I still cannot wrap my mind around the WHY of this. I know that you're saying that God, when making a person knows the full life of that person, but I cannot grasp how this explanation would totally abolish the person's own will. God knows the person's life, but how would the person not make choices inside of time?

 

God already made all the choices for the person. It just seems like the person has free will to make his own choices because of the environment that God designed.

 

 

 

 

Besides that, this idea of predetermined lives implies to me that I can go and like...say...cuss at people and it wouldn't be wrong in any sense because God made me do that. "[cabbage] you. God made me say that."

 

It nullifies all right/wrong that there may be, and God would be a hypocrite for making a Bible.

 

Cursing, drinking, committing crimes, The Apple, and the non-believers around you are not "wrong." They are evil. Similarly, Mother Teresa, Divine Intervention, the YMCA, the Bible, and your fellow believers are not "right." They are good.

 

 

 

The Christian God wants his followers to have true love for him. In order to cultivate true love among his followers, he places them in an environment that contains both good and evil and plans their decisions so that they gain the necessary experience in both areas.

 

 

 

The most eye-opening part of this is that billions of non-believers are predestined to be sacrificed as part of the collection of evil in the environment.

 

 

 

Again, this is not some radical conjecture. This is the belief held by most Christians and Catholics throughout the world, especially outside of America.

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure that if it had been a mistranslation, the many Catholics and Christian groups who believed (and still believe) in Predestination would have discovered the error within the past couple of centuries.

 

Somebody pointed out a site to me with tons of numerical discrepancies. Also, there's one part about raising kids that doesn't really comply with the Greek too well, but I can't even find it with keywords :wall:

 

Numerical discrepancies and methods for raising kids seem like pretty inconsequential things. Predestination affects both creation and afterlife, both of which are already very big concepts on their own, so if there was something as jolting as a mistranslation, it would have been discovered already.

 

 

 

Divine intervention would be part of the environment that God uses to condition his believers. Just as he places evil on earth, he would also place its opposite. The existence of both good and evil is what elevates his believers to "true love."

 

Again, this kind of seems odd. Wouldn't this make God a hypocrite?

 

I already explained this in the first part of my post, but I'll try to shorten it. The only thing that is "right" to God is cultivating true love and adulation for him. Everything else, whether good or evil, are just tools to accomplish that goal. "The ends justify the means," as they say.

 

 

 

 

They are mentioned in your verses. Those verses were literally letters to the people of those churches in those places.

 

I did not know that at all. :D

Note that this is a gray area in the Bible, meaning that there is almost no splicit answer.

 

"So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. [verse 17 omitted] So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires." (Rom. 9:16-18, NASB)

 

 

 

And many, many other quotes. In contrast, there are no quotes in the bible about free will. Seriously.

 

 

 

 

Mind thinking about that again?

 

[hide=Free will]

 

There are many verses that specifically state that people have free will to execute their own choices. In the book of Deuteronomy, God Himself tells the people to choose to follow Him to receive His blessings:

 

 

 

"I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants, (Deuteronomy 30:19)

 

 

 

Joshua tells the people to choose to serve God or the idols of their neighbors.

 

 

 

"And if it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD." (Joshua 24:15)

 

 

 

Many other Old Testament verses tell us to choose to follow the Lord.24 Obviously, choice is not possible if everything is predestined.

 

 

 

Besides the verses that tells us directly to make choices, there are hundreds of verses that tell us how we are to live. Obviously, following this advice requires free will and the ability to choose. So, the Bible indicates pretty clearly that we are to make choices. If everything is predestined, then choice is not possible.

[/hide]

Exodus 7

 

1 Then the LORD said to Moses, "See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet. 2 You are to say everything I command you, and your brother Aaron is to tell Pharaoh to let the Israelites go out of his country. 3 But I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and though I multiply my miraculous signs and wonders in Egypt, 4 he will not listen to you. Then I will lay my hand on Egypt and with mighty acts of judgment I will bring out my divisions, my people the Israelites. 5 And the Egyptians will know that I am the LORD when I stretch out my hand against Egypt and bring the Israelites out of it."

 

 

 

Well, yes the Pharao did make a choice. I wouldn't exactly call that free will though. I don't think christianity and free will are compatible at all.

 

Paperclip pointed out that it isn't about right or wrong, or even good and evil. It's about love.

 

 

 

Also isn't it so that we are redeemed for all our sins as soon as we accept god? Wouldn't that mean we can do anything, right or wrong, good or evil and be redeemed?

 

 

 

I guess the big problem is that the bibel is highly contradictional. You can interprete it in numerous ways. The book is composed of bits and pieces written over the course of 3 millenia. It contains stories, heritage tables, laws and prayers.

 

 

 

Wouldn't it be sufficient toa christian just to live by the delivered teachings of Jesus, instead of the whole bibel? Also there are uncountable different religiouns and sects all based on the bibel, most of them labeling themselves christian, yet they all disagree on certain issues. At best there could only be one of these that is completely right. That fact alone should be enough to make everybody find their own truth.

 

 

 

It is very unlikely that the particular religious group you are following is completely right. The best thing you can do, is to ask yourself what you want to accept and what you don't want to accept.

 

 

 

I guess the thread is inherently flawed because christianity is to broad a subject. There is no such thing as the "christian religion". There are many religions that share some similarities and are therfor grouped together. Yet they are too different to be thrown into one pot and discussed about.

the problem about free will or not.. is that that's a thing we never can know, no mattered us, (or what) discussing... no matter who created us, (or what). If we don't have a free will... then it's meant that we're going to discuss it now...

 

 

 

but i think that God has the power dictate us to do what he wants, but he don't... instead he have learned us about good and bad, and want's us to do the good things.

 

 

 

anyways, we can't find an answer here anyway... as we think we're doing things out of free will, no matter if we are or not

Even if there is free will, God chose who he gives that free will to, for example I said this already but I will again for the people that missed my topic about Christianity.

 

 

 

A child is born in Africa, with aids contracted from his mother, he will starve to death in 2 weeks. ( these cases actually happen everyday)

 

 

 

So therefore from that we can conclude that the child(who the all loving, powerful God made) was born into an uncontrollable situation, he has no free will, he will die in 2 weeks.

 

 

 

All this [cabbage] about what the Bible doesn't say, lets concentrate on what the Bible does say; That anyone who doesn't accept Jesus as their saviour and is baptised WILL go to hell.

 

 

 

So from that we can conclude that the child (the one that God made) was put into a situation where he would die and go to hell.

 

 

 

If someone could answer my statement, it would be very helpful as the pastor of the church I go to, couldn't answer it - he told me to ask God about it. Current status: No answer

Even if there is free will, God chose who he gives that free will to, for example I said this already but I will again for the people that missed my topic about Christianity.

 

 

 

A child is born in Africa, with aids contracted from his mother, he will starve to death in 2 weeks. ( these cases actually happen everyday)

 

 

 

So therefore from that we can conclude that the child(who the all loving, powerful God made) was born into an uncontrollable situation, he has no free will, he will die in 2 weeks.

 

 

 

All this [cabbage] about what the Bible doesn't say, lets concentrate on what the Bible does say; That anyone who doesn't accept Jesus as their saviour and is baptised WILL go to hell.

 

 

 

So from that we can conclude that the child (the one that God made) was put into a situation where he would die and go to hell.

 

 

 

If someone could answer my statement, it would be very helpful as the pastor of the church I go to, couldn't answer it - he told me to ask God about it. Current status: No answer

 

 

 

This thread was more interesting to me then i thought it could be.

 

 

 

Answer to your statement (o.0 answering a statment...): Yes the child goes to hell and couldn't do anything about it, according to what i know about all ths hell thing.

 

 

 

My question in turn is, why the pastor couldn't answer the question. It seems he tried to avoid the question, because it's very unlikely that a man in his position never encountered the question before.

 

 

 

The concept of a hellish state of being makes perfect sense to my metaphysical understanding, but it doesn't make sense at all that a god would design a hell for punishment. Imo punishment is too antropomorph a concept alltogether to be applied to an omnipotent being. What would such a being achieve, especially if it's a well meaning being?

 

 

 

As stated earlier a problem of this discussion is that "christianity" is a divided bunch.

 

Mind thinking about that again?

 

 

 

There are many verses that specifically state that people have free will to execute their own choices. In the book of Deuteronomy, God Himself tells the people to choose to follow Him to receive His blessings:

 

 

 

"I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants, (Deuteronomy 30:19)

 

 

 

Joshua tells the people to choose to serve God or the idols of their neighbors.

 

 

 

"And if it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD." (Joshua 24:15)

 

That is only the illusion of choice. You need to think of this aspect of the bible in layers. If there were no verses in the Bible about Predestination, then this would be considered free will. However, since there are verses about Predestination, the words you have quoted can only be considered part of the environment God created to condition us.

 

 

 

For reference, here is a chart of Predestination vs. Free Will verses: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/free.html

 

 

 

 

Many other Old Testament verses tell us to choose to follow the Lord.24 Obviously, choice is not possible if everything is predestined.

 

That is not true at all. Predestined does not mean automatic brainwash. Presdestination means God made a series of choices for you that will ultimately lead you to become a believer or non-believer on your deathbed.

Bear in mind I am responding to your post from a Christian standpoint, as we are assuming the Christian faith here.

 

 

 

Presenting a false picture of the world to the innocent and the credulous. Fairly self-explanatory, but i'm sure we all know that as a child you're likely to believe in non-truths which a lot of people grow up to reject. Santa Claus, the tooth-fairy etc. Telling children that God made the world in 6 days in a particular order is just a such a fairy-tale.

 

 

 

1. Not all Christians believe in 6-day-creation.

 

2. Calling Christianity a fairy tale makes it easy to refute since you're already assuming that it is invalid. This is called circular reasoning.

 

 

 

1. True, but even those who don't present it to their children as fact. My parents are not Biblical fundamentalists by any means, they're not even that Christian, but when I was young I was told that the world was created in 6 days by God. It's a story which is told with a surprising degree of conviction given the fact that most of the adults who are telling it might not even believe it themselves. But your point has little consolation towards the children of any Christian parents or any kind of faith, who, like me were brought up believing the creation story literally.

 

2. I didn't call Christianity a fairy tale, I called most of the creation stories of the various religions fairy tales, which when you examine them they are. Read about the Hindu creation story, sounds pretty far fetched, but it arose with the same intentions as the Christian version, to try and explain what we could not know at the time. To take it as historical fact nowadays when we know better is like basing all your scientific knowledge on Aristotle.

 

 

 

The only reason children brought up in a Christian environment often carry on accepting it well into their adult-hood is because it's so well imprinted on kids at an early age. If you told a rational 18 year old adult who's well versed in the scientific big-bang model and evolution, the creation story would sound silly, childlike.

 

 

 

1. You're assuming that God and science are mutually exclusive, which they are not. This has been reiterated on so many threads, so many times I'm surprised someone like you would still attempt that this argument.

 

2. You're leaving out those who become Christians later on in life. How does your idea of child imprinting work here?

 

 

 

1. Biblical literalism and science are mutually exlusive. You cannot believe that the Earth was created 6000 years ago in 6 days and the scientific version. They just don't fit.

 

2. Thankfully it doesn't, they come to Christianity for their own reasons, often in times of need and when they feel like they need some kind of support. Clearly you don't have to be indoctrinated into a religion to believe in it, but i'm willing to be that if you raised one generation of children in a neutral, objective manner you wouldn't get them growing up thinking of the existence of God or validity of the Bible as obvious.

 

 

 

The same applies to me when I learnt about for example the Hindu or Sikh creation stories. They sound absurd, but in reality why are they any more absurd than the Biblical creation story? What gives either any more validity than the other? The religious creation stories are little more than folk myths passed down the generations, and to present them as fact to children who are too young to know otherwise is unfair and manipulative.

 

 

 

So I guess you won't be telling your children about Santa Claus then? You will always tell your children 100% truth? Why do you get to choose which lies children believe are moral and which aren't? Guess you'd better throw out fairy tales or fiction novels. Or at the very least, tell your children before you read them any story that it didn't actually happen. That would be consistent.

 

 

 

I'll probably tell my kids about Santa Claus, it's a harmless myth, I don't think you get kids growing up terrified of the consequences of the existence of Santa Claus, or somehow secure in the knowledge that Santa Claus is an absolute and obvious truth. Ditto to fairy tales and fiction novels, you didn't really read fiction thinking that somewhere out there it was happening did you? Do you think knowing that it's fiction that takes away any of the enjoyment?

 

 

 

But again, see above. If the Christian God exists, the creation story could totally be 100% true. Or, it could be symbolic. Science and creation aren't mutually exclusive.

 

 

 

That's a logically impossible standpoint to argue from, sure if the Christian God exists he could do whatever he wants, he could have placed all this scientific evidence here to try and test our faith, he could have sent me here to test your faith as well, but since there's no evidence of that either we have to start from a rational explanation, or at least assume a rational God.

 

 

 

There is one example of blood sacrfice which stands out as particularly awful to me. Abraham's wilingness to sacrifice his only son is a story common to all three monotheisms, and for some reason was always held up to me when I was a child as an example of perfect faith in God. If you step back and look at this story objectively, it's actually pretty repulsive.

 

 

 

1. What is this incredibly "objective" view from which you look at this story?

 

2. What does this isolated event have to do with Christian doctrine?

 

 

 

1. You mean like actually thinking about how God was asking a man to kill an innocent child for the sins of the man? Doesn't that disgust you?

 

2. Quite a lot, when it's held up a shining example of the virtues of faith in God.

 

 

 

Naturally, Abraham was praised from the clouds above for showing his willingness to murder an innocent child for his own crimes

 

 

 

1. What crimes?

 

2. We're assuming God exists since this is a discussion about Christianity. That makes all creation belong to God. That means God can take life, just as he gives it. From a Christian perspective, no person is innocent, either. We are all sinful and deserving of death. Since Abraham is acting for God, it is not murder.

 

 

 

1. His own sins.

 

2. We are all deserving of death? How tragic, how self-deprecating that you should submit your precious life to the whim of an apparently fickle creator. If God is omnipotent, and omniscient why place the child in the world in the first place if he knew Abraham would have to kill it? And why on Earth should he get the father of the child to do his own dirty work? It doesn't make any sense that God should have put a child in the world for the sake of testing the faith of Abraham. Trying to back-justify murder by saying it's an act of God sounds dangerously close to immorality.

 

 

 

because a voice in his head told him to.

 

 

 

This is offensive and circular in logic.

 

 

 

Why is it offensive? It's unspecified how God communicated to Abraham, he'd previously communicated in dreams (in his head), little more is said. It's more than likely that this communication takes a similar form of a voice in his head, I didn't say who's it was.

 

 

 

Some Christians do indeed still practice ritualised animal slaughter to celebrate Easter.

 

 

 

Some Christians rape children. What does this have to do with Christianity?

 

 

 

Does the Bible tell Christians to rape Children? No (although he condones it numerous times), does God approve of animal sacrifice? Yes. Some passages also indicate he approves of human sacrifice.

 

 

 

The idea of vicarious atonement troubled even C.S. Lewis. Again, in the Christian doctrine we have a father subjecting his own son to death by torture, but this time the father is not trying to impress God. He is God, and is trying to impress humans.

 

 

 

Impress humans? Give me a break. This is a joke, right?

 

 

 

You wish.

 

 

 

Ask yourself, if you were told the following what would you think? 2000 years ago a human sacrifice took place against your wishing and under circumstanes so horrible and vicious that if you had been around at the time and able to, you most likely would have tried to stop it.

 

 

 

The Disciples were Jesus' best friends. They did not try to stop it.

 

 

 

And therefore they did the right thing? So if your best friend was being tortured, and put on some kind of a vicious show-trial you wouldn't try and stop it?

 

 

 

But, ignoring all the contradictions between the tellers of said story,

 

 

 

I know this was an aside to try and insult Christianity one step further, but I honestly think contradictions are proof that the Gospels were not a doctored story.

 

 

 

It wasn't an aside at all, I was pointing out that there are numerous contradictions in the telling of this particular story. How do contradictions give the Bible any more authority?

 

 

 

let's assume it's basically true. It goes on, in order to actually gain the benefit of this generous offer you have to accept that you are in someway responsible for the flogging, torture and crucifixtion in which you had no say and no part.

 

 

 

Funny, I thought the Bible stated that we had to accept the fact that we are sinners and that Christ died for us. But of course, your Bible knowledge is obviously greater than mine.

 

 

 

I'll ignore the unnecessary snide remark at the end, but by accepting that Christ died for us and that we are sinners then we are ultimately responsible for what I said. Our sin is deemed original, and unescapable. If you're saying that we're born sinners, why? Because of the original sin of Adam? And so therefore we're responsible, and my point still stands.

 

 

 

Of course, if you really think about the original sin of Adam he was created by God with an insatiable discontent and curiosity and then forbidden to exercise it. Therefore, your own guilt in the matter is deemed original and inescapable. Of course, God generously gave us free will to allow us to refuse this offer, but should you exercise this choice you face an eternity of torture.

 

 

 

I believe I posted about this earlier. Did you miss it?

 

 

 

Possibly, I haven't read through the entire topic.

 

 

 

A central tennent on Christianity, Jesus dying for "our sins" is in fact a shallow charade, Jesus both needed and wished to die and came to Jerusalem at Passover in order to do so, and all who took part in this murder were actually doing God's will. There is also a passage in one of the Gospel's that the Jews who condemned Jesus asked for his blood to be on their heads for future generations. Odd as it seems, this is then what lead the Vatican to maitain their it was the Jews who had killed Christ, not just some or a few, but the Jews. The charge of deicide was only recently dropped by the Vatican. Jesus dying for "our sins" is scapegoating, plain and simple, the offer of offloading our sins onto someone else is supposed to be loving, but in reality it's just not right.

 

 

 

None of this makes any sense at all. Sorry, maybe you can explain it better, but this seems to be some crackpot theory you dreamt up on the spot.

 

 

 

I wish it was. The sad truth is that the charge of deicide was only recently dropped by the Vatican, look it up.

 

 

 

False hope and children terrified of hell. Need I say more? I suppose I will. What else could drive a suicide bomber to blow themselves up except for the absolute conviction that there will be an afterlife with 72 virgins waiting for them.

 

 

 

This isn't Christianity.

 

 

 

Hell isn't part of Christianity? The last part maybe, but the first is still relevant.

 

 

 

What else but the idea of pearly gates could lead people to be so flippant with this life, treating it like a temporary state, a borrowed body?

 

 

 

This isn't Christianity either. We are not told to be flippant with our lives.

 

 

 

You might not be told to, but the promise of an afterlife can lead people to be so.

 

 

 

As for eternal punishment, that's fairly self explanatory, and i'll elaborate more on it in the next point.

 

 

 

I've addressed it in a previous post.

 

 

 

 

 

The commandment at Sinai which forbade people to even think about coveting goods is the first clue. There's also a passage in the NT from Jesus saying that a man who even looks at a woman in the wrong way has committed adultery, as well as the Christian (now no longer used) and Muslim prohibition on charging interest on money. All these try and place restraints on basic human initiative and instinct (which God made in the first place). They are in effect, thought crimes.

 

 

 

The Law was established to realize how much we cannot do, and to point us to God - what really saves us is not the Law, but the dependence on God that comes from a failed attempt at observing the Law.

 

 

 

I guess what you're suggesting is that if a Law cannot always be followed it, to just abolish it? I disagree with that notion.

 

 

 

So do I, but by commanding people to do something which they cannot hope so achieve with the threat of hell if they don't I do disagree with.

 

 

 

This leads to two possible things, eternal guilt and feelings of sin about 'impure' thoughts. These in turn lead to hysterical confessions, false promises of improvement and loud and often violent denunciations of other 'sinners'.

 

 

 

That train of events is a slippery slope and, just untrue.

 

 

 

Based on who's experience? Calling something untrue without evidence isn't much of a refutation, there's clear psychological evidence of people feeling immense guilt most of their lives for "sinning". And if you don't believe the second then look no further then certain pastors or preachers who do indeed violently denounce other sinners.

 

 

 

The other possibilty is that a large enough donation to the right religious authority and cleanse you of your sins. Or, you can bend the rules, the Dalai Lama tells us that you can visit a prostitute as long as someone else pays her, Shia Muslims offer a temporary marriage selling men the permission to take a woman as his wife for an hour or two with all the usual vows then divorce her straight afterwards. St. Peter's was financed by a similar arrangement.

 

 

 

This is nothing but a anger-filled hate-fest against all religion. There's nothing to even respond to here. Your post has degraded, and thus I disgress. Maybe I"ll respond to the rest later on.

 

 

 

A hate filled anger-fest? No, this is fact. The above is all true, uncomfortable as it may be. If you want to call an expression of the sad truths and facts a degredation of my post then so be it, but there is little bias in what I just said, it's just presenting it in a different light to the status quo.

You offered the idea of the illusion of choice. How do you know it is only an illusion? I think someone would only know if something is an illusion if they step out of the picture and look at it with a different view. (Like a magician's tricks) I believe that is only possible when we die, we will find the full picture. Since you are typing rebutles, I take that you are still alive. I personally don't believe you could honestly understand the full picture if you are alive. There are many things I dont completely understand, I will admit that, but I am only human. That is why I feel that this debate will never cease. No one can think how God has, and see what he has planned or destined for us. Maybe he has predestined us to be his, maybe he loved us and gave us a choice to be free. I personally wont have a set answer until I die and know for sure.

 

 

 

Was I predestined to believe this? Was I given a choice to believe this? I dont know the answer to either of those. Like I said, I will find out when I die and I am content in knowing that. I dont see knowing the answer to those questions now would help me anymore than my current world view and beliefs I hold.

You offered the idea of the illusion of choice. How do you know it is only an illusion? I think someone would only know if something is an illusion if they step out of the picture and look at it with a different view. (Like a magician's tricks) I believe that is only possible when we die, we will find the full picture. Since you are typing rebutles, I take that you are still alive. I personally don't believe you could honestly understand the full picture if you are alive. There are many things I dont completely understand, I will admit that, but I am only human. That is why I feel that this debate will never cease. No one can think how God has, and see what he has planned or destined for us. Maybe he has predestined us to be his, maybe he loved us and gave us a choice to be free. I personally wont have a set answer until I die and know for sure.

 

 

 

Was I predestined to believe this? Was I given a choice to believe this? I dont know the answer to either of those. Like I said, I will find out when I die and I am content in knowing that. I dont see knowing the answer to those questions now would help me anymore than my current world view and beliefs I hold.

 

Like I said in my previous post, it is the illusion of choice because there are verses in the bible about Predestination. If the bible did not speak of Predestination, then, yes, it would be vague.

You offered the idea of the illusion of choice. How do you know it is only an illusion? I think someone would only know if something is an illusion if they step out of the picture and look at it with a different view. (Like a magician's tricks) I believe that is only possible when we die, we will find the full picture. Since you are typing rebutles, I take that you are still alive. I personally don't believe you could honestly understand the full picture if you are alive. There are many things I dont completely understand, I will admit that, but I am only human. That is why I feel that this debate will never cease. No one can think how God has, and see what he has planned or destined for us. Maybe he has predestined us to be his, maybe he loved us and gave us a choice to be free. I personally wont have a set answer until I die and know for sure.

 

 

 

Was I predestined to believe this? Was I given a choice to believe this? I dont know the answer to either of those. Like I said, I will find out when I die and I am content in knowing that. I dont see knowing the answer to those questions now would help me anymore than my current world view and beliefs I hold.

 

Like I said in my previous post, it is the illusion of choice because there are verses in the bible about Predestination. If the bible did not speak of Predestination, then, yes, it would be vague.

 

But there are also verses in the Bible about Free Will. I dont deny that there are verses about Predestination, that is why I said the debate can go both ways and will never be fully solved until we die.

You offered the idea of the illusion of choice. How do you know it is only an illusion? I think someone would only know if something is an illusion if they step out of the picture and look at it with a different view. (Like a magician's tricks) I believe that is only possible when we die, we will find the full picture. Since you are typing rebutles, I take that you are still alive. I personally don't believe you could honestly understand the full picture if you are alive. There are many things I dont completely understand, I will admit that, but I am only human. That is why I feel that this debate will never cease. No one can think how God has, and see what he has planned or destined for us. Maybe he has predestined us to be his, maybe he loved us and gave us a choice to be free. I personally wont have a set answer until I die and know for sure.

 

 

 

Was I predestined to believe this? Was I given a choice to believe this? I dont know the answer to either of those. Like I said, I will find out when I die and I am content in knowing that. I dont see knowing the answer to those questions now would help me anymore than my current world view and beliefs I hold.

 

Like I said in my previous post, it is the illusion of choice because there are verses in the bible about Predestination. If the bible did not speak of Predestination, then, yes, it would be vague.

 

But there are also verses in the Bible about Free Will. I dont deny that there are verses about Predestination, that is why I said the debate can go both ways and will never be fully solved until we die.

 

 

 

No, you don't understand. Those phrases are not about Free Will. They are about choices. Free Will is dependent on whether or not Predestination exists, but not the other way around.

 

 

 

That means, since there are verses in the bible about Predestination, the verses about choices are illusions.

 

 

 

If there weren't verses about Predestination, then the verses about choices would be Free Will.

I know I cannot change anyone's mind in this forum and anyone who debates in christian/athiest topics knows that there is no winning side. Its like Iraq, a never ending, never winning war for either side.

 

 

 

So therefor I will post my opinion on what I believe and you may challenge that if you want to, but I will not change my mind. Its set in stone.

 

 

 

I believe in God, my background would be a Christian. I too, am eager to learn about the world and how it was created. I am not eager to learn how to change my Faith so a low self esteem ego manic can say to himself every morning "I was right, they was wrong". In the end, we will all find out who was right. So lets continue.

 

 

 

I believe the body has adaptive properties to it, but not evolving ones. Humans can adapt themselfs to almost any situation, and I have yet to see a "evolving" one. Many say I will not because this process takes millions of years.

 

 

 

But thats where I get confused, why is the transition so slow? If I lived 1 million years, I would have probably endured countless of different human body conditions during my lifetime. The only way I could truely evolve is to dip myself into a permanent condition that would take years. However, even if I did so, I doubt my body would start evolving to take on the condition. If I as a human stood in the cold 100 million years, I seriously doubt my body one change in the slightest.

 

 

 

So therefor I do not believe in the Evolution theory, nor do I believe in the Big Bang. To be honest, it sounds like a kid thought that up. "How did we come to be? A Bang..".

 

 

 

Everyone knows Math is logical, and we can conclude that nothing = nothing and something = something. To say we was all created and design and exist from nothing defys logic and laws. But I don't want to waste anymore time on this subject, and on to the next.

 

 

 

Another reason why I firmly believe in Christanity is because I understand a lot of spiritual principals behind it. Its not something for the weak minded and I catch myself needing help on quite a few verses. But once explained, everything in the spiritual makes complete and perfect sense.

 

 

 

One as a Athiest may say "I enjoy life to the fullest because there is no life after the next". So he goes on living a happy life because this is the only life he has.

 

 

 

However, when its time for him to die and enter void, he will most likely desperatly cling to his life and be depressed.

 

 

 

To me, the opposite would be true. I believe a Heaven exists, so I would happily go into death without fear. And thats why I believe it strongly, because its better to die happy than to die scared.

 

 

 

Thats just my thoughts.. feel free to play devils advocate, but I will not be changing my mind.

 

 

 

~Defender~

I know I cannot change anyone's mind in this forum and anyone who debates in christian/athiest topics knows that there is no winning side. Its like Iraq, a never ending, never winning war for either side.

 

 

 

So therefor I will post my opinion on what I believe and you may challenge that if you want to, but I will not change my mind. Its set in stone.

 

 

 

I believe in God, my background would be a Christian. I too, am eager to learn about the world and how it was created. I am not eager to learn how to change my Faith so a low self esteem ego manic can say to himself every morning "I was right, they was wrong". In the end, we will all find out who was right. So lets continue.

 

 

 

I believe the body has adaptive properties to it, but not evolving ones. Humans can adapt themselfs to almost any situation, and I have yet to see a "evolving" one. Many say I will not because this process takes millions of years.

 

 

 

But thats where I get confused, why is the transition so slow? If I lived 1 million years, I would have probably endured countless of different human body conditions during my lifetime. The only way I could truely evolve is to dip myself into a permanent condition that would take years. However, even if I did so, I doubt my body would start evolving to take on the condition. If I as a human stood in the cold 100 million years, I seriously doubt my body one change in the slightest.

 

 

 

So therefor I do not believe in the Evolution theory, nor do I believe in the Big Bang. To be honest, it sounds like a kid thought that up. "How did we come to be? A Bang..".

 

 

 

Everyone knows Math is logical, and we can conclude that nothing = nothing and something = something. To say we was all created and design and exist from nothing defys logic and laws. But I don't want to waste anymore time on this subject, and on to the next.

 

 

 

Another reason why I firmly believe in Christanity is because I understand a lot of spiritual principals behind it. Its not something for the weak minded and I catch myself needing help on quite a few verses. But once explained, everything in the spiritual makes complete and perfect sense.

 

 

 

One as a Athiest may say "I enjoy life to the fullest because there is no life after the next". So he goes on living a happy life because this is the only life he has.

 

 

 

However, when its time for him to die and enter void, he will most likely desperatly cling to his life and be depressed.

 

 

 

To me, the opposite would be true. I believe a Heaven exists, so I would happily go into death without fear. And thats why I believe it strongly, because its better to die happy than to die scared.

 

 

 

Thats just my thoughts.. feel free to play devils advocate, but I will not be changing my mind.

 

 

 

~Defender~

 

 

 

O Warrior, where art thou?

If I as a human stood in the cold 100 million years, I seriously doubt my body one change in the slightest.

 

 

 

I agree, but that is not evolution, or anything like evolution, or an argument to not believe in evolution.

 

 

 

So therefor I do not believe in the Evolution theory

 

 

 

Evolution does not state that we stand in the cold for one hundred million years and we suddenly adapt to the enviroment. The humans who are more prone to the cold die, and the ones who are not (ie have more hair on their bodies) survive. They multiply with each other and so forth until all the human species has more hair and can survive the cold.

1. True, but even those who don't present it to their children as fact. My parents are not Biblical fundamentalists by any means, they're not even that Christian, but when I was young I was told that the world was created in 6 days by God. It's a story which is told with a surprising degree of conviction given the fact that most of the adults who are telling it might not even believe it themselves. But your point has little consolation towards the children of any Christian parents or any kind of faith, who, like me were brought up believing the creation story literally.

 

2. I didn't call Christianity a fairy tale, I called most of the creation stories of the various religions fairy tales, which when you examine them they are. Read about the Hindu creation story, sounds pretty far fetched, but it arose with the same intentions as the Christian version, to try and explain what we could not know at the time. To take it as historical fact nowadays when we know better is like basing all your scientific knowledge on Aristotle.

 

 

 

All this shows is that you are unhappy with how some Christians bring up their children. What does this have to do with Christian doctrine? Does it tell us in the New Testament to bring up our children on fundamentalist views? If you can prove that parents that do this are doing so because of a Biblical command, then sure.

 

 

 

1. Biblical literalism and science are mutually exlusive. You cannot believe that the Earth was created 6000 years ago in 6 days and the scientific version. They just don't fit.

 

 

 

I said God and science aren't mutually exclusive. One can easily believe in God creating the universe and science as well. You're relying on a literal interpretation of the Bible to support your argument, which is a straw man.

 

 

 

Thankfully it doesn't, they come to Christianity for their own reasons, often in times of need and when they feel like they need some kind of support. Clearly you don't have to be indoctrinated into a religion to believe in it, but i'm willing to be that if you raised one generation of children in a neutral, objective manner you wouldn't get them growing up thinking of the existence of God or validity of the Bible as obvious.

 

 

 

What does raising a child in an objective manner look like?

 

 

 

Do you think knowing that it's fiction that takes away any of the enjoyment?

 

 

 

Yes, I've seen children cry when they find out Santa Claus is a myth. I don't think children cry when they're enjoying something more.

 

 

 

I don't think you get kids growing up terrified of the consequences of the existence of Santa Claus

 

 

 

The Bible doesn't tell us to scare our children with fire and brimstone. This is another action that you're interpreting as an application of Christianity and thus using it to refute Christianity. Another straw man.

 

 

 

You mean like actually thinking about how God was asking a man to kill an innocent child for the sins of the man? Doesn't that disgust you?

 

 

 

I thought I already addressed the fact that from a Christian viewpoint, everybody's life belongs to God and that nobody is innocent?

 

 

 

Oh, and there's the fact that God never actually had Abraham sacrifice his son. I'm sure if you'll remember, once Abraham proved faithful God provided another way out.

 

 

 

We are all deserving of death? How tragic, how self-deprecating that you should submit your precious life to the whim of an apparently fickle creator.

 

 

 

This is something we will never agree on. We disagree on the nature/benefits/consequences of pride/humbleness and so this argument will never be resolved.

 

 

 

If God is omnipotent, and omniscient why place the child in the world in the first place if he knew Abraham would have to kill it?

 

 

 

Abraham didn't kill it.

 

 

 

It doesn't make any sense that God should have put a child in the world for the sake of testing the faith of Abraham.

 

 

 

Are you aware of the circumstances under which Abraham's child came into the world originally?

 

 

 

Not to mention this entire argument about Abraham is ridiculous because it's prior to Judaism AND Christianity, and Christianity is quite separate from Judaism as far as sacrifices and atonement for sins is concerned.

 

 

 

does God approve of animal sacrifice? Yes.

 

 

 

Post Christ?

 

 

 

 

 

It wasn't an aside at all, I was pointing out that there are numerous contradictions in the telling of this particular story. How do contradictions give the Bible any more authority?

 

 

 

Because if you and I were going to try and doctor two separate biographies to be the same we wouldn't load it full of minor inconsistencies, would we?

 

 

 

I wish it was. The sad truth is that the charge of deicide was only recently dropped by the Vatican, look it up.

 

 

 

I didn't know what the Vatican laying charges on someone has to do with my salvation. That's what I don't understand.

 

 

 

 

 

Hell isn't part of Christianity? The last part maybe, but the first is still relevant.

 

 

 

Terrifying children with Hell isn't part of Christianity.

 

 

 

You might not be told to, but the promise of an afterlife can lead people to be so.

 

 

 

I don't see how someone ignoring Biblical commands (not taking life flippantly) has anything to do with the validity of Christianity. Again, stop confusing bad application with bad principle.

 

 

 

So do I, but by commanding people to do something which they cannot hope so achieve with the threat of hell if they don't I do disagree with.

 

 

 

Me too. That's why Christ's forgiveness exists.

 

 

 

Based on who's experience? Calling something untrue without evidence isn't much of a refutation, there's clear psychological evidence of people feeling immense guilt most of their lives for "sinning". And if you don't believe the second then look no further then certain pastors or preachers who do indeed violently denounce other sinners.

 

 

 

I'm not denying it happens, I'm just saying that it's got nothing to do with Christian principles.

To be honest, it sounds like a kid thought that up. "How did we come to be? A Bang..".

 

 

 

I agree on that one.

 

 

 

I also agree that spirituality is quite an important thing.

 

 

 

Your argumentation on why you don't believe in Evolution is miserable. It could be presented in a much more convincing way.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree with Paperclips that the Bibel says that there is no free will.

I believe the body has adaptive properties to it, but not evolving ones...

 

 

 

[...]

 

 

 

...Everyone knows Math is logical, and we can conclude that nothing = nothing and something = something. To say we was all created and design and exist from nothing defys logic and laws. But I don't want to waste anymore time on this subject, and on to the next.

 

It's not worth explaining this anymore (nor the humorous hypocrisy in that last statement), nor is it worth destroying a thread with this crap. I've said it a million times, and I'll probably have to say it another two million: Try and actually understand something before you choose to reject it, wudja?

 

 

 

Just take a biology class, please (read up on Lammarck as well, his ideas, which were the same as yours, have been proven wrong). And try not to "set your beliefs in stone", seeing as how the most dangerous people in the world are those who think they know the truth.

 

 

 

Carry on ya'll, and resist responding to anymore science/religion posts. Keep this thread on Christianity, if ya'll would.

 

 

 

One as a Athiest may say "I enjoy life to the fullest because there is no life after the next". So he goes on living a happy life because this is the only life he has.

 

 

 

However, when its time for him to die and enter void, he will most likely desperatly cling to his life and be depressed.

 

 

 

To me, the opposite would be true. I believe a Heaven exists, so I would happily go into death without fear. And thats why I believe it strongly, because its better to die happy than to die scared.

 

 

 

Thats just my thoughts.. feel free to play devils advocate, but I will not be changing my mind.

 

 

 

~Defender~

 

On the contrary. I don't believe in an afterlife, I believe in nothingness, a form of Nirvana if you will. The thought of living life forever, even in Heaven, scares me much more than the idea of not existing at all.

 

 

 

Ya, weird to a Christian I guess, but that's my stance, and it wouldn't surprise me if the average atheist felt the same way. Athiests and theists both have their own ways of enjoying life, so don't try and act like yours is superior to theirs, even in dying, okay?

Yes, lets outright deny a theory without looking into it because it has the word "Bang" in it and therefore sounds childish.

Based on who's experience? Calling something untrue without evidence isn't much of a refutation, there's clear psychological evidence of people feeling immense guilt most of their lives for "sinning". And if you don't believe the second then look no further then certain pastors or preachers who do indeed violently denounce other sinners.

 

 

 

I'm not denying it happens, I'm just saying that it's got nothing to do with Christian principles.

 

 

 

This is a huge issue imo. It seems like guilt and christianity are closely knit. It appears to me however that christianity should be the cure to guilt, because god is supposed to forgive everything. So actually you wouldn't have to worry about your sins, as long as you love (god).

 

 

 

I certainly don't believe in a god like christians do, but i'm interested in the bibel and expecially in Jesus, who seemed to know quite a bit.

Yes, lets outright deny a theory without looking into it because it has the word "Bang" in it and therefore sounds childish.

 

I know one theory that I would like to look into:

 

 

 

Me. You. In bed. Bang.

You offered the idea of the illusion of choice. How do you know it is only an illusion? I think someone would only know if something is an illusion if they step out of the picture and look at it with a different view. (Like a magician's tricks) I believe that is only possible when we die, we will find the full picture. Since you are typing rebutles, I take that you are still alive. I personally don't believe you could honestly understand the full picture if you are alive. There are many things I dont completely understand, I will admit that, but I am only human. That is why I feel that this debate will never cease. No one can think how God has, and see what he has planned or destined for us. Maybe he has predestined us to be his, maybe he loved us and gave us a choice to be free. I personally wont have a set answer until I die and know for sure.

 

 

 

Was I predestined to believe this? Was I given a choice to believe this? I dont know the answer to either of those. Like I said, I will find out when I die and I am content in knowing that. I dont see knowing the answer to those questions now would help me anymore than my current world view and beliefs I hold.

 

Like I said in my previous post, it is the illusion of choice because there are verses in the bible about Predestination. If the bible did not speak of Predestination, then, yes, it would be vague.

 

But there are also verses in the Bible about Free Will. I dont deny that there are verses about Predestination, that is why I said the debate can go both ways and will never be fully solved until we die.

 

 

 

No, you don't understand. Those phrases are not about Free Will. They are about choices. Free Will is dependent on whether or not Predestination exists, but not the other way around.

 

 

 

That means, since there are verses in the bible about Predestination, the verses about choices are illusions.

 

 

 

If there weren't verses about Predestination, then the verses about choices would be Free Will.

 

Choice is Free Will is it not?

Yes, lets outright deny a theory without looking into it because it has the word "Bang" in it and therefore sounds childish.

 

I know one theory that I would like to look into:

 

 

 

Me. You. In bed. Bang.

 

 

 

That's what i think about when i hear "Big Bang" to. Well.. i don't exactly think about you.

You offered the idea of the illusion of choice. How do you know it is only an illusion? I think someone would only know if something is an illusion if they step out of the picture and look at it with a different view. (Like a magician's tricks) I believe that is only possible when we die, we will find the full picture. Since you are typing rebutles, I take that you are still alive. I personally don't believe you could honestly understand the full picture if you are alive. There are many things I dont completely understand, I will admit that, but I am only human. That is why I feel that this debate will never cease. No one can think how God has, and see what he has planned or destined for us. Maybe he has predestined us to be his, maybe he loved us and gave us a choice to be free. I personally wont have a set answer until I die and know for sure.

 

 

 

Was I predestined to believe this? Was I given a choice to believe this? I dont know the answer to either of those. Like I said, I will find out when I die and I am content in knowing that. I dont see knowing the answer to those questions now would help me anymore than my current world view and beliefs I hold.

 

Like I said in my previous post, it is the illusion of choice because there are verses in the bible about Predestination. If the bible did not speak of Predestination, then, yes, it would be vague.

 

But there are also verses in the Bible about Free Will. I dont deny that there are verses about Predestination, that is why I said the debate can go both ways and will never be fully solved until we die.

 

 

 

No, you don't understand. Those phrases are not about Free Will. They are about choices. Free Will is dependent on whether or not Predestination exists, but not the other way around.

 

 

 

That means, since there are verses in the bible about Predestination, the verses about choices are illusions.

 

 

 

If there weren't verses about Predestination, then the verses about choices would be Free Will.

 

Choice is Free Will is it not?

 

No. There are two forms of choice (in this situation):

 

 

 

1) Free Choice

 

2) Illusion of Choice

 

 

 

Because the bible has Predestination, we have #2.

 

 

 

If the bible didn't have Predestination, we would have #1.

If you told a rational 18 year old adult who's well versed in the scientific big-bang model and evolution, the creation story would sound silly, childlike.

 

 

 

 

By the same logic, if you told a rational 18 year old Christian who has believed creation all his/her life about evolution and the big bang, there is almost no chance that they would believe it.