Why you believe what you believe I

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

I believe that the surface of the world will be consumed in a nuclear holocaust.

Sadly, I think this is one of the more likely possibilities.

When we die, I believe we will go to heaven. I have to go soon, but I can get into this more later.

I'm not very certain what heaven is. I like the romantic ideas around the "typical" Christian interpretation, but I think this is more a way to interpret something that's impossible to understand into something tangible.

I can get into this more if someone wishes me too, or we can discuss something else. It's all good.

Who are you to arbitrarily decide I am wrong about homosexuality being a sin and you are right about its being fine?

I didn't intend my original statement to be a criticism of people who do feel homosexuality is wrong, though I see now it can be construed this way.

The reason I do not feel my beliefs are arbitrary is because I realize that I could be dead wrong. I will live my life according to my beliefs. If it turns out that I'm wrong, when I die and go to heaven (which I believe will happen to everyone, going to heaven I mean) I will apologize to God then.

I respect your right to live your life according to your beliefs, and for the rational reason that many people hold these beliefs. It is due to this, and the acknowledgement that I may be wrong, that I do not feel my beliefs are somehow better than yours, or automatically right etc. (I don't think you feel you're automatically right, I say this merely to outline why I'm not being arbitrary As a side note, perhaps all our beliefs are arbitrary to a certain degree, because we have to make assumptions at some point in our reasoning).

The reason I even used the word arbitrary in the first place is this:
You and I are both rational human beings who read the Bible, a complex and deeply meaningful holy book. I interpret a passage one way, you another. Since both of us have the equal chance of being ultimately right about it, perhaps it is better to choose the path that respects human rights, which sometimes transcend religion. Despite my ultimate belief that I'm right, I believe my previous paragraph still stands.

(I'm pretty sure you're Christian so forgive me if I'm wrong in this assumption.)

I really have to go, but I realize some of my points and/or intentions may be unclear, so I'll be back later.

Also, Lief is completely right about Anglicans. We are a very diverse group of people.

Cheerio!

And thank you all for your intelligent and thoughtful questions. I'm really enjoying this!

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

I didn't intend my original statement to be a criticism of people who do feel homosexuality is wrong, though I see now it can be construed this way.

Don't worry; I felt no insult.

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

The reason I do not feel my beliefs are arbitrary is because I realize that I could be dead wrong. I will live my life according to my beliefs.

Okay. That's nice, for a lot of liberals believe every worldview is equally true. Nice it is to meet a liberal who doesn't agree with that .

A lot of conservative Christians, like RÃ*an, would also admit the possibility that they're dead wrong. However, you must admit that some theories seem more plausible then others. For example, you certainly are permitted to believe still in Isostasy, but because of evidence, the Theory of Plate Tectonics seems far more likely to be true. Because of evidence, RÃ*an and myself are Christians. My faith in God would be extremely weak right now (or nonexistent) if God hadn't met me and shown me through my meeting him that he existed. I believe in the God of the burning bush, the pillar of fire and cloud and the Pentecost explosion. I haven't experienced him yet in as much glory as I hope and pray to, but that of him which I have experienced convinces me that those forementioned things happened. You must admit that if one could encounter the God described in the Old Testament and the Book of Acts, evidence would swiftly stack up to cause all contrary beliefs to flounder.

I don't believe that religion lies outside of the field of evidence. Evidence can be found to debunk or to support Christianity, and both logical debate and other lines of evidence can be used to approach the controversy between liberals and conservatives.

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

I respect your right to live your life according to your beliefs, and for the rational reason that many people hold these beliefs. It is due to this, and the acknowledgement that I may be wrong, that I do not feel my beliefs are somehow better than yours, or automatically right etc. (I don't think you feel you're automatically right, I say this merely to outline why I'm not being arbitrary As a side note, perhaps all our beliefs are arbitrary to a certain degree, because we have to make assumptions at some point in our reasoning).

I agree. One thing my Dad says is, "If you have no bias, then you haven't decided anything yet."

What I was doing in my previous post was pointing out a flaw in one of the most common liberal beliefs. That belief is that everyone believes truth. Your truth his as good as my truth, and both are true. Even if things are absolutely contrary to one another, they are both true. I was demonstrating that this belief flounders on itself, because if you believe that, then you believe my beliefs (that you're wrong about this philosophy) are untrue. So you're failing by your own rules. However, I'm glad to find that you aren't a part of this belief system.

As to what you said here: "What right have we to say whether someone else's way of life is right or not?" Let's say you have a son, and he grows up to about thirty years old. He plans to climb Mount Everest, without any training whatsoever, simply to show that it can be done. Many people die on Mount Everest, and they are some of the best professional climbers there are. What your boy wants to do looks like suicide, even though he doesn't see it at all as suicide. He's confident he can make it safely. It's "his chosen way of life."

Perhaps he's heard reports that this can be done and heard "scientific evidence" that it can be done. He's planning to gamble everything he owns on the fact that he will make it.

Now, you don't have the right to lock him in his room and forcibly restrain him. He's a grown man; he can make his own decisions. However, you have every right to do your utmost to convince him he's going to severely hurt himself.

That is what Christians do. We have the same right you have to talk to your son and beg him not to go.

Perhaps the example would be better if it wasn't a son that was going up, but a friend. But anyway, this is essentially how I see the situation. I would strongly encourage the person not to do this, because the evidence to me seems very great that he shouldn't. I would show what the evidence is, also. In the end it's that person's decision to make, however.



Insidious Rex, in case you're reading this, here's where we differ in this example about gay marriage. I believe Gay marriage is like this: That one wayward friend is trying to encourage your children to go up Everest with him.

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

The reason I even used the word arbitrary in the first place is this:
You and I are both rational human beings who read the Bible, a complex and deeply meaningful holy book. I interpret a passage one way, you another. Since both of us have the equal chance of being ultimately right about it, perhaps it is better to choose the path that respects human rights, which sometimes transcend religion. Despite my ultimate belief that I'm right, I believe my previous paragraph still stands.

Well, I disagree that we have an equal chance of being ultimately right. If it were all guess work, then I might agree with you. There is a fair amount of evidence that homosexuality is wrong, or at least not intended for humans by God, that is visible even without getting into spiritual evidence.

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

(I'm pretty sure you're Christian so forgive me if I'm wrong in this assumption.)

Yes, I am a Christian.

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

I really have to go, but I realize some of my points and/or intentions may be unclear, so I'll be back later.

I believe you are a good writer. Of course I'm attacking the belief of anyone else who believes you're not a good writer, but that's just too bad .

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Also, Lief is completely right about Anglicans. We are a very diverse group of people.

Cheerio!

And thank you all for your intelligent and thoughtful questions. I'm really enjoying this!

Me too. I always love these debates. To me, they're actually addictive. Once I get involved, it's near impossible to get detached again, until it's over. Unfortunately, it's doubtful that after today (California time) I'll be able to get on for a week. If there's any more posting for today though, it would be my pleasure to do so .

[Janny]

Nurv, get into the everyone going to heaven thing, please. Sounds interesting.

[Lief Erikson]

Yet pray don't forget to respond to my posts, also. Your comments are in high demand, Nurvingiel .

[Nurvingiel]

Part 1:

Thank you for your thoughtful post Lief, you will not be ignored! I will also get into my thoughts on heaven too. Yay, I'm popular!

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

A lot of conservative Christians, like RÃ*an, would also admit the possibility that they're dead wrong. However, you must admit that some theories seem more plausible then others. For example, you certainly are permitted to believe still in Isostasy, but because of evidence, the Theory of Plate Tectonics seems far more likely to be true.

I don't know what Isostasy is, but I get the gist of your point here. I agree that some theories are more likely than others. Rather than think everything is equally true (that is obviously not the case IMHO), I think people hold their beliefs for rational reasons, and therefore respect their beliefs though I may not agree. Rational decisions are when people make choices based on their values. It is because we all have different values that we believe different things. (That is the basic idea. What we value and why is quite complex.)

Yes, RÃ*an is quite a liberal conservative in her open-mindedness. However, it's statements like that that make me question the point of labels like “liberalâ€� etc. They help us organize our thoughts, but really tell us nothing about the people we label.

Because of evidence, RÃ*an and myself are Christians. My faith in God would be extremely weak right now (or nonexistent) if God hadn't met me and shown me through my meeting him that he existed. I believe in the God of the burning bush, the pillar of fire and cloud and the Pentecost explosion. I haven't experienced him yet in as much glory as I hope and pray to, but that of him which I have experienced convinces me that those forementioned things happened. You must admit that if one could encounter the God described in the Old Testament and the Book of Acts, evidence would swiftly stack up to cause all contrary beliefs to flounder.

I don't think religion is outside of evidence either, but this evidence is shown to different people in different ways and amounts. People then understand this evidence in different ways, as God is very wonderful and complex, and the people's different situations will affect their understanding. (How many times can you say "different� in a paragraph? Let's find out! )
For example, I have not had the same sort of evidence that you have experienced. Perhaps I was shown this evidence, but I just didn't notice. However, God has shown me other evidence (which you may also have seen) that causes me to believe in God.
God in the Old Testament is easier for people to understand. If people actually met him on a mountaintop, I agree, the evidence would mount up very quickly.
I believe (from what I have seen and felt) that God is very subtle. In fact, Lizra (and other atheists) might interpret the evidence I've seen differently, and still not believe in God.
Largely, God is expressed to me through emotions. The feeling of love and joy I have singing hymns (the good ones, not "Battle Hymn of the Republic") in church, or the incredible kindness or mercy that manifest themselves in our lives at unexpected moments. I still have a very strong faith in God.
I also have the feeling that their is more to life than what we see. The Universe is so vast, we have only seen the most minute amount of it. We know just enough about the Universe to realize we actually know diddly squat.
(The four stages of intelligence are:
1. You do not know that you do not know
2. You know that you do not know
3. You do not know that you know
4. You know that you know
In recent history, humanity has achieved 2 [for the most part]. God is somewhere above a 4.)

This is exciting, think of future scientific advancements! Also, this points (IMHO) to the human understanding as being only one of nearly infinite layers to the Universe. I believe that God is the "ultimate" layer, if you will.
About creation, I believe in Darwinism and evolution, and that God guided this process and allowed it to happen. Several things occurred that were next to impossible to allow life to form, and then for humans to exist. (There is actually a thread about this, so if we really want to get back into the evolution discussion we should bump that thread up. However, I feel my beliefs on evolution outline how I am spiritual and scientific, and how these two beliefs work well together.)
1. An environment occurred where RNA and nucleotides (the building blocks of all life) were able to form was created. Somehow (God’s influence, I believe)
2. Later, a bolide hit earth, causing a nuclear winter and largely contributed to the extinction of dinosaurs (I believe this theory too). This allowed mammals to emerge as a more dominant life form, giving the chance for humans to evolve.
The possibly of both those events occurring was infinitesimally small. I believe God allowed them to happen, thus creating life and human beings too. Adam and Eve, to me, is not meant to be taken literally. It explains other important things about humanity.

To be continued…
(Unlike irritating television programs, this will happen immediately after.)

[Nurvingiel]

Part 2:

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

What I was doing in my previous post was pointing out a flaw in one of the most common liberal beliefs. That belief is that everyone believes truth. Your truth his as good as my truth, and both are true. Even if things are absolutely contrary to one another, they are both true. I was demonstrating that this belief flounders on itself, because if you believe that, then you believe my beliefs (that you're wrong about this philosophy) are untrue. So you're failing by your own rules. However, I'm glad to find that you aren't a part of this belief system.

I agree. I never really thought about it the way you wrote, but I like your reasoning. I believe you can respect someone and still think they're wrong. Perhaps incorrect is a better way to say this – different connotations. People who feel that everyone's worldviews are equally true probably also have respect for other opinions as the main goal. I feel a different approach can achieve the same degree of respect.

As to what you said here: "What right have we to say whether someone else's way of life is right or not?" Let's say you have a son, and he grows up to about thirty years old. He plans to climb Mount Everest, without any training whatsoever, simply to show that it can be done. Many people die on Mount Everest, and they are some of the best professional climbers there are. What your boy wants to do looks like suicide, even though he doesn't see it at all as suicide. He's confident he can make it safely. It's "his chosen way of life."
Perhaps he's heard reports that this can be done and heard "scientific evidence" that it can be done. He's planning to gamble everything he owns on the fact that he will make it.

Now, you don't have the right to lock him in his room and forcibly restrain him. He's a grown man; he can make his own decisions. However, you have every right to do your utmost to convince him he's going to severely hurt himself.

That is what Christians do. We have the same right you have to talk to your son and beg him not to go.

I see where your going with this, but I don't believe this analogy is entirely correct.

Where the analogy works:

• My son is an adult and will make his own decisions, whether I agree or not.
• You have the right to try to talk someone out of something you believe is harmful to them. They might not take your advice, but you can try.

Where the analogy doesn't work:

• We know people who are experienced mountaineers can still die on Mount Everest. Obviously, doing it without training is a bad idea. However, we also know that God did intend people to be gay, because God made many people that way (details follow). What we are not sure of is what God wanted people to do about it. Unlike the dangerous example, we do not have irrefutable evidence that being gay is a bad idea.
• Choosing mountaineering as a hobby could be analogous to a way of life. I would not oppose my son doing this, even though it’s dangerous (to varying degrees) to climb any mountain. Choosing to climb Mount Everest is not analogous IMHO.
• I strongly believe that being gay is not a choice. More about this later.

Perhaps the example would be better if it wasn't a son that was going up, but a friend. But anyway, this is essentially how I see the situation. I would strongly encourage the person not to do this, because the evidence to me seems very great that he shouldn't. I would show what the evidence is, also. In the end it's that person's decision to make, however.

Insidious Rex, in case you're reading this, here's where we differ in this example about gay marriage. I believe Gay marriage is like this: That one wayward friend is trying to encourage your children to go up Everest with him.

Even if it’s just a friend, my previous points about the analogy still stands. Your view of gay marriage is consistent with the rest of your beliefs on being gay at least.

Well, I disagree that we have an equal chance of being ultimately right. If it were all guess work, then I might agree with you. There is a fair amount of evidence that homosexuality is wrong, or at least not intended for humans by God, that is visible even without getting into spiritual evidence.

Perhaps we should discuss this evidence, I believe someone mentioned Leviticus earlier (maybe it was you?) I think a lot of such evidence is subject, and that there’s more evidence that it is not wrong. Maybe we don’t have an equal chance of being right – I have more.
However, maybe this part of the discussion should wander over the the “Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual� thread. It’s part of what I believe, but I don’t want to solely focus on this.

On being gay:
There is scientific evidence that sexuality is a development in the brain that occurs when the foetus. Left-handedness develops similarly, we know that's not a choice. Incidentally, even until recently people forced left-handed children to write with their right hand in school. Analogous? I think so.
You do not choose to be gay, but as I said earlier, what God intends you to do about that is still open for debate. (You all know what I think about that now. I'm very, very pro-gay. )
If you do feel being gay is a choice, sexuality must be a choice, and therefore, you chose to be straight. In other words, if you can choose to be gay, you can also choose to be straight.
Imagine that you are choosing to be gay. Can you even conceive this choice? I doubt it. Many gay people throughout history have pretended to be straight, even to the point of marrying people of the opposite sex and having children. But they weren't really straight; it was just that - pretending. It would be the same way if I pretended I was gay. I could have a female partner, about whom I may even care deeply. But I would still be straight, because I was born that way.
(I have other thoughts on this but they're more appropriate to the "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual" thread.)

About Heaven:
Heaven is a difficult concept for people who understand. As I feel there is much more to Universe than meets the eye, I also feel that there is more to our existence than just living on Earth. But to me, heaven is a place where your soul can be with God.
I also believe sinners go to heaven. I don’t believe in the “typical� Christian view of hell and Satan. However, this isn’t a licence to sin.
At this point, I have less strength in my beliefs. What happens to souls? Perhaps they spend the rest of eternity with God in heaven, and each human has a unique soul. Or maybe after spending some time in heaven, the soul then returns to earth in another body.
I don’t think animals have souls, but I’m not particularly adamant on that point. I certainly think the Buddhist view of reincarnation is possible (from the little I understand of it anyway). Perhaps animals do have souls. Either way, there might be animals in heaven too.

I believe you are a good writer. Of course I'm attacking the belief of anyone else who believes you're not a good writer, but that's just too bad .

Yay! Thanks for your kind words.

Me too. I always love these debates. To me, they're actually addictive. Once I get involved, it's near impossible to get detached again, until it's over. Unfortunately, it's doubtful that after today (California time) I'll be able to get on for a week. If there's any more posting for today though, it would be my pleasure to do so .

I'm totally addicted to this discussion now. I was thinking about in class (until things got interesting).

Ok, I'm done for now. Post away friends!
*Rereads two part post*
*sniff* Rian would be proud, I can hear snoring!

[inked]

Nurvingiel,
What scientific evidence do you have for your statements about sexual identity being "known"? There is a widely touted speculation that that might be the case, but no evidence - not even so much as for handedness. In fact, nowhere near even that.

The assertion of a point of view as deduced from data must have data from which to work. If there is no data, it is a belief remark. The latter is known as scientism and is not scientific.

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

Thank you Nurv. I agree with you on most things you said and even the things I don't agree on make alot of sense.

[Meriadoc Brandybuck]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

About Heaven:
Heaven is a difficult concept for people who understand. As I feel there is much more to Universe than meets the eye, I also feel that there is more to our existence than just living on Earth. But to me, heaven is a place where your soul can be with God.

I agree with that. And (IIRC) St. Thomas Aquinas was the only one to see heaven while on earth. It must have been a really happy sight, for he no longer desired to live on this earth but to be in heaven.

About the evolution thing, what do you believe we evolved from? I know there are several theories, such as the fish and the ape ones. (I myself am a Creationist, so I would like your opinion.)

[Nurvingiel]

Inked, your post made me realize that it doesn't matter to me if being gay is a choice or not. My arguments are still the same, but if it was a choice, I'd still be fine with it. Being gay does not seem wrong to me in and of itself. (Did I use "in and of itself" properly? I like scientific grammar phrases such as this one, even though I don't totally understand it. Help me out here Lief. )

I will give several sources of the scientific evidence. (As with any study of the brain, they are theories. Isn't it amazing how little we know about our own brains?)

Professor claims scientific evidence of homosexuality
For some reason, I couldn't find the study. I could look for it at WebofScience or another such database.

Our Perception of Gay Science Alters Political Opinions
This article is actually anti-gay, but they make several un-scientific assumptions. This suggests to me that neither side can be scientifically proven. Or that these guys are wrong.


And just for fun...
Pro gay humour article.
Yes, it really is pro-gay. And funny. Does God hate gays? You do the math.

I was gonna look for more links, but I've already cross posted with at least two people. So lets see what others have to say...

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

And just for fun...
Pro gay humour article.
Yes, it really is pro-gay. And funny. Does God hate gays? You do the math.

that's great

[Nurvingiel]

My previous post was a cross post with Telcontar and Merry.

Originally Posted by Meriadoc Brandybuck

I agree with that. And (IIRC) St. Thomas Aquinas was the only one to see heaven while on earth. It must have been a really happy sight, for he no longer desired to live on this earth but to be in heaven.

Now where do I remember St. Thomas Aquinas from? I've heard of him before... is he the patron saint of anything?

About the evolution thing, what do you believe we evolved from? I know there are several theories, such as the fish and the ape ones. (I myself am a Creationist, so I would like your opinion.)

I think all life started out as single-celled organism, and evolved into the more complex organisms we see today. (Note: theory simplified drastically for clarity.) This theory was first put to me in a rational, scientific way in First Year Biology, and I have subscribed to it ever since. (In high school, I believed it too, but the teachers weren't very convincing scientifically. Biology in university gave real evidence, some of which I outlined in the "Evidence for creationism" thread. I don't want to relive my Biology exam again here though, boy was that class ever hard. )

Just a little more on homosexuality before we move over to the "Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals" thread (I think the discussion would be best continued there for the most part):

What does it feel like to be homosexual in a heterosexual culture? If you are heterosexual, one way to understand is to imagine how you would feel if you were ostracized or fired for openly admitting or displaying your feelings toward someone of the other sex; if you overheard people making crude jokes about heterosexual people; if most movies, TV shows, and advertisements portrayed (or implied) homosexuality; and if your family members were pleading with you to change your heterosexual life-style and to enter into a homosexual marriage.

This is from this interesting article, found here.
EDIT: This quote mirrors what I stated earlier about trying to imagine you're gay (if you're actually straight).

EDIT2: This post crossed with Brownie's one. Wow, activity! Or maybe I just take a long time to post.

Final note: (and really final this time) if anyone wants to discuss the articles or really go in-depth on any issue pertaining to being gay, maybe we should hop threads, because being pro-gay isn't the only thing I believe.

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

About Heaven:
Heaven is a difficult concept for people who understand. As I feel there is much more to Universe than meets the eye, I also feel that there is more to our existence than just living on Earth. But to me, heaven is a place where your soul can be with God.
I also believe sinners go to heaven. I don’t believe in the “typical� Christian view of hell and Satan. However, this isn’t a licence to sin.
At this point, I have less strength in my beliefs. What happens to souls? Perhaps they spend the rest of eternity with God in heaven, and each human has a unique soul. Or maybe after spending some time in heaven, the soul then returns to earth in another body.

Your thoughts on heaven are extremley simlar to mine. I also don't believe in the typical Christian view of heaven. I think Satan is symoblism for all things bad/wrong. And if God is perfect then he would never doom people to eternal suffering whether they were pur evil or not.

[Nurvingiel]

Very interesting Telcontar, thanks for your reply! (Even though I coerced you over MSN. )

I don't think anyone is pure anything - good, evil, or etc.

I also think Satan is the embodiement of evil, but the "typical" view was conceived to understand such a difficult concept as evil in the world. Why is there hurt and suffering in a world that God made? Why would God, who is loving and merciful, allow it to occur?
The answer for many is that it is Satan's doing. I believe in Satan (as a concept, but not in a "typical" way), but not in Hell as a final destination for sinners.
I believe that God gave us free will, and does not feel the need to control or influence all aspects of human existence. That being said, God can be found in many places, both expected and otherwise.
This is my own slightly simplistic explanation of why God allows suffering. God is more powerful than Satan, so God does allow it to occur, IMHO.

Maybe I'll pause here and give everyone a chance to read the novel I just wrote on this page.

Note on the text: When I say typical I don't mean it in a bad way.

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

I don't think anyone is pure anything - good, evil, or etc.

What I meant by pure evil is that there was extremly little or no good in them because often if you are viewed as evil you will become bitter and fearful.

[inked]

Nurvingiel,
I don't mind that you have a belief regarding sexual identities or how you believe. What I was pointing out was the lack of data. You note that what data there is conflicts.

I admire your honesty in stating that regardless of data you are going to believe x. I just wanted to point out that prefacing something with an invocation to science does not make it scientific. You seem to acknowledge that up front.

This is a thread about belief.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

I don't think anyone is pure anything - good, evil, or etc.

I also think Satan is the embodiement of evil, but the "typical" view was conceived to understand such a difficult concept as evil in the world. Why is there hurt and suffering in a world that God made? Why would God, who is loving and merciful, allow it to occur?
The answer for many is that it is Satan's doing. I believe in Satan (as a concept, but not in a "typical" way), but not in Hell as a final destination for sinners.
I believe that God gave us free will, and does not feel the need to control or influence all aspects of human existence. That being said, God can be found in many places, both expected and otherwise.
This is my own slightly simplistic explanation of why God allows suffering. God is more powerful than Satan, so God does allow it to occur, IMHO.

as i've said earlier... i've always seen religion as stories mankind creates to attempt to explain the unknown... and obviously, people like to think that the force behind it all is "good"... but they need to think of some reason behind all the evils in the world, for why wouldn't a "good" god create a shiny happy world with little or no unpleasant things in it?

pagan beliefs tended towards the good and evil gods... all very powerful, but not all powerful... and humanity was subject to evil because these powers conflicted with one another... and we were caught in the middle

early judaism, which later spawned christianity, came up with the adam and eve story... the idea that god was all-powerful, but he did not want to create a race of perfect beings... instead he wanted to create a race that would have to learn their way to perfection through experience and suffering (i.e. free will)... a reasonable idea on the face of it, and it coveniently allowed both the all-powerfullness of god and the presence of evils in the world

my problem with it... and the reason i don't buy it... is that i don't think an all-powerful being would be so extreme about it... tossing adam and eve out into the world as portrayed in genesis to me would be like taking your child and leaving him on some street corner in nyc with a book of moral fables and saying "i'll be back in fifty years to see how you turn out"... i would think that this "good" god could just as easily have gotten all the benefits of his creations learning through experience without being so extreme

another possibility is that god is simply beyond good and evil, a kind of grand scientist, and we are all part of some massive experiment... maybe one of many that he has done before and will do again... so what we see as "good" and "evil" is just part of the experiment in god's eye

yet another scenario is that god is not all-powerful at all, but very powerful... and he created the best universe he could, warts and all... felt a bit guilty, and has been sending help when and where he can along the way

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

(I bagged these scones for you to have on your journey. )

Thank you very much!!!

BTW, I made 3 dozen white chocolate chip scones to share for the potluck dinner on Saturday night, and they were gone pretty quick! (there were over 60 people)

[Meriadoc Brandybuck]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Now where do I remember St. Thomas Aquinas from? I've heard of him before... is he the patron saint of anything?

He's the patron saint of all universities and of students.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by Telcontar Dunedain

What I meant by pure evil is that there was extremly little or no good in them because often if you are viewed as evil you will become bitter and fearful.

Ok that makes sense.

Originally Posted by inked

Nurvingiel,
I don't mind that you have a belief regarding sexual identities or how you believe. What I was pointing out was the lack of data. You note that what data there is conflicts.

I admire your honesty in stating that regardless of data you are going to believe x. I just wanted to point out that prefacing something with an invocation to science does not make it scientific. You seem to acknowledge that up front.

This is a thread about belief.

There is less data than I thought, but there still is enough to show that someone didn't just pull this idea out of their wazoo. As you rightly said though, I'm going to believe this anyway, for aforementioned reasons.

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

as i've said earlier... i've always seen religion as stories mankind creates to attempt to explain the unknown... and obviously, people like to think that the force behind it all is "good"... but they need to think of some reason behind all the evils in the world, for why wouldn't a "good" god create a shiny happy world with little or no unpleasant things in it?

I'm just going to quote a little snippet, but that was a post worth reading twice. I agree with this statement in general. However, your last sentence gives me pause. Consider the statement "If everything is beautiful, nothing is beautiful". If God made a perfect world, we would not realize how wonderful things like art, music, love etc. are.

Ponder Point 1
Would it be better to have suffering and beauty, or plainness and no suffering? I would be quick to say the former, if it were a little more fairly distributed.

About what you said later, perhaps Satan is the "equivelant" to an evil pagan God.

Ponder Point 2
After all, you can't have good without evil, or can you? Tthere must be some phisolophical analysis behind that).

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

BTW, I made 3 dozen white chocolate chip scones to share for the potluck dinner on Saturday night, and they were gone pretty quick! (there were over 60 people)

I bet they were! *drools*
I hope you enjoy my super long, 2-part post RÃ*an. Asleep yet? *cough* religion thread *cough*
Just kidding buddy, I seriously love your posts.