Offshoot discussion of "what religion are you" thread

[Lizra]

Here's a kiss for you Rian!

[Rían]

Thanks, Lizra

(and Coney took it how I meant it, too )

[Andúril]

I like all this kissing.

*kisses RÃ*an, Lizra and BoP*

So when are we going to see the mud wrestling?

[Rían]

Thanks, Andúril

[Legolas_Frodo_Aragorn]

Just came back from being away for 3 days...you guys put up quite some arguments

[Gwaimir Windgem]

They certainly did! Though, if I am correct, Anduril didn't reply to my post (the one before the hokey pokey)...

[Lizra]

He put his dictionary in, he put his dictionary out........

[Andúril]

Gwaimir Windgem:
Stop your whirring brains from their whirring for a moment, and put aside your atheistic predeterminations.

Don't you mean preconceptions?

More:
Pause for a moment, and relax.

Phone's ringing off the hook. Pathetic sub-human end-users...

More:
Then, think about it: what if there is a God?

A God? Well, I guess that depends on the definition of "God".

More:
What if there is an eternal, omnipotent, omniscient Being without beginning or end;

I don't know what you mean by these concepts. Will you elaborate?

More:a Being which created the heavens and the earth, and everything in or on them, including Man.

In other words, created the universe? Since I'm not sure how this being affects me, I don't really have much to say.

More:
Take a moment to ponder the incredible nature of such a Being.

Well, so far all I know is that there is a being that is defined ambigiously which created the universe. Done.

More:
Imagine how powerful, how great, how vast such a Being would be.

I don't know how powerful, since you haven't explicated your idea of omnipotence. "Great" is an ambigious term. Vast? This being could be the size of a quark -- you haven't defined him as omnipresent or anything similar yet. Would you like to?

More:
Now, can you honestly say that you know beyond the shadow of a doubt that there would be nothing about such a Being, which you, as his tiny creation, a speck upon the Earth, might be unable to understand?

Well, that depends on whether the being in question interacts with the universe. Does it? Or "he" (the being has gender now, I see...).

More:
That there is no way there might be different rules of logic?

If "different rules of logic" exist then thought is pretty much useless.

More:
which would apply to such a Being?

Then incoherent concepts can in fact exist in reality, which allows other things like square circles and the absence of the Law of Non-contradiction.

More:
Or even that your own understanding of logic might not completely accurate and infallible?

I don't doubt that my own understanding of formal logic is not completely accurate and infallible. But if we conclude that a lack of complete accuracy implies complete inaccuracy, then communication has no meaningful application.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Ignored the first sentence, didn't you?

And I meant that you had predetermined that there is no God.

[Andúril]

Gwaimir Windgem:
Ignored the first sentence, didn't you?

Partly, yes.

Whatever you meant by "whirring", I took it to mean "thinking" or "thinking hard". Since I can't read your post without thinking, and I can't stop myself from thinking hard (most of the time), there was nothing I could do but ignore that part.

More:
And I meant that you had predetermined that there is no God.

Show me where I have exhibited "atheistic predetermination", and in particular, that I have predetermined that "there is no God". Keep in mind that I am an actively weak atheist. Thanks in advance.

[Rían]

A quick note for Andúril - I said on Friday that I would address your posts by Monday, but what I didn't realize is that Monday is a holiday (Martin Luther King day) here in the US, and all 3 kidlings are home from school and in a PaRtY mOoD! I think I probably won't be able to get to it in detail until tomorrow - sorry - however, I'll try to hit a few things today.

[Andúril]

RÃ*an:
A quick note for Andúril - I said on Friday that I would address your posts by Monday, but what I didn't realize is that Monday is a holiday (Martin Luther King day) here in the US, and all 3 kidlings are home from school and in a PaRtY mOoD! I think I probably won't be able to get to it in detail until tomorrow - sorry - however, I'll try to hit a few things today.

Take your time, RÃ*an. I've got tons of things to do anyway.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Anduril: As you have been talking about how God is impossible, logic proves that there is no God, etc. it is certainly a logical conclusion to draw that you have predetermined that their is no God. Anyway, this is nitpicking.

I never said that a lack of complete accuracy means complete inaccuracy. Don't put words in my mouth.

By "whirring", I meant stop the constant attempting to prove and disprove; couldn't you just read it, without dissecting and nitpicking?

Eternal is unending. Something that will never end.
Omnipotent is all-powerful. This does not have to do with being able to lie. As Rian said, there are two kinds of can; one can which is is physically able to (like I can pick up that box). Another has to do with who you are, and you're nature (like Lady Macbeth could not kill the king, because of his resemblance to her father).
Omnipresent means a being that is Everywhere. Allow me to address an issue; you will say that God cannot be omnipresent: Hell is separation from God. As I have said before: All of this Logic does not really apply to the supernatural, in my opinion. You cannot force the supernatural to fit the rules of the natural. Otherwise, how would it be supernatural?

When I say vast, I don't mean physically; God's physical form was that of Jesus Christ, or the form he used when he visited Abram, or (I think, but I'm not sure) Melchezidec. I refer to a different kind of vastness; a supernatural vastness; his Being is vast, not his physical shape.

This being affected you by creating the world you walk on, and creating you (indirectly), according to Christian beliefs. I would say that's a pretty substantial way to affect someone.

EXACTLY. In my belief, the human being cannot know exactly how powerful God is.

Sorry if my answers are out of place; just did it at random.

1 last thing: Couldn't you have just stopped your analysing, logic-izing :P, and dissection, and just read it, without doing any of that; just read it and done this one thing I asked?

[Rían]

Originally posted by Gwaimir Windgem
Omnipresent means a being that is Everywhere. Allow me to address an issue; you will say that God cannot be omnipresent: Hell is separation from God. As I have said before: All of this Logic does not really apply to the supernatural, in my opinion. You cannot force the supernatural to fit the rules of the natural. Otherwise, how would it be supernatural?

Did Andúril comment on that somewhere? I must have missed it. I wondered if someone was going to pick up on that apparent contradiction when I said that Hell is where God isn't. I explained that concept rather simplistically, and there is NO contradition with God's omnipresence there. I'll have to put that one in my queue, but basically I agree with what Gwaimir says in general, that you cannot force the supernatural to fit the rules of the natural. We as finite created beings cannot even comprehend all of the 'rules' that are in existence, but what we can see of God's rules makes sense, and God abides by the reality that He has made.

Two quick examples of the 'rules' idea - there's a great one in The Chronicles of Narnia by C. S. Lewis, and a great one in the Bible.

Narnia - (btw, Narnia is not an allegory in the sense of Aslan is Jesus and Narnia is this world; what Lewis says it is is his idea of how Jesus would appear in a different world; one where animals can talk. Aslan is definitely Jesus, but Narnia is not Earth. And if there is sin in Narnia, then Jesus would also come to Narnia to die there for sinners.) Anyway, Edward (one of the 4 kids that comes to Narnia from Earth) is a traitor, and thus his life is forfeit. The rules of Narnia say that a traitor shall die. The White Witch knows the rules, and rightfully claims the right to kill Edward. However, Aslan offers himself in Edward's place. The witch is thrilled with this - Aslan is a MUCH greater prize than Edward - and Aslan allows himself to be killed in Edward's place. However, Aslan comes back to life - is this 'against the rules'? Aslan explains it as follows:

from The Chronicles of Narnia (book 1) - The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe
"It means," said Aslan, "that though the Witch knew the Deep Magic, there is a magic deeper still which she did not know. Her knowledge goes back only to the dawn of Time. But if she could have looked a little further back, into the stillness and the darkness before Time dawned, she would have read there a different incantation. She would have known that when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor's stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backwards."

Please stop and contemplate the truths expressed in this little section. I think stories are excellent ways to convey truth, and this section here explains how Aslan follows a law, yet to some understanding appears to not follow it, but he is actually following a deeper law that builds on the first, and that only Omnipotence knew (and finite minds can't know everything!).

The example from the Bible is when Jesus saw the moneychangers and merchants in the temple court -

Matthew 21:12
And Jesus entered the temple and cast out all those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the moneychangers and the seats of those who were selling doves.

Do you think Jesus sinned here, and violated his own laws, for example, of loving your neighbor as yourself? Or is there something else going on here, a higher law?

[Gwaimir Windgem]

I don't think Anduril commented on that, that I can remember at least: I was just saying that beforehand.

That is a really great passage! I wish I still had my Narnia books.

[Rían]

Oh, I see - I missed the 'will' in 'you will say' - oh well, a good topic, anyway!

Yes, Narnia is really good, you can see one of my favorite quotes from there in my sig. I can almost feel the waves when I read The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. And I think Lewis really succeeds in giving just a glimpse of heaven in the last book - I always get a thrill when I read that section.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

My favorite was probably the Magician's Nephew: I loved the Creation story, and how it tells about the beginnings of Narnia, and the Lamp-post!

[Coney]

Lewis really succeeds in giving just a glimpse of heaven in the last book - I always get a thrill when I read that section.

The Last Battle.

Geez yes, made my hair stand up on end ......... and Aslans words about Susan......scary and very profound.

Onwards and upwards.........Onwards and upwards..or was it vice-versa?

Brilliant books

*off to explore the wardrobe*

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Have fun! Go see some Centaurs for me!

[Rían]

*can't remember, so looks it up*

Ah! "Further up and further in!"

And there's something in The Silver Chair that I hope I can get to tomorrow to illustrate another angle of our discussion...