free will entails that we choose evil at least some of the time. Unless God some how creates a stipulation in Heaven were all of our "free choices" are going to be good. If this is the case, the whole process of getting into Heaven seems stupid and absurd. Why wouldn't an all good God just create that same stipulation in the real world?

People sin because it is in their very nature to sin. True, you can choose to do good, but we all have the bent toward evil, to be selfish, and to put our needs ahead of our fellow mans and the will of God.

***Saying that we are "bent" towards evil doesn't make a whole lot of sense when considering our Creator is supposedly all good.

BigKazWSM747
04-17-2004, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by Poor Excuse
why are you blaming god for hitler and the holocaust?.. you should blame HITLER.. maybe if he had god in his heart he would NOT have committed so many evil doings

people wanna blame God for all the wrongness in the world today.. blame the wrongdoers and the evildoers.. not God

I am not blaming God. But I am saying it divine intervention is true then it is likely a frequent occurence and then why in the hell wouldn't God have stopped Hitler since all the things he did were much worse than making the Israelites lose a battle because the troops, who were supposed to be fasting, went out and ate the canaanites meat after they took over their camp.

Heavily Armed
04-18-2004, 06:51 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
How can you assume it (divine intervention) is rare if it is a reality? You have no way of knowing exactly how often God interfers in our lives if he in fact does. For example you may think you decided to marry a certain woman. Bbut God could just as easily have intervened making you too wed eachother as easily as he made the Egyptian pharoah refuse to free the Jews so he could further flex his mystical power over men via the plagues. Of course you won't have the "divinely inspired" scripture telling you this, but it doesn't mean it is not the case. And if during the Bible God thrusts himself into human affairs very frequently then it seems quite probable a lot would happen that was not documented.

So if God decides to allow a madman like Hitler to seize power because its his "choice" (although he doesn't seem to have a problem compromising the Pharoah's, Peter's, the Caananites', etc. choice) to punish the wicked then why does he allow the righteous to be hurt in the process. That does not have the smell of divine justice, but a rather twisted sense of justice that allows evil to create mass sin for a period that wounds both the wicked and the just.

Of course, you said the leaders reflect their people. Hitler then must have reflected all of Germany. However, it was the people that Hitler oppressed that suffered more than the Germans who elected him even after Hitler's defeat.

Your examples where of a world-changing nature. Indeed it's true, we can't know how often God intevenes. A supernatural intervention would most easily recognized. Such "miracles", whether they be healing or something else, are still scoffed at by non-believers. You ask why people like Hitler are allowed to come to power? That's a finite mind trying to discern the plans and motivations of the infinite. How many possible others have there been, like Hitler or worse, that have been thwarted?

There's no Biblical guarantee that life will be just or fair. The presence of evil guarantees the opposite. Evil is a choice, one that's popular.

BigKazWSM747
04-18-2004, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by Heavily Armed
Your examples where of a world-changing nature. Indeed it's true, we can't know how often God intevenes. A supernatural intervention would most easily recognized. Such "miracles", whether they be healing or something else, are still scoffed at by non-believers. You ask why people like Hitler are allowed to come to power? That's a finite mind trying to discern the plans and motivations of the infinite. How many possible others have there been, like Hitler or worse, that have been thwarted?

There's no Biblical guarantee that life will be just or fair. The presence of evil guarantees the opposite. Evil is a choice, one that's popular.

You compare God's actions almost like those of a human's, picking and choosing. However, for a being that is supposed to represent absolutes I don't find that answer very assuring and find it fallacious.

Heavily Armed
04-19-2004, 11:29 AM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
You compare God's actions almost like those of a human's, picking and choosing. However, for a being that is supposed to represent absolutes I don't find that answer very assuring and find it fallacious.

Who can know the mind of God? Are you or I omnipotent? Whether or not we can understand all of His decisions or fathom His motivations in their entirety does not detract from His sovereignty. This merely points to the limits of our minds by comparison. His rules go. You don't have to agree. But by His standards we will be judged.

honeybbqgrundle
04-19-2004, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by The Kurgan
I like to compare the Christian god to Big Brother out of Animal Farm

U mean 1984. Animal Farm is just like his version of 1984 with animals, thus making it better because it has talking animals. Interesting analogy though.

BigKazWSM747
04-19-2004, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by Heavily Armed
Who can know the mind of God? Are you or I omnipotent? Whether or not we can understand all of His decisions or fathom His motivations in their entirety does not detract from His sovereignty. This merely points to the limits of our minds by comparison. His rules go. You don't have to agree. But by His standards we will be judged.

I don't have to have the mind of God to see basic fundamental problems with the concept of free will and coupling it with divine intervention, along with the idea that God is totally good and pure.

Heavily Armed
04-19-2004, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
I don't have to have the mind of God to see basic fundamental problems with the concept of free will and coupling it with divine intervention, along with the idea that God is totally good and pure.

While I see no problem at all. The filter of our personal beliefs make all the difference in the world. You accept that which fits within your understanding. I accept there are higher things and powers beyond my understanding. The same subject seen from different viewpoints.

Poor Excuse
04-21-2004, 04:16 PM
yup that professor got officially OWNED

Kane Fan
04-22-2004, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by The Kurgan
The Student's arguement isn't very strong, though.

it's as strong as the professors argument
wich is why it's perfect
it illistrates how weak the professors argument was

Kane Fan
04-22-2004, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
You can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a God. The student does not answer the question of an all-powerful and totally good god and then why is the world the way it is today.

Also evolution has evidence to support it, a vast amount of evidence. The professor having a brain has a vast amount of evidence to support that statement as well.

god has evidence to support his existance as well tho
the big bag theory is as weak as Religious theory
I mean compare them
Science: ok there was nothing, then bang there was something
Religion: ok there was nothing but god, then god said hey I'mb ored I want something and bang there was something

besides evidence does not equal proof
proof equals proof
so there is no proof in evilution, the professor having a brain (scientifically) or gods existance
so the argument goes well because it illistrates how weak the professors case was
also, the problem with science is it thinks if it offers any evidence to the contrary of a book writen about a religion, then it has countered the entirety of the religion
that's simply not the case

Kane Fan
04-22-2004, 11:44 AM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
The student's arguement is weak in defending how God can be all good despite how the world is (weak is an understatement he doesn't address it). Also the way the student argues is fairly superficial imo it doesn't get down into any of the nitty grity.

again, the argument countered the professors argument perfectly cus it illistrated how weak the proffessors arguemnt was
also, youc an't ask someon to quantify someone ELSE'S morals
that's idiotic and the professor should have known better in the first place and so should you

The Kurgan
04-22-2004, 02:14 PM
It's an interesting link between Judaic faiths and Greek paganism...

In both religions, the chief God (or in the Judaic faiths, the ONLY Gods) create mankind in their image... And in both cases don't get it quite right (in Greek pagan stories, we're the third attempt, and still not in tune).

It's fascinating how different faiths can be compared, even to a Humanist.

BigKazWSM747
04-22-2004, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by Kane Fan
god has evidence to support his existance as well tho
the big bag theory is as weak as Religious theory
I mean compare them
Science: ok there was nothing, then bang there was something
Religion: ok there was nothing but god, then god said hey I'mb ored I want something and bang there was something

besides evidence does not equal proof
proof equals proof
so there is no proof in evilution, the professor having a brain (scientifically) or gods existance
so the argument goes well because it illistrates how weak the professors case was
also, the problem with science is it thinks if it offers any evidence to the contrary of a book writen about a religion, then it has countered the entirety of the religion
that's simply not the case

If 2 arguements are weak it doesn't change that both are weak, and so simply because you like one alternative doesn't mean its true.

BigKazWSM747
04-22-2004, 02:33 PM
Originally posted by Kane Fan
again, the argument countered the professors argument perfectly cus it illistrated how weak the proffessors arguemnt was
also, youc an't ask someon to quantify someone ELSE'S morals
that's idiotic and the professor should have known better in the first place and so should you

No, I could very easily have beaten the student from the professors argument, its just either they did not show his reponse or he didn't even logically look at the students.

BIONIC MAN
04-24-2004, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by Jimineye
Explain please on why the argument is weak. If you are referring the fact about the brain of the professor, the student directed his argument to the class asking if they personally have seen the professors brain. If the students have touched the professors brain, smelled it, heard it, or tasted it. If they haven't done any of those things on a personal basis, then they have to rely on faith that the professor has a brain. big bump but the professor probably had never tasted his brain either so through faith he thought he had one.