asaris

It's been gone into already. See the homosexuality thread (should be near the top). And I don't think mandal was being serious when he put homosexual into that list.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

mandal

yes it was gone into.

mandal

I'd also like to add that the reason I think about this topic and argue for it is not so that I can tell religous people they are all wrong and what they think is just a sham. Rather it's so that I can defend myself and others who are pushed around by religous folks that act as though that are superior to everyone else.

mandal

This is what I was wondering from the beginning. I asked the first question to make sure that most religions believe in a God that know everything since this seemed like the more debatable topic, however, I did not think too much about the whole creation idea. I guess I'll just put the question out then for those who know... do the major religions believe in a God who knows everything AND creates everything? It was always my understanding that people say life is a gift from God and God made me this way and what not so I always assumed, but verification would be good.

ravenradiodj

Most Christians (the Gnostics being a notable exception), Jews, and Muslims believe in one and only one God who created all, is omnipotent, omniscient, etc. Muslims reject the idea of the holy Trinity, because, in their view, it makes a case for three Gods, when they believe there is only one. Christians who believe in the Holy Trinity believe it is three aspects of one God, similar in principle to the Triple Goddess - maiden, mother, and crone - as viewed by many Pagans. Buddhism contains no dogma, nor any required belief in a Supreme Being - Buddhism is a code of life, a path to enlightenment, nothing more or less. The same with Taoism, though the Taoist church has strayed very far from Lao Tzu's teachings, and has become as corrupt as some forms of Christianity. Paganism is by nature polytheistic and nature-based, though many Pagans belief in one God or Goddess that is more powerful than the rest in their pantheon - Odin, for one, in the Asatru churches of Scandinavia. Overall, it's a fair estimate that a third of the world's population rejects the idea of a single, omnipotent, omniscient, eternal God.
________________________________________________________________________

Gimme That Old Time Religion - PAGAN FOR LIFE!

martinguerre

"Buddhism contains no dogma"

Really? I'll admit i'm not a scholar of non-western traditions, but in my cursory study of buddism there do seem to be teachings and schools of thought that are not simply a "code of life."

Mr Zen

There are different branches of Buddhism, just as in most religions, some of which deify the Buddha for reaching nirvana, but the general idea of Buddhism is to find the middle ground in life and to allow yourself to stop wanting for things to remain static, understanding of the Four Noble Truths is paramount. Certain techniques are advocated, but like I said, the general rule of Buddhism is to follow the middle ground. ie. don't eat meat unless someone offers it to you.

To say that "Buddhism contains no dogma," however, is only half correct. There has been a consensus set down for the whole of Buddhism by athoritive groups in the past, but at the same time, the Buddha said only to use his experiences as a guide and that one must find the path to enlightenment on their own terms, not his.

They are definately not as stringent as Jains are, some of whom have starved themselves to death so as not to harm any more living beings.

__________________
“Not even Satan would use customer service as a form of punishment”
- Lucas ctrlaltdel-online.com

adam

There is a Goddess! At least, she works for me.

There are many ways to celebrate our connection to the world... it doesn't require believing in an omnipotent, ultimate "God", IMO.

Zeraph

IMO people are fscking idiots, we all are. Why do people personify god? Why do they assume it will have the same perceptions on good and evil as them? How can they assume good and evil even exist? Think of how childish that attitude is, its funny how the gods we create, that if they were a person, I wouldn't want to be friends with them.

Ignore me Im just rambling.

mandal

done, done... and...... done.

j/k well it doesn't really matter to me what you said about God because I don't personally believe in one, but i'm sure there are those who will come right back and tell you off.

KrazyKracka

I was born and raised an Anglican Christian, but most of the time I find myself asking these same questions constantly. I guess I'm more of an agnostic at this point than anything. I like the idea of God, the afterlife, salvation, etc. Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuut, one of the things that I've been thinking about lately is this: The stories contained in the bible are thousands of years old, and it was a lot easier for something unexplained to be credited as a miracle, vs. today's standards, where there is much more information available. That said, I have another thought: I was born and raised as a Christian and taught to believe what christians believe. What if I was born and raised muslim? Jewish? hindu? I would have their beliefs set in stone the way I had christianity set in stone, wouldn't I? I don't really know what's out there, but I guess what I'm saying is, if there is a one true God, then its existence is beyond our perception or reasoning. The whole "omnipotent, omniscient" thing really gets confusing. From my standpoint, it kind of creates a paradox, doesn't it?

Stiltzkin

Try reading Mark Twain's "Letters from the Earth", especially the letters from Satan to his archangel pals. Most of your arguments are covered there.

__________________
The most important thing in this world is love.

mandal

interesting... i'll check it out

Livia Regina

It's different because God cannot be wrong. You can. Something could happen to your car between now and tomorrow or something could happen to a family member and you would have to change your plans. You might even die tonight, making it unlikely that you'd be in South Bend tomorrow. Donald could change his mind about going with you. The point is that any number of things could happen that would make you wrong. If God knows something is going to happen then it will happen. So how could I have free will if God already knows what I am going to choose? God cannot be wrong so I cannot choose anything other than what he knows I will choose. How is it a choice then? I wouldn't have another option.

asaris

That's simply false, Livia, as I've already argued. From the proposition "God knows that I will drive to Grand Rapids tomorrow", you can only infer (A)"Necessarily, I will drive to Grand Rapids tomorrow", not (A')"I will necessarily drive to Grand Rapids tomorrow". But for free will, the following proposition needs to be true: (B) "I will freely drive to Grand Rapids tomorrow". But this is the denial of A', not of A, since the denial of A is just "Possibly I will drive to Grand Rapids tomorrow." And the contingency of an action is not identical to its freedom; as pointed out in another thread somewhere, random acts are contingent, yet not free. The difference is that the necessity in question is the necessity of the statement, not the necessity of the action.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

WillyPete

This is my issue with mainstream christianity.
How does a panel of bishops in ancient times when the world was still flat get to determine what God is like? If they received direct communication from God on this matter, why aren't THEIR words in the bible like all the other people that spoke to Him.

Personally, I think a lot of the problem lies in how we phrase the question.
Here are some others to cast new light in it:
-If there is a god and he did make us, why make us the way we are? Why are we so different from animals that work mainly on instinct and why is that free will so important?

-If there is a God, and there is a reason for the above, what is the plan? To let us continue or is there an end to the 'project earth'?

-If this life is all there is according to some people, should people who believe in a god and the god-given right of free will allow those people to live their lives like there is no tomorrow?

-If there is a god, does that mean the presence of an equal but opposite deity? (Satan, lucifer whatever) What is that personage's ultimate role? If all things need an opposite, is Satan really bad or is he just fulfilling a role?

Welcome to the hell of theology.

Livia Regina

They expected the council to be moved by the Holy Spirit to do God's will - they didn't expect God to write on the wall for them. The idea was to get enough holy men in a room together discussing doctrine and everything would come out as God wished because everyone present had the Holy Spirit. Also, there wasn't a standard version of the Bible until after Charlemagne so their words might have been in one of the versions that was not accepted.

A' is the only thing that you can argue from the proposition "God knows I will drive to Grand Rapids tomorrow." How can God know infallibly what I am going to choose (because from his point of view, I already have chosen) and still give me the choice? The only option I have is the one he knows I will take. Even when I was a Christian I didn't believe that God was omniscient because it is incompatible with free will. I'd argue that God knows every option I have and which one I am most likely to choose but he does not know for certain what I will choose.

asaris

Well, there are a number of ways to explain how God knows the future; the most common is simply that God is outside of time. He doesn't really know ahead of time what we'll choose, he knows then. It's just that for him, then is now.

I probably have an argument for my claim that the proposition "God knows..." entails A, but I'll have to look them up. It's been a while since I've done that sort of philosophy. Just to check, do you have any arguments for your claim?

There is a somewhat common position among contemporary Philosophers of Religion that seems similar to your viewpoint when you were a Christian called "Open Theism". It holds that God does not know all things in advance, but knows us so well, and the universe so well, that he has a very good idea about what will happen. And there's something to be said for the position. But the problem is that even the very near future, tomorrow say, is dependant on so many free choices that even if God is 99.99% sure about any given free decision, the odds of God's guess about tomorrow would be fantastically small.

For what it's worth, there is an issue I believe to be valid floating in the background. The question shouldn't be "How is God's foreknowledge compatible with human freedom?", but rather "How is God's providence compatible with human freedom?" If God truly ordains all things, not only knows them but causes them to be, how can we possibly be free. This has come up before, so I think I'll start a new thread with my own views up for discussion.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

Livia Regina

I have heard this before and it makes sense in as much as I can imagine a being outside of time. I believe C. S. Lewis said something of the sort. I'm assuming that's a difficult thing for most people to wrap their minds around.

I'm afraid I don't. Most of my theology comes from discussions with people around the dinner table or studying the history of the Church and thinking "oh that makes sense." I'm pretty sure that arguments for my claim exist because the people I was talking to read an awful lot of philosophical works, but I haven't run across them yet.

That would be fascinating. You have probably answered this somewhere else, but what is your theological and religious background? And are you a philosophy major? If you are, I doubt I have a chance in an argument with you.

WillyPete

On a personal opinion, if God is the ultimate being all laws of physics are either generated and controlled by him/her or god is also subject to them. Kind of like a judge sets the laws and can make new ones but is not above it.

Also, regarding time and knowing all things I think it revolves around your belief in whether god has a plan or not. If the world is meant to end at day x and all people are to be judges as most christians believe, then you can be pretty sure that God knows the outcome as he has planned it from the start. Does it matter if Johnny is good or bad if God knows that ultimately everyone ends up being judged whilst the world is a boling mass?

Thus we come to another point. If he DOES know exactly who will do what, then bother make us? Back to the tricky philosophy of predestination.

The best solution I have been given for this is to consider a God to be the ultimate quantum computer.
If you consider that for an equation x+ 2 = z where X can have many values, a quantum computer can give you the answer to all the possible variants at once. We could say that with regard to the outcome of the equation, the computer is all knowing. It depends on the value of X.
With that in mind an ultimate God doesn't need to predestine humans to a particular role or fate, he/she/it just knows what any answer will be for the value of Johnny being Good or Evil.

With regard to Time, what does an eternal being consider of it?
I've heard a good comparison of this too.
Were we to consider Time to be music, then you and I would be listening to the orchestra and following along the score sheet, recognising it note for note. But a god would be like a master musician. They would be able to look at the first few notes and just know the most probable progression of the melody, rythm and mood of the piece.