Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

No

Only Judeism

Only Islam

Yes to both Judeism and Islam

[BFEL]

What is your response to the Christians who believe in annihilation, not hell? Also, when you say

Which I would like to point out that its not "love" to torture someone who didn't commit the crime to death instead of eternally torturing the ones who...ALSO didn't commit the crime... Its psychopathy.

Are you referring to the crucifixion?

Just a couple of points that I picked up on that I thought could use clarification.

1. I didn't even know that's a thing. Sounds like a very quiet minority to me.

2. Yes I'm referring to the crucifixion. The "Jesus died for your sins" thing. Even though the particular one he died for wasn't actually committed by anyone alive at the time and was basically the most popular sibling taking daddy's drunken beating for his other siblings. I see no reason to thank God for something his son did to DIRECTLY OPPOSE HIM.

nananananananana TEXT WALL

So if God permeates the entirety of the universe and physical and moral laws exist as an extension of him, along with all matter and energy, doesn't this mean that humanity is thus divine and defines the shape of God? If everything is a reflection of God then a change in one part of the reflection is a change in God, correct?

[Frumple]

Ooh, ooh, that last bit is only if God is temporal. God as outside time is a very normal conceptualization, and omnitemporality is a very normal extension of the omnipresent thing. There is no change in God because God is all things at all times, and all that. So it's not really a change in the nature of God so much as a further revelation of the nature of Its existence.

Which yeah, kicks free will right in the arse but what can you do *cheerful shrug*

[BFEL]

Which yeah, kicks free will right in the arse but what can you do *cheerful shrug*

Not believe in things that contradict themselves?
Or alternately take it as your will being an extension of that omnitemporal will and thus capable of pulling Doctor Who shenanigans with causality.

But yeah, so if humanity accidentally destroys the universe then God is revealed as suicidal? Good to know.

[freeformschooler]

But yeah, so if humanity accidentally destroys the universe then God is revealed as suicidal? Good to know.

This is old news. The God of Pantheism dies at heat death.

[Loam]

A) The trinity isn't common to all chrisistanity.

Well, to the vast majority. It's certainly not a throw-away belief, at any rate.

B) A bit sad that he didn't share that info with everyone that killed in his name.

He did - through reason, natural moral law, etc. The sad thing is that no one listened.

God would disappear as well. My view is Panentheism, in which God at once transcends and pervades Creation.

Like a dwarf fortress player to dwarf fortress, got it.

Sort of, if you also made up the code by which the dwarves live and breathe and have their being.

In modern-ish terms, it's basically saying that God is the atomic structure of reality. Mind you, it'd probably be something quantum these days, but that's basically it.

Er, not really. God is in everything, but also transcends everything. I explained it very poorly, I'm afraid. I am unfamiliar with "Christian Materialism" but I can assure you that is not what I'm talking about at all.

Interesting. can you refer to further reading material about:

A) Sin is nothingness and nothingness is Sin.

B) That the "Natural order" you are speaking of and that is in the path of god and into god, is in fact a preexisting, predetermined godly manifested order and not men made order (When speaking about a moral order) and if such a godly manifested order has been established how can we, mortal men, know how to follow it if it keeps changing (If you are a Christian, then you are following certain laws that are attributed to Jesus yet are in conflict with Jewish laws, despite the christianity and Jesus acceptance of Moses as a true prophet.)

I take from many sources - Aquinas, Augustine, Chesterton, Lewis, and many more besides - but forget where I picked up what. However, I will tell you that I phrased (A) very poorly.

A is actually sin as an absence (of god), if you want to be particular

This is more what I meant. Sin isn't a "thing" that you "do": it's a "nothing" that you "not-do," or an absence of action. You don't murder someone, you fail to respect their right to life.
As for (B), the law has always been the same. The salvific quality of Mosaic law is... suspect in Christianity (fundamentalists notwithstanding). That's a terse answer, I realize, but you can probably find a more in-depth explanation in writings of early Church fathers.

So if God permeates the entirety of the universe and physical and moral laws exist as an extension of him, along with all matter and energy, doesn't this mean that humanity is thus divine and defines the shape of God? If everything is a reflection of God then a change in one part of the reflection is a change in God, correct?

If you look in a cracked mirror, will you crack?
In a sense, the universe (and hence humanity) is "divine." But it is not God - God is not made up out of the universe, that would be pantheism which I explicitly stated was not what I was referring to. The universe does not define God, God defines the universe.
Another insufficient analogy to help explain what I mean: Creation is to God as organisms are to the planet Earth. They are, in one way, a part of Earth (ecosystems etc.) and they rely on it for their existence; but they are not necessary to it - the Earth was here long before life arose, and may be here long after all that life dies.
Obviously the big flaw here is that, if life was gone the Earth would be substantially different from what it is, while God would be completely the same even if the universe blinked out of existence, but hopefully you get the point.

[penguinofhonor]

How does non-sin suffering fit into this? How do hurricanes, stillbirths, and ebola reflect God's nature?

[BFEL]

the Earth was here long before life arose, and may be here long after all that life dies.

Or alternatively, humanity may discover space travel, colonize new worlds and outlive the Earth. Also possible.

[Phmcw]

Well, to the vast majority. It's certainly not a throw-away belief, at any rate.

You wouldn't believe the number of catholic I met that don't belive in the trinity. Ofc most of them don't recognize the pope as the representative of god on earth. I guess tradition and culture is the only reason why they still call themselves catholic.

He did - through reason, natural moral law, etc.

Then they'd be atheist/agnostic. But faith is a pillar of catholicism.

Sort of, if you also made up the code by which the dwarves live and breathe and have their being.

God is the player, the Toady one and the holly computer. His Name is Armok, which mean "the one that have arms". Dwarven scholars are still divided on thee meaning of this name. Literally, too, since heretics has been chopped in two by both side in the great holly war of 543-739. -- The divine question -- A zebra leather-bound book in the librairies of failedgreaves, written by Urist Mc scholar, Dwarf fortress 1.2

[Frumple]

Er, not really. God is in everything, but also transcends everything. I explained it very poorly, I'm afraid. I am unfamiliar with "Christian Materialism" but I can assure you that is not what I'm talking about at all.

Nah, it's got some other name (well, probably a good half dozen or whatev', but that's how it goes) -- christian materialism is just what I call it. What I'm talking about is exactly what you're talking about, just stripped of some of the religious language

Iirc, the tradition ultimately defines god as "the most fundamental good" -- that good which enables all other goods (and, in being enabled thusly, said goods become of god). Which is, as noted, bare faced raw existence -- material existence. That which defines all other things, which they cannot exist without. That which is not, is not, et al, and that which is, is of god (existence). I AM that I AM, etc., etc. Reality is of god, and god is of reality, but god is also beyond reality (transcendent) because more can (conceptually, anyway) exist than what does. More or less, both the manifestation and non-manifestation of the platonic ideal of existence. It ends up boiling down to materialism, though, because only what is, is :3

That's why it's a hoot, heh.

[Loam]

Or alternatively, humanity may discover space travel, colonize new worlds and outlive the Earth. Also possible.

We can only hope.

How does non-sin suffering fit into this? How do hurricanes, stillbirths, and ebola reflect God's nature?

I'll be honest with you, I don't have a quick-and-dirty answer that won't make God seem utterly awful. I advise reading some Christian writers on that subject, because I know someone has covered it: you don't go 2,000 years and not confront such an obvious criticism.
I believe the consensus is that it's wrapped up in the Fall. Humans were meant to be the stewards of Creation - essentially, the universe was given to them to care for and enjoy, like a child gifted with a new pet. When they failed and fell (whatever that consisted of, which was almost certainly not fruit-related) then Creation fell with them, and things which weren't meant to happen started happening.
I really don't want to get into why God doesn't (apparently) step in to stop these things, because that's another text wall of metaphysics and hair-splitting about human time vs. God's time and shit like that; and considering how confusing and poorly-rendered my last text wall was that might be a bad idea. Suffice it to say, for the moment, that He did step in at the Crucifixion, which created the New Earth where these things don't happen.
I'm not absolutely thrilled by the idea either; it's a subject I need to look into more.

You wouldn't believe the number of catholic I met that don't belive in the trinity. Ofc most of them don't recognize the pope as the representative of god on earth. I guess tradition and culture is the only reason why they still call themselves catholic.

Oh, you're talking about individuals. I was referring to denominations: Trinity is an official tenet of most Christian faiths.

snip

Neo-Platonism? Which is also not what I'm talking about.

[Orange Wizard]

I don't really have anything to contribute to this discussion, but I am enjoying reading it.
I would also like to praise you all on keeping it civil.

God is the player, the Toady one and the holly computer. His Name is Armok, which mean "the one that have arms". Dwarven scholars are still divided on thee meaning of this name. Literally, too, since heretics has been chopped in two by both side in the great holly war of 543-739. -- The divine question -- A zebra leather-bound book in the librairies of failedgreaves, written by Urist Mc scholar, Dwarf fortress 1.2

This is amazing, by the way.

[Frumple]

Nah, platonic theology (neo or otherwise) is something else. It's just really easy to describe the concept in relation to platonic ideals, because that's more or less what the folks were describing, even though they were calling it other stuff. Seriously, god as a thing both in existence and beyond existence is straight up the description of a platonic ideal -- a thing that both manifests in reality and has a perfected/complete form outside of it.

The theologians that headed the stuff you're talking about definitely didn't put it in the same terms I've been, but their implications were somewhat deliciously obvious. Is why I enjoy it so :3

[Phmcw]

Also, why the hell have eveyone stopped burning animal in the name of god. He's happy with the bones, skull, etc, and is adamant that he love the smell. It's in the same book as the main condemnation of homosexuality.

[burningpet]

This is more what I meant. Sin isn't a "thing" that you "do": it's a "nothing" that you "not-do," or an absence of action. You don't murder someone, you fail to respect their right to life.
As for (B), the law has always been the same. The salvific quality of Mosaic law is... suspect in Christianity (fundamentalists notwithstanding). That's a terse answer, I realize, but you can probably find a more in-depth explanation in writings of early Church fathers.

What if i see a man pointing a gun to a random good individual, about to shoot him, and its apparent that a dialogue wont do any good nor delay the execution and i got a gun. does shooting the potential killer means i fail to respect his right to life and therefor i am a sinner? does not shooting him means i fail to respect the potential victim right to life and therefor i am as just a sinner?

What if i see a boulder rolling in the direction of some good random guy and by jumping to its path, i can save that poor lad life on the expense of my own. am i a sinner by not jumping to its path? (Failing to respect their right to life) am i a sinner by jumping to its path? (Failing to respect my right to life)

What if some pedophile serial killer just got killed by one of its victim's dad and upon hearing about it i was extremely happy because from my perspective, he had no right to continue living. is the Dad just as a sinner as the pedophile? am i just as sinner as the dad because i wished that pedophile to be dead?

What if my boss extremely annoyed me and i wished with all my heart that he'd get run by a truck. am i a sinner?

[penguinofhonor]

The theologians that headed the stuff you're talking about definitely didn't put it in the same terms I've been

Maybe because they weren't using the concepts to create ridiculous strawmen?