Since we've gotten told to stop talking generally about religion twice in the Homosexuality and Religion thread and were told that, if we want to talk generally about religion, we need to make a new thread, I have made a new thread.
Full disclosure: I am an agnostic atheist and anti-theist, but I'm very interested in theology and religion.
Mod Edit: All right, there are a couple of ground rules here:
- This is not a thread for mindless bashing of religion or of atheism/agnosticism etc. All view points are welcome here. Let's have a civil debate.
- Religion is a volatile subject. Please don't post here if you can't manage a civil discussion with viewpoints you disagree with. There will be no tolerance for people who can't keep the tone light hearted.
- There is no one true answer for this thread. Don't try to force out opposing voices.
edited 9th Feb '14 1:01:31 PM by Madrugada
It's not the right way, it's a stupid way. Boundaries are neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for meaningfulness, and, in fact, even in our bounded, mortal lives, we get along without meaning just fine.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.Not necessarily-I think in Heaven, people are basically rational, and therefore are not irrationally unhappy.
Leviticus 19:34Because he works in mysterious ways... blah blah something something free will?
This is basically just the problem of evil in reverse, and that particular debate has been done to death several times over. Though I should point out that I didn't actually propose the existence of an "evil" God, just one that isn't always perfectly honest.
But enough of that. I'm really just trying to confirm my suspicions.
Let's pretend for a moment that I also believe in a loving, good deity who only gives me good impulses (I'll keep calling them that for lack of a better term). I then do something that in your eyes is morally wrong, while claiming to "know in my heart" that my God wanted me to do it, and that it felt right.
Would you say that I am either lying for some reason, or mistaken and in need of "developing and improving my gut feelings" as you put it?
Still a great "screw depression" song even after seven years.Lets say a serial killer claims that he feels in his heart that God calls him to kill innocent people. We have no way of proving him wrong. But it disagrees diametrically with what I and most others feel in our heart. So the inevitable outcome is this: he will follow his heart in attempting to kill more people, and we will follow ours in attempting to stop him. Who was right? There's no way to know for sure, all we can do is do our best and trust it will all work out.
But note that this would be the case whether there's a God or not.
The truth is that a universe with God in it looks just like one without it.
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.![]()
Fair enough, this is not too different from my own viewpoint actually.
But let's say that we have another guy, who feels that murdering random people is wrong, but also feels that God wants him to do it. Now, he really doesn't want to hurt anyone, and he has no idea why a loving God would tell him to... but on the other hand he also just knows that God always knows what's best, so maybe he should just have faith and trust God's judgement?
What should he do?
That would depend entirely on what kind of God we're talking about, wouldn't it?
Still a great "screw depression" song even after seven years.You mean, like the idea of Pandeism
, which is the idea that a God became the Universe?
There are degrees of pantheism. Just like with anything.
On another note, one of my favourite images
◊. The few instants a man peered behind the veil of existence, understood and then went mad with the revelation.
"Now, he really doesn't want to hurt anyone, and he has no idea why a loving God would tell him to... but on the other hand he also just knows that God always knows what's best, so maybe he should just have faith and trust God's judgement?"
There are multiple sources of the truth, not just one, and even your own heart is not 100% reliable. It's never spelled out in Christianity as far as I know, but one of the central tenets of any theism is that the universe makes sense- everything that is natural to it fits together and is consistent with each other, if we only knew the right way to look at it (again, this remains true even if you're a materialist). So if you have two beliefs or impulses that drive you toward fundamentally incompatible things, then most likely at least one of them is wrong (or more wrong, anyway). We cant know for certain, but one way to update your prior probability estimate is to consider which impulse seems most compatible with the impulses of other people- the one telling you to kill them or the one telling you not to?
Your hypothetical man couldn't be a Christian, by the way, not a thoughtful one anyway. We are taught that God loves everyone equally, and that we are to treat others as we would want them to treat us, so any God that told you to kill random people could not be the Christian God, by definition. That belief is inconsistent with most of the mainstream theisms, of course, not just Xianity.
"That would depend entirely on what kind of God we're talking about, wouldn't it?'
IMHO I think it depends on what type of universe we're talking about. The kind of God we can believe in has to be consistent with the universe as we observe it. That's why I said it was significant that the quality of life on Earth has been improving over the course of centuries. But that doesn't prove God exists in the first place. There is no such proof.
edited 7th Nov '15 11:14:01 AM by DeMarquis
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.
God just seems to get less and less important the further we go with this. What does he actually do?
I didn't say that he necessarily was, but given enough time I could probably come up with some Insane Troll Logic that justifies his actions even with these conditions. Plenty of other people already have.
Also: No True Scotsman
Oh, really? I think a few people might have missed this.
edited 7th Nov '15 12:24:45 PM by Corvidae
Still a great "screw depression" song even after seven years.It isn't No True Scotsman because the standards have not been redefined, they were there from the beginning. I cant help it if some people claiming to be the truest Scotsmen have gone off the deep end of the pool.
Anyway, as to your other point- God isn't supposed to be useful, he just is. That's a little bit like saying the background radiation of the universe isn't important because it doesn't do anything. What good is it? One could also say the exact same thing about the Mona Lisa, or Homer's Odyssey, or, well you get it. Theists believe in God for reasons independent of his or her utility.
Unless, of course, you think adding meaning to existence is useful.
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.
The one that DeMarquis believes in. You'll have to ask them for more details.
![]()
He doesn't have to do anything. But if he just hangs around outside of our observable reality, never really does anything that we'll notice, and we can't know anything about him... Why does he matter? Wouldn't it just be like "Yeah, he exists. <Shrug>"
Edit: Btw, what's up with all these male pronouns?
edited 7th Nov '15 12:54:18 PM by Corvidae
Still a great "screw depression" song even after seven years.I happen to be male, so that's the aspect of God I identify with. I have no objection to someone using "her". The English language has no gender-neutral singular pronoun for a person.
I believe that I explained before that I consider belief in God to be a feeling-state. The contemplation of God arouses certain meaningful emotions in me. So my faith in God does serve a purpose, for me.
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.
I don't doubt that it does. I'm just trying to figure out how.
I am. Just figured that asking actual people about their beliefs as well couldn't hurt.

If you can make it Hell, it's not the best possible world by definition. Especially since given enough time everyone's probably going to stop and think about this sort of thing.
So the infinite bliss of heaven is inevitably ruined by the infinite time giving everyone the opportunity to think about how the infinite time renders everything they care about meaningless.
Heaven as a concept collapses in on itself if you look at it the right way.