tommy2bad wrote: » No he is morality, God doesn't follow any law in the sense that He could choose evil or good but chooses good.
marienbad wrote: » Philologos, in your opinion,do all those Muslims and non believers that either won't or can't believe in Jesus go to hell ?
philologos wrote: » I don't believe that it is true that people aren't capable of believing in Jesus. It is more that people don't desire to do so. Ultimately, if we've all sinned, and if Jesus is the only way that we can be saved (John 14:6), then there are very clear consequences for refusing to acknowledge Him. That's why Christians long to tell people about Him, so that they might be saved through Him. Zombrex: Caring is taking an interest in Creation. I don't see why it need be any more complex than that . God loves us, God knows the parameters of Creation and as a result knows how to live in it. That's why He's given us standards that we ought to follow. It is for our own benefit than for our detriment.
philologos wrote: » Zombrex: Caring is taking an interest in Creation. I don't see why it need be any more complex than that . God loves us, God knows the parameters of Creation and as a result knows how to live in it. That's why He's given us standards that we ought to follow. It is for our own benefit than for our detriment.
RichieC wrote: » Seems to be a common enough phenomenon that people think the majority religion they grew up around is the one true religion.
ISAW wrote: » how do you explain the growth of Christianity among paganism or Judaism?
RichieC wrote: » I'm not a historian, but I do know the Christians outlawed Paganism in 350 and began to murder Pagans or Convert them and destroy their temples. Christianity was a political power back then.
Zombrex wrote: » Then it makes no sense to say that God knows what is good, or what is best for us, or is caring to us, since all those concepts would simply be defined as what ever God happens to treat us like.
Zombrex wrote: » Explaining why a small percentage of people convert to a religion they were not raised in also doesn't explain why so many people simply continue in the religion they were raised in. It is almost as if for most people it is not the details of the religion itself but the broad themes any of them can provide. Almost as if religion in general is some sort of human phenomena
ISAW wrote: » discussed earlierhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg_en.html The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature.[5] The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality.[6] Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazm went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God's will, we would even have to practise idolatry.[7]
tommy2bad wrote: » Nail and head. Thats because we are created by God (See what I did their)
marienbad wrote: » All those Muslims that live good lives according to their beliefs are wasting their time as they are going to hell anyway ? And all those murderers dictators torturers rapists child molesters that repent and believe in Jesus are going to heaven ?
Zombrex wrote: » That is a pointless argument, since it does the same thing as asserting God is good. If God acts a particular way and we find it unreasonable or illogical then we are, by definition, wrong. If you say "God will not do X because that would defy reason" and then God did X you would not say that cannot be God or God does not exist. You would say our understanding of X being something that defied reason was flawed.
The illogical nature of a number of Christian doctrine has been pointed out by atheists and other non-Christians on this forum and far beyond.
You simply say that we are wrong, even I would point out, while happily admitting you do not know why we are wrong, as PDN and Phil have done many times.
Even right now we are discussing the unreasonable assert that God does not want us to suffer yet made it so that we would suffer in his absence.
You are desperately searching for a way to make that sound reasonable, wheedling out all manner of straw man arguments from free will to God just respecting our choices, none of which even begin to answer the actual questions.
Others have thrown up their hands and simply said they don't know, but they do know there is a reason and they will ask God what it is when they see him.
It is some what off topic, but it should also be pointed out that you have nothing to base your assertion that God is reasonable on other than that is simply how you choose to believe he is.
HamletOrHecuba wrote: » Define a good life? Also God is merciful- why should He not have mercy on those who repent and call upon Him however evil their deeds and send the "good" atheists into the fire for their rebellion? It seems that people often have as big or a bigger issue with God's Mercy than they do with His Justice.
marienbad wrote: » So all the inhabitants of north and south america before 1492 went to hell ? all those millions in asia back to the dawn of time that never even saw a christian are going to hell ? Is that correct ?
ISAW wrote: » You dont seem to understand. Read it again. the christian would say " that cannot be God" the Muslim would say "it is gods will" that is handwaving! WHAT is illogical or against reason in Christian theology? More handwaving. A bt like claims of the Bible ordering rape. and then when we look we dont find it; but it wont stop claims of "God ordered rape" being made. you keep trying to assert that. Noone except you claimed Christian theology says it. christians didnt claim it! YOU did! that is unfair. PDN admitted he didnt have the answer to all the unknowns. It was not a case of "it is allahs will" that is nonsense. the same logic and reason is used by mathematics and science . It is the Logos of the greeks. If yu think it is absent in christian theology you are willfully ignorant.
ISAW wrote: » no. not to mainstream christian theology.
ISAW wrote: » that is nonsense. the same logic and reason is used by mathematics and science . It is the Logos of the greeks. If yu think it is absent in christian theology you are willfully ignorant.
marienbad wrote: » So that is a yes then ? All those Muslims that live good lives according to their beliefs are wasting their time as they are going to hell anyway ? And all those murderers dictators torturers rapists child molesters that repent and believe in Jesus are going to heaven ?
marienbad wrote: » Must interrupt here , you don't find the bible orders rape ISAW- others do and there is nothing you can do about it- get over it .
marienbad wrote: » what do you mean by mainstream ? how about those on here ? a lot appear to think so ?
Wh1stler wrote: » I think it is strange that God chose language and the written word as the method through which He makes Himself known to us rather than just getting the genetics right in the first place.
Especially when you consider the primitive nature of these tools at the time they were being used.
If there is a One True God then it is apparent that His relationship with the Universe ended at the Big-Bang event.
And so, because of that, as far as the Universe is concerned, God can be considered as the fundamental laws of physics as it is they that will govern all the outcomes of the Universe.
The thing is that physics seems to explain so many observations made by humans based on simple unchanging laws from which the Universe can proceed.
Whereas, when God is introduced into an explanation of how existence came into being, it relies on rules that change in order to reconcile events that take place with the will of God.
The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature.[5] The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality.[6] Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazm went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God's will, we would even have to practise idolatry.[7]
In all honesty, one must observe that in the late Middle Ages we find trends in theology which would sunder this synthesis between the Greek spirit and the Christian spirit. In contrast with the so-called intellectualism of Augustine and Thomas, there arose with Duns Scotus a voluntarism which, in its later developments, led to the claim that we can only know God's voluntas ordinata. Beyond this is the realm of God's freedom, in virtue of which he could have done the opposite of everything he has actually done. This gives rise to positions which clearly approach those of Ibn Hazm and might even lead to the image of a capricious God, who is not even bound to truth and goodness. God's transcendence and otherness are so exalted that our reason, our sense of the true and good, are no longer an authentic mirror of God, whose deepest possibilities remain eternally unattainable and hidden behind his actual decisions. As opposed to this, the faith of the Church has always insisted that between God and us, between his eternal Creator Spirit and our created reason there exists a real analogy, in which - as the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 stated - unlikeness remains infinitely greater than likeness, yet not to the point of abolishing analogy and its language. God does not become more divine when we push him away from us in a sheer, impenetrable voluntarism; rather, the truly divine God is the God who has revealed himself as logos and, as logos, has acted and continues to act lovingly on our behalf. Certainly, love, as Saint Paul says, "transcends" knowledge and is thereby capable of perceiving more than thought alone (cf. Eph 3:19); nonetheless it continues to be love of the God who is Logos. Consequently, Christian worship is, again to quote Paul - "λογικη λατρεία", worship in harmony with the eternal Word and with our reason (cf. Rom 12:1).[10]
But ultimately, physics can explain 'the will of God' too; the will of God can be described as the evolution of human behaviour which is biology which relies on chemistry which relies physics which only relies on the constancy of the speed of light.
Even if there is a God who caused the Big-Bang then by creating the laws of physics, He cancelled Himself out of the equation.
If God decided to change the laws of physics, it would be inconsequential; there would be no humanity to write and talk about Him. It would be as if we had never existed.
Who would God show off to then?
Wh1stler wrote: » But mathematics and science are supported by logic and reason whereas necessarily, Christian theology relies on something that is not supported by logic and reason.
That is where 'faith' comes into it and you have to 'make' yourself believe that certain events occurred through supernatural means even though the same phenomena can be more easily explained by logic and reason and an analysis of human tendencies.
i.e., there may well be a God but it is not necessary to invoke God in order to describe human development. God doesn't explain it, God avoids explaining it.
I read about a survey todat that said that 93% of a group of scientists claimed not to believe in a personal God.
In contrast, that is about the same proportion of all Americans that claim to believe in the existence of a personal God.
I think that is quite scary actually; these are the same people who put Bush in power. How can God have anything against Afghanistan and Iraq that He doesn't have against Bush and Blair?
You can't really blame God for anything so why should such a God be praised, He's not even watching or listening? And even if He was, all He would be able to do is look upon His creation in shock and horror.
philologos ; If I held to a universalist position - I would be denying the value and significance of Jesus' death and resurrection.
ISAW wrote: » That is a fallacy against logic and reason. First YOU claimed the God of the Bible ordered rape. when pressed on it you couldnt support your contention. the later you came back and made the same unsupported assertions! The burden is on YOU who made the claim to support it. Second it isnt a matter of "others have a different opinion" . You were clearly saying that it is written in the Bible that god ordered rape. It ISNT! It is not reasonable to conclude that your opinion is one of balance when clearly it panders more to bigotry than balance. Furthermore the idea of "i cant prove P therefore P is true" is preposterous.
philologos wrote: » People who out and outright reject Jesus, will be condemned according to the Biblical text. Honouring God and following Him is good, rejecting God and rejecting His standard is evil. I think it is a Christian's responsibility to share the Gospel with all those around them for a reason. It's really important. If I held to a universalist position - I would be denying the value and significance of Jesus' death and resurrection. If I said that anyone who the world perceives to be "good" should be saved irrespective of whether or not they hate God, I would be cheapening Jesus' death. It would be as if He died and rose again for nothing. I have no issue in saying that if a murderer repents truly, and accepts Jesus that they can be transformed through Him. Likewise rapists, child molestors, torturers anything under the sun that is evil. The problem is that many people don't acknowledge that they have done wrong, and that they need to repent also. Jesus can play a key role in turning peoples lives around, indeed that's why many churches take part in prison ministry. Jesus makes it quite clear in the Gospel that anyone irrespective of how much of a sinner they are can accept Jesus and live for Him. There is a grey area in respect to those who have never heard about Him. I trust God's better judgement in that situation.
