By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 05 July 2011
Edit Thread
sapphi_snake said:

Kasz216 said:

That's good, because usually you do and it makes you look like a jackass.

He's explaining it poorly but you don't really need to have faith to understand it... it's actually really quite straightfoward when you cut to the heart of Christianity.

Man is inherently good.

Those who find god and themselves and adhere to there better and true nature.  While those who choose not to adhere to there better nature freely choose to act wrong and as such find themselves outside of god because rather then focus on the spiritual and the each other.  They focus on the physical, and themselves.

Believer or not, it's fairly easy to see how that ties up everything and largely explains everything including "Why do good things happen to bad people."

 

Really the whole free choice vs divine will thing is better questioned under the "God knows what choice your going to make so how is it free will arguement" that is made against evangelicism and that suggests full true ominpotent god.

Though even that isn't really a contradiction.  Since if I travel to the future one week and find that you decide to have a diet coke over a coke, then go back to my time....

I've in no way negated your free will.

 

Man isn't inherently good. And are you suggesting that people who don't believe in god are "bad"? (see italics) You can't say that something is "good" because god asks it. That's just lazy thinking (if you can even call it that). I expected better from you (did I?).

As for the underlined, that does not negate free will, it just negates the purpose of life.

A) Man isn't inherently good... that's an opinion... and a rather pointless one when it comes to the conversation.  It seems like your just trying to retreat from the arguement to "higher ground" so as to not admit fault by trying to replace your own beliefs with christian ones to try and find an incongruity.

B) Are people who don't believe in god "bad".    No.  that's certaintly a leap of faith.

C1) I never said it was good because it was something god asks.  It's good because, it's good, you disagree that thinking about others before yourself is good.

C2) Actually, you can say something is good because god asks it.  It's not lazy so much as it is logical.  If there is one ominipotent creation god, it stands to reason that he created everything and that includes abstract concepts such as good and evil.  An all creator god could decide that raping children is good, and we would disagree, and he would be right because he is the one who has control over reality, created reality this way and holds complete knowledge of everything.

To think otherwise is to hold the logical fallacy that you are the center of the universe and the one who gets to define these abstract qualities. This is something to keep in mind even if you don't believe in an all powerful creator god as it general shows where a lot of fallacies, ignorance and stubborness comes from.  Someone placing themselves as the center of the universe.  This may be a problem you yourself are facing... afterall, look back at A.  You simply said man isn't inherently good, rather then think from the mindset that man is inherently good.  Which if you did would make the whole thing eaisly understandable.

It would be illogical to suggest that an ominpotent creation god WOULDN'T always be right.

Hence why arguements around religious literature among believers tend to focus on the trasnlation, interpretation and possibility of it being faked.

D) So in your opinion, timetravel negates the purpose of life?  Or are you talking about the Christian sense of choosing correctly?  Either way I can't see how.  That's like saying that reading the end of a book negates the point of reading the book.