Hell

[Edwardo Piet]

I have just simlpy always believed that there is someone like God. I have had different opinions of him but in the end I believed in him.

Why?

Like I said emotions such as love, compassion. Things such as infinity makes me believe that there has always been someone around.

You consider positive emotions to be evidence of God?

Surely they're just self-evidence of positive emotions?

Now when I heard that people don't believe in Hell I thought this makes sense. Thats after thinking about it for a while.

So you believe in a 'Satan' of some kind but not Hell, correct?

[Ervin]

DvF, I thought for a second that my jihad is over but I was wrong. I have given you many reasons as to why I believe in God so if I was to go into it again I would just be repeting my self.

And yes I believe that there are satan like beings but no hell and I don't think that the Quran or the bible are a Gods word. I think that in many religions, for instance in budhism they believe in demons and what ever.

I can accept that there is temporary suffering limited to this life, but eternity in horor is just what I simply don't think possible if there is a loving concious entity in charge.

However I could be wrong about lots of things. I simply can't claim anything I am saying as a fact wich is faith. I don't think for instance that God can hate. A perfect, infinite, all knowing being would be infinetly wise wich to me would imply inability to hate hence no hell. Most likely everyone will live in heaven, even atheists. The only ones that would't go on if thats the case( that some don't go on) would be if that person doesn't want to go on.

In the bible it says that a human is woth more than sparows. To me God would love the birds as much as humans.

Anyway, evil spiritual beings I think exists because God is to good to destroy him. He is perfect I believe. And returning anger for anger is evil I believe although I am not the best practitioner of my beliefs. I have become prety good but I supose we should always look for improvement.

Thanks


Thanks

[OnlyNatural]

and it is rational to believe the premises

I just can't think of any premise I could rationally believe that involves the supernatural (the invisible, unmeasurable, intangible, etc.)...

I take the existence of God to be what's known as a basic belief which supports all other beliefs, and that without that basic belief we are unable to rationally believe anything. I thus reason from God's existence, not to it. [This means that I take a particular epistemological view called foundationalism, which says that a belief is rational if it is basic or it is ultimately supported by at least one basic belief.]

Basic beliefs are said to be self-justifying or self-evident

Typically and historically, foundationalists have held either that basic beliefs are justified by mental events or states, such as experiences, that do not constitute beliefs (these are called non-doxastic mental states), or that they simply are not the type of thing that can be (or needs to be) justified.

A foundationalist might offer the following theory of justification:
A belief is epistemically justified only if (1) it is justified by a basic belief or beliefs, or (2) it is justified by a chain of beliefs that is supported by a basic belief or beliefs, and on which all the others are ultimately based.

Well, I can definitely see how you might believe in God if this is where you're coming from. However, I personally don't see God as self-evident at all. The world makes much more sense to me as an atheist than when I ever believed in God (and I did, for a while). I think we can rationally believe things and have rich emotional experiences because we have amazingly evolved brains. Some may call their experiences 'God,' but I just don't see the need.

[Ervin]

I just wanted to say how its nice that Mathew believes in death rather than torture as a punishment. I would sugest to those who like Christs teachings that there is a book called the Jeferson bible( you can check it out for your self) and one thing that to me seems belivable that I heard from some christians.

That is that you can not have a perfect or very good government or political system and total peace no mater what. Now they say that when Christ rules the Earth it will be Ok. Otherwise Satan is in charge.
Honestly I agree that things apear to be such.

Or the muslims believe as far as I know that paradise is a realm of peace and before that you want get any. Again it seems to me that this is you know true,I mean the part about this earthy systems.

Maybe you need to achieve Nirvana, maybe thats the only way.

Look, I havent worked it out yet but to me it seems as if there is Devil runing a mock on earth.

Thanks

---

I forgot to elaborate a bit further. These Christians don't want to serve in the army and the are not politicaly active(these are JW). This is what I like about them. But there are things I don't like about them.

Anyway Mathew, can you tell me about your beliefs on wars and politics.

Thanks

[Edwardo Piet]

I take the existence of God to be what's known as a basic belief which supports all other beliefs, and that without that basic belief we are unable to rationally believe anything.

All beliefs must be scrutinized. Foundationalism I take to be almost certainly false because it simply falls into special pleading.

[Matthew]

I would like to ask a bit more broadly on how it is you conclude that your belief in your idea of a god is a foundation for anything else, be it logic, morality, meaning, human rights, or whatever.

The understanding that God is a "foundation" comes from the notion that God is a necessary being and the Creator. Given these things, everything that exists either does so because of God's nature, character or (at least ultimately) His will. Very, very broadly, I think the categories we cannot help but think in (those of being, logic, epistemology, ethics, aesthetics...) can be shown to have a direct correspondence of some sort (which may be fleshed out in different ways) to God's attributes, who God is and God's purpose for Creation as taught by the Christian Scriptures.

As for how I come to the conclusion that the Christian metaphysic is correct, I have said before that I do not reason to God but from God. I accept the Christian epistemological account of belief in God as basic (as made possible by God's self-revelation) and from that basic belief that the Christian metaphysical account of the existence and nature of the world (contingent beings, laws of logic, knowledge, morality, beauty, etc.) is true. I would reject the Christian metaphysic if it were demonstrated either that the Christian metaphysic is inconsistent or incoherent, or if a non-Christian metaphysic adequately explained the existence and nature of the world.

---

I just can't think of any premise I could rationally believe that involves the supernatural (the invisible, unmeasurable, intangible, etc.)...

You already do, as demonstrated by your use of argumentation when discussing me. You believe that human beings have an intellectual obligation to be rational and that there are such things as laws of logic that we must abide by in order to have a rational discourse. Are intellectual obligations or laws of logic visible, measurable, tangible?

---

All beliefs must be scrutinized. Foundationalism I take to be almost certainly false because it simply falls into special pleading.

Since when is it a principle of foundationalism that basic beliefs can not be "scrutinized"?

[Captain Scarlet]

When evaluating a truth claim then the best and only reliable method we have is science which relies on evidence.

This is itself a truth claim, but I can conceive of no evidence that supports it. By its own lights, then, I must reject it.

Wrong. Evidence: Electricity, penicilin, suspension bidges, radio, laser, nuclear power, genetically modified food, telecscopes, computers, television, the internal combustion engine, petrol...

This is evidence that the scientific method (generally conceived) is effective for evaluating scientific claims about the physical world, but it says nothing about the epistemological claim that the scientific method is the best and only reliable method for evaluating all truth claims (e.g. epistemological claims).

My claim was that it were powerful inductive reasons for beliveing this is the case, so I should formally add the word 'probably'. I specifically stated that it is not deductive. It makes a difference to a formal philosophical structure to an argument, but not to the way we practically run our lives. As we only have a limited time on this earth we kind of have to make up our minds on what we are actually going to believe. I imagine (but do not know) that you operate your life as if that statement I made was also true.
Would you argue that Jesus really can solely be relied upon to heal you or you loved ones in a real medical emergency? Or that praying for your lamps to come on will be the best way to light up your house at night? The truth claims evalauated by science have led to the advances we see. There are no truth claims (that I'm aware of) made by theism that are not highly dubious. So lets 'walk the talk' here

[OnlyNatural]

I just can't think of any premise I could rationally believe that involves the supernatural (the invisible, unmeasurable, intangible, etc.)...

You already do, as demonstrated by your use of argumentation when discussing me. You believe that human beings have an intellectual obligation to be rational and that there are such things as laws of logic that we must abide by in order to have a rational discourse. Are intellectual obligations or laws of logic visible, measurable, tangible?

I wouldn't say we are 'obligated' to be rational, plenty of people aren't rational and we all have our irrational moments. Maybe intellectual honesty is a better way to put it, that we should strive to be as unbiased as possible, and be open to all the available evidence. Reasoning 'from' God, assuming that God is a given, immediately changes your interpretation of everything else, and you become less open to explanations that exclude God.

The laws of logic may not be visible or tangible, but I would say that they are indeed measurable. But even if they weren't, that doesn't mean that something else that is apparently 'self-evident' (ie. God) automatically exists. And obviously not everyone finds God to be self-evident; the existence of laws of logic can just as easily be accommodated in an atheistic world view.

[Godscreated]

Ervin, you say you do not believe that the Bible is the word of God yet in some of your statements you do refer to things in the Bible. If religious writings have no meaning to you then how is it you can believe in God. Since you do not believe in the Bible why is it you would worry about a hell and the eternal punishment. If you do not believe in the Bible as God's word then why have you come to believe in Satan.
Ervin God does not torture people, He does however bring justice to the righteous and that is why there is a hell. What kind of a society would we have if we did not punish those who commit crimes, and who do you believe justice is for in our society the bad people or the good. I believe justice serves the good and punishes the bad.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

If religious writings have no meaning to you then how is it you can believe in God. ?

As far as I'm aware, belief in gods,the supernataur;fairies and other superstitions were pre literate.

Sacred texts are ( eg Torah, NT,Qur'an) are only written mythologies.In many cultures,such things were not written down.