Freethought & Rationalism Archive

HoosierGuy28 · 10-25-2002, 12:43 AM

Philosoft,

Quote:

Why is this? We make decisions all the time that don't involve the wholesale rejection of a creator concept. As a matter of fact, we make innumerably more decisions of this nature than we do of the creator-rejection kind. If we make 4 trillion free-will decisions over a period of time, this doesn't count as free will unless one of those decisions is whether to "reject God"?

If God made it so the knowledge of his existence was indisputable or intrinsic, we could still make 3.9 billion+ free-will decisions. Are you saying all those free-will decisions are somehow not free-will decisions unless one of them is whether to "reject God?"

Christianity isn't a prerequisite for free-will. You have it whether you're a Christian or not. What you do with it is up to you. Everything we do has consequences, whether they be good or bad.

Quote:

Is it enough to be able to do any evil or must all evil acts be permissible? Would our ability to do evil be so diminished by intrinsic knowledge of God that they would cease to be free-will decisions?

I would say that most, if not all, is permissable but none of it justified. Also, if we exercise our free-will to do what is good, then that is by our own choice. If you can live a life of purity, then I see no reason to even be concerned with doing evil acts.

Thanks for the questions

Joel

[ October 25, 2002: Message edited by: HoosierGuy28 ]

HoosierGuy28 · 10-25-2002, 01:21 AM

Cipher Girl

Quote:

I though a major part of christian doctrine was "original sin". According to most christians the second choice does not exist. It seems crazy that a god would create people in such as way as they would have to grovel for forgiveness over the mistakes of others in order not to be eternally tortured. And we're supposed to blame ourselves for the way god supposedly created us? That's like blaming the child for child abuse.

Yes, the "original sin" is part of Christian doctrine, which refers to the knowledge of good and evil at the apostasy of Adam. But say a baby were to die and the baby was sinless; why would that baby need redemption, considering it remained sinless? I'm sure most Christians would tell you that if a baby were to die, the baby would be justified by its sinlessness. I'm also sure you've heard many Christians tell you "Jesus died for our sins" and not for our "sinlessness".

Quote:

What I would like to see is physical evidence that can be independently verified by a skeptic. Do you know what the most unreliable evidence in court is? Eyewitnesses. That's because people's perceptions are so subjective and colored by their preconceptions. That's why something like DNA evidence is so much stronger.

This is understandable, an I assure you that I plan to address these types of evidences in future posts. Unfortunately, this will take a lot of gathering and I have several exams coming up next Tuesday that I need to prepare for. I will try to work on this following my exams on next Tuesday, and your patience would be greatly appreciated.

If this is something that you want to pursue on your own, I would recommend doing a studying on biblical numerology and/or studies on ELS Bible codes.

Quote:

Setting sarcastic mode.
I suppose its easy to let go of reason. Its soooo much easier than thinking.
Turning sarcastic mode off.

I wouldn't call it so much letting go of reasoning, but balancing reason. There is certainly nothing wrong with having some skepticism, but it is also possible to have too much.

Quote:

I have a lot of fun here on II, and you are definately a friendly character here. But be warned, we will make you think.

So I've noticed. I've received a lot of good questions, and you seem like a rather friendly character yourself.

Thanks again for the responses.

Joel

Howay the Toon · 10-25-2002, 01:21 AM

What, if anything, would lead you to the conclusion that Christianity was incorrect?

HoosierGuy28 · 10-25-2002, 01:34 AM

Howay,

Quote:

What, if anything, would lead you to the conclusion that Christianity was incorrect?

If I suddenly found myself unplugged from the "Matrix", or trapped inside a locker like in MIB 2 (Hope I didn't spoil any movies for anyone)

Actually, I don't see anything leading me to the conclusion that Christianity is incorrect. To deny myself of the doctrine of Christ would be to reject my own conscience.

Thanks for the question.

Joel

sakrilege · 10-25-2002, 03:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by HoosierGuy28:
Yes, the "original sin" is part of Christian doctrine, which refers to the knowledge of good and evil at the apostasy of Adam. But say a baby were to die and the baby was sinless; why would that baby need redemption, considering it remained sinless? I'm sure most Christians would tell you that if a baby were to die, the baby would be justified by its sinlessness. I'm also sure you've heard many Christians tell you "Jesus died for our sins" and not for our "sinlessness".

So if a person never heard about god, religion and sins then they would automatically go to heavean because they would be unable to sin.

K · 10-25-2002, 05:51 AM

Joel:

Quote:

Actually, I don't see anything leading me to the conclusion that Christianity is incorrect. To deny myself of the doctrine of Christ would be to reject my own conscience.

Didn't you say that you were a critical thinker? The previous statement certainly wouldn't indicate that.

I have no problems with your Christianity. I do object when you imply that it isn't necessary to abandon critical thinking to arrive at it.

[ October 25, 2002: Message edited by: K ]

Amazon · 10-25-2002, 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sakrilege:


So if a person never heard about god, religion and sins then they would automatically go to heavean because they would be unable to sin.

And further more, if Sakrilege will allow me to build on his/her thought, I assert that missionaries who bring the message of Jesus to parts of the world where he is not known, are (according to Christian doctrine, at least) condemning some humans to hell simply because they have then been exposed to that doctrine. If they reject the foreign Jesus message, even though they never asked for it, are they now going to hell?

[ October 25, 2002: Message edited by: Amazon ]

[ October 25, 2002: Message edited by: Amazon ]

Ronin · 10-25-2002, 07:42 AM

Have you ever doubted any aspect of Christianity?

Rusting Car Bumper · 10-25-2002, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by HoosierGuy28:
DigitalChicken,

If God controlled your beliefs, then you wouldn't have any free will. You have to choose for yourself. I assure you, that if you seek God with an open-heart, you will find Him.

Joel

I'm an ex-Christian. As I stated the free will argument doesn't wash. This is not something I get to choose. You so conveniently ignored that part of the post.

I cannot make myself believe things. I cannot make myself believe that I can flap my arms and fly to the moon and I cannot make myself believe I have 12 fingers. Many if not most beliefs are not chosen.

So then now that you understand my point... I ask the same question again...

Quote:

Here is my question:

How can god condemn one to hell if one has no reason to believe that god exists? Doesn't god realize that he is culpable for my beliefs since he, being all powerful, can control what experiences I have which would cause my believe or not to believe?

(Please do not respond by saying Jesus is proof or that I choose not to believe. Jesus, assuming he existed, was proof only of Jesus. I don't choose not to believe any more than I choose to believe I have 10 fingers.)

DC

HoosierGuy28 · 10-25-2002, 07:55 AM

Sakrilege,

Quote:

So if a person never heard about god, religion and sins then they would automatically go to heavean because they would be unable to sin.

I would say that statement is kind of right and kind of wrong. Morality is a part of our conscience. As someone grows, their conscience begins to develop more and more. For one to develop their conscience is for one to develop their knowledge from within.

Take a child for instance. Out of curiousity, it will pull the cats tail and the parents will tell the child no. The child has established what no means, but it will continue to pull the cats tail to get the attention of the parents or to see if he or she can get away with it when the parents aren't looking. Sin isn't dependent on someone telling us about sin, it comes from knowledge within.

Now, if someone has this knowledge within of good and evil, and they don't exercise this knowledge to commit sin, then they would not need redemption. They would be justified by their righteousness.

Joel

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-25-2002, 01:21 AM	#203
Howay the Toon Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Bicester UK Posts: 863	What, if anything, would lead you to the conclusion that Christianity was incorrect?

10-25-2002, 07:42 AM	#208
Ronin Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Mississippi Posts: 5,047	Have you ever doubted any aspect of Christianity?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.