The pope has a pacemaker

[CleanShavenJesus]

Why is it that when a religious man seeks medical assistance or assistance from technology, he can be poked at for not letting God do it all? There is nothing wrong with medicene and technology., or the use of both. Does the Pope using a pacemaker disrupt the natural pattern of his life (and death), perhaps cheating his death for a while? Perhaps. But it's not like he's going to sit there and pray to God to prevent him from going into cardiac arrest. That's something put on the individual.

[Cyberman]

It's regarded as something of a lack of faith, whether or not that is what it really is. It's on the same lines as the Pope installing himself behind two inches of bulletproof glass whenever he's wheeled out in public, or churches in general having lightning conductors running up the side. A bit "practise what you preach". Atheist humour - don't worry about it.

[Anomalocaris]

Kudosed the first post because humor.

But Dirch is right: why would a god not work within the system they created?

Because the development of science and technology points overwhelmingly to a reality incompatible to centrality of god. A religionist is either stupid, or disingenuious, or both, if he avails himself the benefit that something that was only made to work because of the strength of the world view which expells god from centrality, while clinging ostentatiously via words to the centrality of god.

[Cyberman]

But Dirch is right: why would a god not work within the system they created?

Because science and technology points overwhelmingly to a godless reality.

It's like that joke about churches not offering free wi-fi, since they don't want to have to compete with an invisible, omnipresent power that actually works.

[Aegrus]

Why is it that when a religious man seeks medical assistance or assistance from technology, he can be poked at for not letting God do it all? There is nothing wrong with medicene and technology., or the use of both. Does the Pope using a pacemaker disrupt the natural pattern of his life (and death), perhaps cheating his death for a while? Perhaps. But it's not like he's going to sit there and pray to God to prevent him from going into cardiac arrest. That's something put on the individual.

It's like you're just ignoring my post.

[Violet]

It's regarded as something of a lack of faith, whether or not that is what it really is. It's on the same lines as the Pope installing himself behind two inches of bulletproof glass whenever he's wheeled out in public, or churches in general having lightning conductors running up the side. A bit "practise what you preach". Atheist humour - don't worry about it.

And I understand that point in the humor of it... regardless: of all the black jokes I make, how many of them reflect reality? Other than the grape drink thing, obviously

I don't worry about the humor, I'm with that. I worry when people start thinking this is a serious argument against X creator. Now... if they were Amish: having a pacemaker would be fucking hilarious.

---

Because the development of science and technology points overwhelmingly to a reality incompatible to centrality of god.

Explain how, please? Because way I see it: regardless of our technological prowess, God is metaphysical.

A religionist is either stupid, or disingenuious, or both, if he avails himself the benefit that something that was only made to work because of the strength of the world view which expells god from centrality, while clinging ostentatiously via words to the centrality of god.

Science is not a position on theism, nor a stance is it... those are wholly independent. Sure, scientists are typically atheists or deists... but there are theistic scientists too. The centrality of a god in a philosophical worldview does not make one incapable of the scientific method.

[Drich]

Drich,

Again, you are being ridiculous. In this case your designer fucks up, through science and technology man improves on the design, and you still want to give the inept designer credit.

Adam was the only Human 'hand crafted' by God. How long did He last? Oh, that's right 930 some odd years (outside the garden)

We copies of copies of copies of copies..... The fact that a copy this old can modified in anyway is indeed an act of God.

[Aegrus]

Drich,

Again, you are being ridiculous. In this case your designer fucks up, through science and technology man improves on the design, and you still want to give the inept designer credit.

Adam was the only Human 'hand crafted' by God. How long did He last? Oh, that's right 930 some odd years (outside the garden)

We copies of copies of copies of copies..... The fact that a copy this old can modified in anyway is indeed an act of God.

Why a sunflower as your avatar, Drich?

[Minimalist]

This is just brilliantly ironic.

Not compared to this.....

[Drich]

Because god working through humans conflicts with free will,

What if 'free will' is not the freedom to choose whatever we want to do with this life, but the right to choose where we wish to spend eternity?

because there would be no need for god to use humans to achieve his ends

Who is to say 'His ends' are not to work through our efforts? the NT seems to be littered with examples of this.

You can say that god doesn't alter free will, since free will is whatever god wants it to be. You can also say that humans inventing things and saving lives helps us grow, so it's sort of like a test.

Actually i say 'free will' (as the bible describes not the 'free will of Greek philosphy) has nothing to do with this.
Humans inventing things is little more than a young son mimicing his father. Just scaled up a few points. the fact that we are allowed to play with these 'larger toys' is only because our Father has allowed it.

However, to a god, our growth would be arbitrary. And if you're okay with god adjusting free will because he creates free will, there would then be no issue with god simply making us better people directly, without bothering with struggle or invention, since by claiming the former you admit that you're okay with the latter. (Altering free will and altering human thought and ability both break the same fundy argument; that a god would want us to live our own lives, without divine intervention.)

Maybe you should define 'free will' as i think you have confused the biblical concept of it and the Greek philosphy that uses the same name. I would also ask that you any biblical references that establish your defination. (if you have any)

He could have simply made the Pope not require a pacemaker-- miraculous healing could have solved his health issues.

What if it is not within the Will of God that support the office of the 'pope'? With mircials, but at the same time want a given man to play out a role in this religion?