|
No Reason To Worship
|
 (September 28, 2009 at 6:22 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: God's attributes are entirely consistent if you consider them fully. Primarily: God is love. Or I could just as easily say: God's attributes are entirely inconsistent if you consider them fully. Nevertheless, primarily: God is hate. I can assert things too. I also don't know the mind of God  EvF 
God is love
Love is blind God is blind One chip equals three bisquits! Pass the vegemite! Rhizo  
H0ary H0bbit Religious Views: “Never to suffer would never to have been blessed.” - Edgar Allan Poe RE: No Reason To Worship
September 28, 2009 at 7:13 pm
(This post was last modified: September 28, 2009 at 7:14 pm by fr0d0.)
@ Evie: Yet your bare assertion fits no known descriptor of God, where mine does. Yours is the Straw Man. When discussing the Christian God we can assert what is known. We're not talking something undefined here. Same as with evolution. People can barely assert evolution. Most of us understand what that is, and don't need it explaining every time. It's something defined.
Ignorance on your part is no excuse.
Indeed ignorance is no excuse. And no one can know the mind of God. I am merely trying to understand how God can possibly allow such suffering in the world and still be just. I am hypothesizing. I'm thinking about how, if he is indeed perfect, then he doesn't need to care. He doesn't need anything. I am not making a straw-man, because I am not talking about how the Bible defines God. Because I think the Bible never justifies how a truly Just God could allow such suffering.
EvF 
Actually fr0d0... I was of the mind that he was quite logical
 I would like to think that I think, which would be a thought, therefore I think ^_^
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
H0ary H0bbit Religious Views: “Never to suffer would never to have been blessed.” - Edgar Allan Poe
You can't know the mind of God but that's not an excuse for not knowing the nature of God which includes that he is love. You are wise to question. You certainly don't have to take the established view that theologians have concluded, just as I don't have to take on face value what scientists claim about evolution. I could recreate those experiments myself, although I guess it would be prohibitively expensive and beyond my means. We can question everything and that is only right and is what Christianity promotes. Presumably we will come up with what our very learned predecessors come up with or will be hailed geniuses of our time in discovering the flaws.
I of course don't agree with your stance on religion. But other than that I agree with the rest of your post right there. I am glad you understand that I am just questioning. I am well aware that my hypothesizing disagrees with the Christian interpretation of the God of the Bible. I am just trying to interpret my own way because I personally don't think that the Bible explains how God can really be Just.
I love hypothesizing. Hypothesising + speculating= the very essence of philosophy I think. I think most of philosophy is nonsense assumptions, but then I think a lot of stuff is crap, not just philosophy. I love the essence of philosophy that is hypothesising and speculating. Philosophising. EvF
H0ary H0bbit Religious Views: “Never to suffer would never to have been blessed.” - Edgar Allan Poe (September 28, 2009 at 7:40 pm)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: I personally don't think that the Bible explains how God can really be Just. Then you need to justify that against the overwhelming logic for. My personal hypothesizing varies greatly from the Christian interpretation too. It has to otherwise it wouldn't be valid questioning.
Philosophy without its basis upon the equality (IE: Metaphysics) is nonsense
The rest of it is pure logic
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
(September 28, 2009 at 7:45 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Then you need to justify that against the overwhelming logic for. I don't see any overwhelming logic. So I don't think the onus is on me. Quote:My personal hypothesizing varies greatly from the Christian interpretation too. It has to otherwise it wouldn't be valid questioning. I find that interesting fr0d0. Please elaborate, if you will. EvF |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
