Print

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

I am religious and believe in free will

71 (27.7%)

I am religious and do not believe in free will

10 (3.9%)

I am not religious and believe in free will

114 (44.5%)

I am not religious and do not believe in free will

61 (23.8%)

Total Members Voted: 251

[wierd]

God works with "perfect, total knowledge"-- Wouldnt it make sense for him to try and convey "Perfect, total knowledge" to his children?

Your question could be recast as an ad-absurdium like this:

Why do I need to know the nuances of mathematical proofs, when 1+1=2 is obvious enough?

(and your spoilerized religiously dogmatic screed written by others is just the more populist rehash of the actual source. I am not an adherent of this religion, being agnostic. I simply have read the bible, and its attendant literature (apocrypha). It is quite clear that god uses suffering as a correctional/educational tool-- including death.  In my example, I used being raped and mugged to death-- a pretty grisly end--  but the bible says that the purpetrators of such acts get taught the other end of the lesson 7-fold after judgement, and having to face their accusers.  Dead men really DO tell tales in this case-- Perfectly.)

[origamiscienceguy]

God didn't cause disease or death, that was Adam and Eve back in the garden of Eden (and Satan too)

They may have triggered it, but they certainly didn't set the trap, and they weren't equiped with the tools to detect it. It is a meaningless choice if you are not aware of the consequences, might as well throw a coin.
Allowing the existence of bad choices isn't required for "free will", you can still have meaningful choices even if all of them are perfectly good choices. Unavoidable disasters dont "improve" free will but terminates it. It is clear that god didn't give either Adam or myself every choice possible, since we aint omnipotent or omniscient, so he's quite confortable with limiting free will. There isn't a benevolent reason for god to allow the bad choices of some people to doom some innocents, or even the totality of mankind.

Why, in this universe created by an all powerfull and absolutely benevolent god, the selfish, ignorant, or evil choices of some people more often than not have worse consequences for innocent people than for the sinners themselves?

Will we not have free will in paradise? Is it as shity as here? Or only those who never make wrong choices get in there?

Are you saying that you have never done anything wrong? Because unless you have, you are just as guilty as Adam and Eve.

3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

It's details like this which sometimes make me wish I believed, because God is so often written as a villain being set up to be defeated.

Edit: If only we had a hero like Prometheus, to steal the fruit as he stole the secret of fire.

Look at it this way: If God had truly wanted Adam and Eve not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge, why did He put it there in the first place?

I'm gonna say passive-aggression

Can I have some references that back up this claim?

It can also be explained the way the bible tries to explain it allegorically-- 

That the benevolence of the divine is not easily understood (Things seem adversarial to humans, but are actually intended for a benevolent purpose) by humans.

The allegory is "Parent instructing child"--  While falling out of favor today, spanking is the physical bottom slapping of a petulant child, for the purposes of correcting behavior until they are old enough to understand why something is not acceptable to do, to prevent them from falling into a pattern of behavior (and also to train them down a different pattern of behavior that is in their best interests,)  Ask any little kid who gets a spanking though-- Mommy and daddy are big meanies who wont let them get their way.

God tries to instruct humanity, and also tries to instruct individual humans. He has a purpose for this instruction, and this instruction can take the form of destructive actions.  The "omni-benevolence" that humans idealize, optimizes human petulance, not human benefit. Naturally, a truly benevolent god would not behave this way, lest his creations run totally rampant.

Even in more modern parenting approaches, ask the bratty kid how he/she feels about time-outs, or having their toys/privs taken away.  The kid's view of what a benevolent parent would be, would be one where mommy and daddy give them cookies and icecream whenever they want, they never have to clean their room, and they never get punished for anything.

As adults, we like to try to think that we understand things-- but one look at global politics, how we treat the global climate--- hell, ANYTHING related to the public commons, and we clearly get schooled about how we DONT understand things, and as a group, expect cookies and icecream all the time.

The christian god claims to have humanity's total best interests in mind, which is why he chastises with a rod of iron. Quite literally, the bible has that exact message repeated many times.


From what I have been able to determine after reading this particular set of religious texts, the purpose for which humanity was created was NOT blind supplication; god already had angels for that purpose. Rather, it was an attempt at procreation. Something literally LIKE himself.  Allegorically, humans are like gods, when measured against other animal forms here on earth. We can literally tear down mountains into rubble, we can make fertile lands desolate for millenia with atomic bombs-- we can even create new lifeforms these days.   This appears to be purposeful, and expected. As the christ put it, "The son does as the father does", paraphrased.  God created lifeforms, we seem compelled to do so as well, within our more limited capacities.  Rather, the christian god has always existed, and we have a moment in which we begin existence. As such, we are not blessed from birth with perfect omniscience, and so we cannot make perfect choices, and as a race, we are POWERFULLY destructive.  Since the goal is to ultimately MAKE us into immortal, much more powerful beings later, the avenues of education are not limited to "Do this or else!"-- but also includes "See what happened to you when Robert mugged and raped you to death in that alley? He overpowered you without even a thought for your concern. Now you understand, directly, why this is evil."  etc.  Remember, death is not an obstacle to god, and is thus as good a teaching tool as any other. 

Again, difference of opinion on what "Omni benevolence" means.

Can I have references that back up this claim as well? Because God doesn't need to procreate, and Angels are prone to sin just like us.

[Bohandas]

It can also be explained the way the bible tries to explain it allegorically-- 

That the benevolence of the divine is not easily understood (Things seem adversarial to humans, but are actually intended for a benevolent purpose) by humans.

The allegory is "Parent instructing child"--  While falling out of favor today, spanking is the physical bottom slapping of a petulant child, for the purposes of correcting behavior until they are old enough to understand why something is not acceptable to do, to prevent them from falling into a pattern of behavior (and also to train them down a different pattern of behavior that is in their best interests,)  Ask any little kid who gets a spanking though-- Mommy and daddy are big meanies who wont let them get their way.

God tries to instruct humanity, and also tries to instruct individual humans. He has a purpose for this instruction, and this instruction can take the form of destructive actions.  The "omni-benevolence" that humans idealize, optimizes human petulance, not human benefit. Naturally, a truly benevolent god would not behave this way, lest his creations run totally rampant.

Even in more modern parenting approaches, ask the bratty kid how he/she feels about time-outs, or having their toys/privs taken away.  The kid's view of what a benevolent parent would be, would be one where mommy and daddy give them cookies and icecream whenever they want, they never have to clean their room, and they never get punished for anything.

As adults, we like to try to think that we understand things-- but one look at global politics, how we treat the global climate--- hell, ANYTHING related to the public commons, and we clearly get schooled about how we DONT understand things, and as a group, expect cookies and icecream all the time.

The christian god claims to have humanity's total best interests in mind, which is why he chastises with a rod of iron. Quite literally, the bible has that exact message repeated many times.

But isn't the finitude of the public commons an aspect of creation?

In a truly ideal world this would all be a moot point because resoirces would be unlimited and byproducts would be dispersed without limit.

[Angle]

Arx posted this in the progressive discussion thread, and I just have to argue with him, (Don't judge me!) so here we go.

Do those who formed this law not know how stupid that sounds? Does the Christian faith not teach that you should love thy enemy, hate the sin but not the sinner, and that god is the only one who can judge? What.... what complete and utter bullshit.

The Christian faith teaches that man whom lies with main is an abomination, to confront sin wherever it may be found, and to live in the righteousness of God's will. Hippie Jesus is kind of a weak position to take.

The Christian faith teaches that the greatest commandment is to love God and the second greatest is to love your neighbour as yourself. The Christian faith teaches that only a sinless person may judge and condemn others. The Christian faith teaches that true religion that is pure and faultless in the eyes of God is to help those in need. The Christian faith teaches that homosexuality is no worse a sin than calling someone a fool.

There is no Biblical justification for this law. Please don't make it sound like Christianity is at fault here. The problem is with bigots, it's just a justification.

The trouble here, is that while your particular interpretation may read like that, other peoples will differ. And then what do you do? When smeone tries to use science to justify bullshit, like "Homosexuality is unnatural because it doesn't result in pregnancy!" You can beat them with science. You can reply with "Human pair bonding is about more than reproduction," and "Same sex pair bonding provides benefits to society", and you can throw peer reviewed papers at them, until either they give the whole idea up or they stick their fingers in their ears and start screaming "I can't hear you! LA LA LA LA LA LA!", and because relatively few people are prepared to do that, you can pretty effectively marginalize such opinions. But when it comes to faith, you have no such recourse. They can just say "Well I have Faith" and that just ends any meaningful discussion. You're basically reduced to saying "Well I have More Faith.", which is clearly not an effective argument.

[Arx]

Christianity is defined by the Bible. It's not a question of me having More Faith, it's a question of people either agreeing with the Bible or being wrong. You cannot claim to be a Christian and not do what the Bible says.

If someone wants to discriminate against gay people, they are violating several pretty fundamental tenets from the Bible. Unless they are literally Jesus returned, that makes them not acting in accordance with Christianity.

[Rolan7]

Okay, so if all sins are equal in the eyes of God...  and homosexuality is no worse than calling someone a fool...  murder is also akin to calling someone a fool?

I understand that even the most "minor" sin is supposed to keep someone out of heaven, that's why we have to have to let Jesus take the sin.  The message is still clear though: God will not abide homosexuality in his presence.  It's still wrong, supposedly.  And while some passages warn Christians against judging others, many more passages warn them not to *associate* with sinners.  Better to "cut off your hand" then let it spread its sinful ways to the rest of your body (AKA, community).

Jesus said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."  People interpret that as "Don't throw stones."  But if you think about it, it means "I'll deal with her myself."  And sure enough he forgave her, this time, but he also told her "Don't sin anymore."  And, wow, went on to say this:

8:15 Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.
8:16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.

"I don't judge people.  But when I do judge people, I'm right because God is with me."

That kinda sets a precedent for certain types of Christians, thinking they're being guided by God, to judge people.  If God is with you, you can judge sinners...  But it's not really you judging them, it's God, just like Jesus didn't judge.

Besides that, the people who want to protect children from sinful influences like non-traditional relationships, or women who are more than slaves to their men, are Biblically *in the right*.  Just because all sin is equally 100% deadly doesn't mean it's ever okay, or that you should let young people believe it's okay. 

(Though I think there are Christians who don't even try to avoid sin, since the forgiveness is absolute anyway...  I consider that to be in bad faith though, not sure if it would really count.)

People need to know what's in the Bible and decide whether it's something they really support...

3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

Christianity is defined by the Bible. It's not a question of me having More Faith, it's a question of people either agreeing with the Bible or being wrong. You cannot claim to be a Christian and not do what the Bible says.

If someone wants to discriminate against gay people, they are violating several pretty fundamental tenets from the Bible. Unless they are literally Jesus returned, that makes them not acting in accordance with Christianity.

The most reasonable Christians recognize that the Bible is heavily allegorical and probably largely corrupted, and just try to live like (the common conception of) Jesus.  Biblical Jesus wasn't so great.

[Angle]

But those fundamental tenets are completely open to interpretation, which means they're hardly fundamental at all, as evidenced by all the people who believe differently. Indeed, on this matter, I'm pretty sure that you're in a minority, albeit a quickly growing one.

[lemon10]

But those fundamental tenets are completely open to interpretation, which means they're hardly fundamental at all, as evidenced by all the people who believe differently. Indeed, on this matter, I'm pretty sure that you're in a minority, albeit a quickly growing one.

It is, after all, homoSEXuality. I want to know what right do the politically correct, pro-homosexual minority have to impose their values on the majority? What right do they have to condemn Christians, call us names (homophobes, bigots, etc), and be so very intolerant when we say their behavior is a sinful?

Wow. That dude is just crazy. "How dare they call us mean names when we are trying to take away their rights?"

[TD1]

Christianity is defined by the Bible. It's not a question of me having More Faith, it's a question of people either agreeing with the Bible or being wrong. You cannot claim to be a Christian and not do what the Bible says.

If someone wants to discriminate against gay people, they are violating several pretty fundamental tenets from the Bible. Unless they are literally Jesus returned, that makes them not acting in accordance with Christianity.

Ah, okay. Just next time I look at a city being destroyed by you don't take my life in salt.

[Orange Wizard]

Biblical Jesus wasn't so great.

Biblical Jesus spent most of his time telling people to be nice to each other, though. That was pretty much the point of his ministry.

if all sins are equal in the eyes of God...

They're not. The origin of that phrase comes from the idea that anything less than perfection is inadmissible to God, not that being gay is literally as bad as Hitler.

(Though I think there are Christians who don't even try to avoid sin, since the forgiveness is absolute anyway...  I consider that to be in bad faith though, not sure if it would really count.)

Yeah, pretty much everyone else agrees with you there. It's missing the point of forgiveness - you actually have to be sorry about it.

Christianity is defined by the Bible. It's not a question of me having More Faith, it's a question of people either agreeing with the Bible or being wrong. You cannot claim to be a Christian and not do what the Bible says.

If someone wants to discriminate against gay people, they are violating several pretty fundamental tenets from the Bible. Unless they are literally Jesus returned, that makes them not acting in accordance with Christianity.

Ah, okay. Just next time I look at a city being destroyed by you don't take my life in salt.

To expand on Arx's point, not discriminating against them doesn't preclude thinking that what they're doing is wrong. We shouldn't discriminate against people who don't go to church, either.

[Rolan7]

Sorry for ranting a bit, by the way.  I really ought to take time to make my arguments more carefully and less... harsh.  I just get excited to see the thread moving and I need to hop in right away!  I hope I didn't offend anyone too much.

For what it's worth, I think that if Jesus did exist then he was a truly kind and amazing person.  Biblical evidence to the contrary generally has possible political motivation.
(And if he didn't exist *exactly*, then his story is based on *several* remarkably good people)

[Askot Bokbondeler]

If someone wants to discriminate against gay people, they are violating several pretty fundamental tenets from the Bible. Unless they are literally Jesus returned, that makes them not acting in accordance with Christianity.

given that the book contradicts itself, being a cristian is effectively impossible then

Are you saying that you have never done anything wrong? Because unless you have, you are just as guilty as Adam and Eve.

if everyone is equaly guilty wouldn't morality be meaningless? or are you saying that when people are taken by an "act of god" they're being punished for their sins?
tbh, if god does really exist, then yes, i never did nothing wrong, he did all of it. I only took the choices he permited me to take with the information he alowed me to have, and under the influence of the emotions he built into my personality.

Can you blame a psychopath for being selfish if his brain is malformed and he is missing the structure that allows him to feel empathy?
Do you think that it's his soul that is flawed and the brain has a different biological function, taking no part in decision makin'?
Who made his soul\brain so flawed?


Also, i've always felt annoyed by the teaching god theory, as i think the flaws in it are quite obvious. A "good" parent punishes its child to teach him how to live in a cruel world he took no part in designing and can't realistically expect to protect him from, god designed humans imperfectly to maneuvre the death maze he set up for them. An eternal and all powerful loving parent would have no reason to teach it's children to stant up in two legs, cope with pain and loss, or overcome obstacles, he could simply *make him know* what he needs to learn and build him a good house where he needen't fear anything. This would interfere with free will though, maximizing it.


FakeEd: i haven't read the last 6 replies, sorry if the conversation moved on or i'm repeating somming

[origamiscienceguy]

If someone wants to discriminate against gay people, they are violating several pretty fundamental tenets from the Bible. Unless they are literally Jesus returned, that makes them not acting in accordance with Christianity.

given that the book contradicts itself, being a cristian is effectively impossible then

Are you saying that you have never done anything wrong? Because unless you have, you are just as guilty as Adam and Eve.

if everyone is equaly guilty wouldn't morality be meaningless? or are you saying that when people are taken by an "act of god" they're being punished for their sins?
tbh, if god does really exist, then yes, i never did nothing wrong, he did all of it. I only took the choices he permited me to take with the information he alowed me to have, and under the influence of the emotions he built into my personality.

Can you blame a psychopath for being selfish if his brain is malformed and he is missing the structure that allows him to feel empathy?
Do you think that it's his soul that is flawed and the brain has a different biological function, taking no part in decision makin'?
Who made his soul\brain so flawed?


Also, i've always felt annoyed by the teaching god theory, as i think the flaws in it are quite obvious. A "good" parent punishes its child to teach him how to live in a cruel world he took no part in designing and can't realistically expect to protect him from, god designed humans imperfectly to maneuvre the death maze he set up for them. An eternal and all powerful loving parent would have no reason to teach it's children to stant up in two legs, cope with pain and loss, or overcome obstacles, he could simply *make him know* what he needs to learn and build him a good house where he needen't fear anything. This would interfere with free will though, maximizing it.


FakeEd: i haven't read the last 6 replies, sorry if the conversation moved on or i'm repeating somming

If Christians discriminate against Gays, they are sinning. This doesn't make them a christian anymore, it just proves that we are not perfect.

[Frumple]

Christianity is defined by the Bible. It's not a question of me having More Faith, it's a question of people either agreeing with the Bible or being wrong. You cannot claim to be a Christian and not do what the Bible says.

... christianity is, and always has been, defined by the church(es). What the bible itself is, was defined by the church at the time. That they primarily use the bible as the foundation for that definition -- which is not, as wierd likes to point out, even the whole of the original texts -- is incidental. A holy text does not make a religion -- a religion makes a holy text. Christians act contrary to the biblical texts all the ruddy time and still claim to be christian. Still are christian, both to themselves, many other people of the general belief system, and most certainly to those who aren't either. Plenty denominations outright ignore or de-canonize (in respect to their congregation, anyway) parts of text entirely, or interpret it to mean things that are radically different -- often outright contradictory -- from what other groups do.

As incredibly nice as it would be to no-true-scotsman away the troublesome members of the belief system, it really doesn't work like that. Especially when significant portions of said belief system are such people. When it comes to things like holy texts, you just... can't really say someone else's interpretation of it is wrong. The texts are what is made of them. They generally are written such that they can't stand on their own.

[Arcvasti]

If someone wants to discriminate against gay people, they are violating several pretty fundamental tenets from the Bible. Unless they are literally Jesus returned, that makes them not acting in accordance with Christianity.

given that the book contradicts itself, being a cristian is effectively impossible then

Luckily there is a priority system.

36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

In this case, "Homosexuality is bad" is overrided with "Don't be a douche"[<-Paraphrased]. If you're supposed to be accepting of the people who are actively harming you, I don't really see why you shouldn't be accepting of the people who aren't, but are being sinful in some abstract way no one's been able to explain satisfactorily to me.