|
Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
|
|
66 members (bobrunyan, anotherscott, AaronSF, apianostudent, beeboss, brdwyguy, benkeys, 15 invisible),
2,196
guests, and
389
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,384
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,384 |
Originally posted by phykell: Originally posted by Tom-*K: [b] [b]1) Why did he let that terrible earth-quake happen on Christmas day?
2) Assuming that an honest, kind and pure person that happens to be a complete atheist dies, he/she should go to Heaven, right? Wrong. God only lets in His followers. Isn't that Degrading to Him by bringing Him down to the low level of human thinking? Being [Himself], he should not care who one believes in. Denying the right to heaven to a non-believer would be personal vengeance, the same thing we frown upon. Dear Zorro, 1. God doesn't "let" anything happen here. It's our world. 2. It's not a matter of vengeance, it's a matter of character. It's a matter of who you are, not so much in relationship to "heaven" but a interrelationship to what all of creation really entails. To deny the spiritual (i.e. atheism,) is to deny who we really are. And if we can't recognize ourselves and we can't recognize God, how can we expect God to recognize us. Heaven is not a place. It is being in the presence of God. So, there's a misconception here. Christians don't go to heaven when they die. They are in heaven as they walk this earth and they continue to be in heaven after they die. The physical state changes--the spiritual never does. That's what's meant by eternal. [/b] 1. It might be "our world", but it is still His creation and is fundamentally flawed if it can cause such disasters. Didn't He leave us enough to deal with, poisonous snakes, insects, superbugs, famine, pestilence, plague, etc.? Obviously not, He even allows the very ground we walk on to swallow us up and destroy our buildings.
2 "And if we can't recognize ourselves and we can't recognize God, how can we expect God to recognize us." He's omnipotent, that's how! Why should I have to make myself recognisable to God? Surely he knows eactly who I am, why I think like I do, why I cannot find it in myself to believe in or have the requirement to believe in Him. Surely he knows all this?
Then again, thinking back to the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve managed to hide successfully from him in just a few bushes. He had to actually call out to them to show themselves! Somehow, I'd have expected more from an omnipotent being. [/b]I confess, I haven't read through every post on this thread due to lack of time but this one caught my eye. Phykell, you are taking a much too literal approach to various phrases in the Bible. Surely if you do this you won't believe much of what the Bible says. To those who don't believe in God, do you really feel that we developed from chance occurrences alone with no help from a Creator? Do you really believe that we developed from simple evolution? Sure, evolution does occur but I would argue that with our supreme complexity and intelligence, that simple forces of nature alone could never produce such a being.
While one who sings with his tongue on fire Gargles in the rat race choir Bent out of shape from society's pliers Cares not to come up any higher But rather get you down in the hole That he's in.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 700
500 Post Club Member
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 700 |
Originally posted by DT: God knew what would happen if Eve, then Adam, [b]chose to eat from the forbidden tree. He also knew what would happen if they obeyed Him. His omniscience covers the decision tree but we chose which branches we follow. That's why we are humans with free will rather than puppets of a grand Geppeto. [/b] God also knew that they'd fail though, in fact omnipotence meant that he knew they'd fail the test when he created them. In fact, the error was his, in his creation, that they would fail the test. No, he is ultimately responsible for all our sins simply because he made us according to the bible. When I write a computer program, I have to take responsibility for the errors. I can't simply give it artificial intelligence and then blame the program itself when it fails especially not if I also know where exactly the program will fail... Originally posted by johnmoonlight: Phykell, you are taking a much too literal approach to various phrases in the Bible. Surely if you do this you won't believe much of what the Bible says. So how should I approach it? How can I be sure my interpretation is even nearly accurate? Are you saying that not only did we lose Eden, gain poisonous insects, deadly bacteria, etc. but also that the handbook we were given isn't even written in a straight-forward manner? I know we're expected to have faith, but surely it's hardly surprising if we find it very difficult to believe in an omnipotent being allowing the truly terrible things that do go on, to happen. I'm only one person and I know of individuals who have suffered terribly, and I know that those people do not deserve their suffering. I cannot reconcile this with any belief in an merciful God. I just can't and I don't blame me or so many others either. Originally posted by johnmoonlight:To those who don't believe in God, do you really feel that we developed from chance occurrences alone with no help from a Creator? Do you really believe that we developed from simple evolution? Sure, evolution does occur but I would argue that with our supreme complexity and intelligence, that simple forces of nature alone could never produce such a being. Supreme complexity and intelligence? That's a joke. Other than our brain, we're hardly suited to our environment are we? We think of ourselves as the most successful species on the planet, yet we've only been here a fraction of the time that (say) crocodiles have, and they haven't had to change much in the last million years or so have they? It's typical human arrogance to say that such creatures have reached an evolutionary dead-end and that we are somehow superior. Strange that we're destroying our own environment. I can think of so many creatures that actually contribute to the eco-system, that are at one with nature and live quite happily, in fact the only creature I can think of that stands out like a sore thumb, a fly in the ointment as it were, is mankind. Perhaps that's the real proof you're looking for, that we're such a poor factor in this planet's eco-system, that we must be fundamentally difference from all other animals, even all the physical proof says otherwise. Did life just invent itself though? I don't know, but it depends on how you define life, for example, what about new star systems being created in stellar nurseries? Who's to say those star systems won't go on to support life as something like we know it? Who's to say that the creation of life isn't actually a common-place occurrence? Who's really to say that we are so complex that we must've been created? How do you define complex anyway? Where do you get your metrics from? You talk of supreme complexity, yet you as a medical professional probably know of many flaws in the design of human beings, such as the glaring fact that human children are virtually helpless when they're born because the human brain is now so big, it has to continue to develop after the birth because the size of the cranium is now at the limit that the pelvic girdle can allow through it. That's not a great original design is it but you know what it sounds like to me? It sounds like we really did evolve from a more primitive creature and that evolution has had to make certian compromises to allow our brains to become as large and complex as they have. It certainly doesn't sound like the sort of compromise an omnipotent being would have to make, does it?
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,384
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,384 |
Originally posted by phykell: [QUOTE]Supreme complexity and intelligence? That's a joke. Other than our brain, we're hardly suited to our environment are we? You've GOT to be kidding. "Other than our brain" What other organ deals with intelligence? We are so far beyond any other species that to make comparisons is the real joke. So the crocs have outdone the humans? I'll let you have the croc brain and I'll keep my measly human one. Have you ever been in a foxhole, Phykell? I still am curious as to what exactly a person who doesn't believe in God thinks about as the mortars explode all around him. I asked this question earlier and never got an answer.
While one who sings with his tongue on fire Gargles in the rat race choir Bent out of shape from society's pliers Cares not to come up any higher But rather get you down in the hole That he's in.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,683
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
|
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,683 |
Originally posted by johnmoonlight: "Other than our brain" What other organ deals with intelligence? Our brain isn't the only thinking organ. As a physician surely you know this. Oh, wait, are we talking about men or women?
"If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to." MSU - the university of Michigan! Wheels
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,478
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,478 |
Originally posted by phykell: God also knew that they'd fail though, in fact omnipotence meant that he knew they'd fail the test when he created them. In fact, the error was his, in his creation, that they would fail the test. No, he is ultimately responsible for all our sins simply because he made us according to the bible. When I write a computer program, I have to take responsibility for the errors. I can't simply give it artificial intelligence and then blame the program itself when it fails especially not if I also know where exactly the program will fail... I guess that's our point of disagreement: you see us as predestined robots and I don't. God created us with the potential to succeed or fail, not merely to fail. Yes, He knows what will happen if we choose either path but He gave us the ability to choose which path we want to take. We are not a program or a puppet. We have free will. Faith is a choice for us; grace for Him.
Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as heck...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,934
5000 Post Club Member
|
5000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,934 |
Posted by DT: Faith is a choice for us; grace for Him. Excellent way of putting it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,384
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,384 |
Originally posted by gryphon: Originally posted by johnmoonlight: [b]"Other than our brain" What other organ deals with intelligence? Our brain isn't the only thinking organ. As a physician surely you know this.
Oh, wait, are we talking about men or women? [/b]Woops, you're correct. The other organ has a fairly one-track mind, however.
While one who sings with his tongue on fire Gargles in the rat race choir Bent out of shape from society's pliers Cares not to come up any higher But rather get you down in the hole That he's in.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,271
4000 Post Club Member
|
4000 Post Club Member
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,271 |
Originally posted by Tom-*K: ]We differ on this point. You diminish God from being the substantive object of all creation into a fluffy bunny that we can all take turns petting. Hey, don't you mess with my Fluffy Bunny! You think it is a diminishment. You obviously don't know the first thing about bunnies. Read your Bible.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 700
500 Post Club Member
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 700 |
Originally posted by johnmoonlight: You've GOT to be kidding. "Other than our brain" What other organ deals with intelligence? I don't understand your question. Originally posted by johnmoonlight: We are so far beyond any other species that to make comparisons is the real joke. So the crocs have outdone the humans? I'll let you have the croc brain and I'll keep my measly human one. That's my point though, that if you only consider intelligence, then arguably we are the most successful species and are "so far beyond any other species" as you rightly say. However, we are not exactly suited to our environment are we? We couldn't survive without clothes for example. Our eyesight is relatively poor compared to many other animals. No, it's only our intelligence which has led to our success and domination of the planet yet we're also the only species which has seriously threatened the existence of the entire eco-system. I guess it all depends on what your idea of success is really and there's loads of opinions on how it can be defined, probably as many as for how intelligence itself can be defined. For example, a dolphin is a superior creature in many ways including the fact that it is ideally suited (adapted) to its environment. Ourselves, we find we have to adapt our environments to suit us, and that is potentially disastrous for the planet as a whole. Originally posted by johnmoonlight: Have you ever been in a foxhole, Phykell? I still am curious as to what exactly a person who doesn't believe in God thinks about as the mortars explode all around him. I asked this question earlier and never got an answer. I've been in some sticky situations like most people, though I've never resorted (yet) to asking for God to intervene. However, if I did, it would not mean that I believe in God, it would simply be an act of desperation. Incidentally, I must just say at this point, that it's not my intention to try and convince anyone here that God doesn't exist. All I can do is explain why I personally do not believe. Like most people, I would say I'd like to believe in a just and merciful God, but from what I've seen in my relatively short lifespan, there just isn't one. TBH, I don't worry about God or believing in any religion thought that might change as I get older, or if I become seriously ill but if I live my life as a good person, I can say that I do so without expecting some reward in the after-life and I think in many ways, that's a more noble attitude than some religious people who act virtuously in the belief God is watching them. I wonder how many religious people are capable of sincerely selfless acts and I wonder how many can even be sure they have done any. As a non-believer I am capable of such acts and I can be sure that I've done some. That'll be my excuse on Judgement day
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 700
500 Post Club Member
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 700 |
Originally posted by johnmoonlight: I asked this question earlier and never got an answer. Talking of which, I note that you didn't address my point about human evolution and the pelvic girdle...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,934
5000 Post Club Member
|
5000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,934 |
Posted by phykell: But which one is right though? Any of them? First of all, sorry I didn't answer your first question, I thought you were just being polemical. On this: Most religions have "us" in a position of reaching up to God. All fine. But there is only one religion where God reaches down to us. That's where I would I would place my money.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,384
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,384 |
Originally posted by phykell: it has to continue to develop after the birth because the size of the cranium is now at the limit that the pelvic girdle can allow through it. /QB] Wrong. The human brain has almost completely developed by mid-pregnancy. Sure, the brain continues to grow, but the potential is all there at birth. Now I don't deny that evolution does exist. Of course it does. But simple evolution could never have produced such a specimen. We don't attempt to get to God by doing good things as you have suggested. We find God and as a result, our behavior is directly influenced. Now, I'm off to bed. I've been up all night and the 'ol lids are gettin' heavy.
While one who sings with his tongue on fire Gargles in the rat race choir Bent out of shape from society's pliers Cares not to come up any higher But rather get you down in the hole That he's in.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,934
5000 Post Club Member
|
5000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,934 |
Posed by JohnnyMoon: Wrong. The human brain has almost completely developed by mid-pregnancy. Sure, the brain continues to grow, but the potential is all there at birth. Now I don't deny that evolution does exist. Of course it does. But simple evolution could never have produced such a specimen. We don't attempt to get to God by doing good things as you have suggested. We find God and as a result, our behavior is directly influenced. Now, I'm off to bed. I've been up all night and the 'ol lids are gettin' heavy. This guy is as good as they friggin' get.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 700
500 Post Club Member
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 700 |
Originally posted by johnmoonlight: Wrong. The human brain has almost completely developed by mid-pregnancy. Sure, the brain continues to grow, but the potential is all there at birth. First you say I'm wrong, then you admit that the brain continues to grow and I don't really know what you mean when you mention the word "potential". Either it has more to grow after the birth or it doesn't. The fact is that after birth a newborn begins a rapid period of brain growth and that in the first four years of life, the brain increases to 80% of its eventual adult weight. Certainly there are two soft spots (fontanelle) on a new-born's skull where the skull bones have not yet fused. The one at the top of the head is large and diamond-shaped, and closes at around 18 months. The smaller, triangular one is at the very back of the head and closes at about six months. I suggest that the normal human baby is actually born many months prematurely and that the reason is that at full term, the baby's head could not pass through the mother's pelvic girdle? It is as a result of evolution that we have a such a compromise. Consider a typical foal that can stand on its feet within a very short time after the birth and be running around very soon after that. Back to the supposed "superiority" of Man, and imagine biologists and genetecists' surprise when at the end of the human genome project, they found that we hardly have any more genes than the other primates, some 33,000 in fact. They had forecast 100,000 or even 120,000! Further, despite obvious differences between (say) chimps and humans, brain imaging has revealed only minor neurological differences and evolutionary changes to gene DNA sequences may be less than 1%! (from New Scientist, October 2003). Originally posted by johnmoonlight: Now I don't deny that evolution does exist. Of course it does. But simple evolution could never have produced such a specimen. So have humans evolved at all? What have they evolved from? Do you agree that the pelvic girdle is an evolutionary dead-end? Do you agree that is the reason that babies are in fact born so helpless for so long? Do you agree that babies really could do with a little longer than 9 months development in the womb? Originally posted by johnmoonlight: We don't attempt to get to God by doing good things as you have suggested. We find God and as a result, our behavior is directly influenced. I believe you are sincere John and many people are hopefully like you but I would say many religious people perform good deeds just to please their God rather than because it's the right thing to do. I wonder which is more virtuous in God's eyes?
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 2,419
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 2,419 |
Crap. I just spent half an hour of my workday writing a reply, and it got lost somewhere in the posting process...
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 2,419
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 2,419 |
Okay, second try: Originally posted by phykell: ...but if I live my life as a good person, I can say that I do so without expecting some reward in the after-life and I think in many ways, that's a more noble attitude than some religious people who act virtuously in the belief God is watching them. I guess people would consider me a "religious person." I do indeed believe that God is watching us, but that is not the primary reason that I attempt to live my life according to God's will - which is my definition of living a "virtuous life." I believe that we do not achieve God's approval or salvation by adhering to (or trying to adhere to) a list of divine "do's and don'ts." I believe that God's salvation is offered to us, via His grace (i.e., not through anything that we've done to "earn" it). We then must exhibit faith in God to reach out and accept this gift. Once we do that, our faith and commitment to become a disciple of Christ (i.e., one who lives a life disciplined by Christ's instructions to us) makes us live in that manner because we owe it to God to obey His instructions, in recognition of the salvation offered freely to us, but at a cost that we ourselves could never pay. We obtain a relationship with God, through Christ, because of our faith. Our faith, and the assurance of the truth of our salvation, then strengthens us and makes us live as selflessly as possible as His disciples. These are two sides of the same coin, but their subtleties are important. Faith in God is the way in which we are saved, and a selfless life follows from the faith. If it doesn't, the faith doesn't actually exist. So if there are "religious people" who are merely doing good works as if they're trying to avoid the wrath of some supernatural ticked-off Parent, they've missed the point, and won't avoid any of their worst fears. And God does not call us to merely do good works; he first calls us to acknowledge His existence and sovereignty. It's possible to do good works without faith, but that's not what we are called to do. It's been said that "faith without works is dead." It's equally true that works without faith is hollow, at least in God's eyes. I wonder how many religious people are capable of sincerely selfless acts and I wonder how many can even be sure they have done any.
I can think of a few.
As a non-believer I am capable of such acts and I can be sure that I've done some.
I'm sure that you have too, but from a Christian perpective, God demands more of us. He first demands that we obey his command to "Follow me." The rest follows after that.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,934
5000 Post Club Member
|
5000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,934 |
Dwain, now that you're an Elder shouldn't you be saying things like, "Pshaw!" or "Oh, Fudge"?
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 2,419
2000 Post Club Member
|
2000 Post Club Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 2,419 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,111
1000 Post Club Member
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,111 |
I am no expert in evolution or the bible but where the heck did dinasaur's come from if their fossils date back millions of years before god "made" our earth? "To test the faith of my children I will scatter fossils all over the world . MAUHAUHHAUAHA!"
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 701
500 Post Club Member
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 701 |
Originally posted by Tom-*K: Dwain, now that you're an Elder shouldn't you be saying things like, "Pshaw!" or "Oh, Fudge"? [/b]Years ago, after wrestling unsuccessfully with a software problem, I found the perfect phrase. "I verbed with that noun all adjective day".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:34 PM
|
Piano
by Gino2 - 04/17/24 02:23 PM
|
|
Forums43
Topics223,408
Posts3,349,457
Members111,637
|
Most Online15,252 Mar 21st, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|