This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Classic Theme
Thottbot Theme
Hell
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Orranis
2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
You forgot the second verse. Basically right there it is saying the Earth existed in name but not form. God was kinda hovering over it and decided to make it (First by adding Light). The Earth didn't exist until the final phase. Only after it was completely finished did the Earth exist.
Well played, sir.
Post by
Orranis
Funden, do you believe that Birds were one of the first forms of life?
Post by
Monday
Funden, do you believe that Birds were one of the first forms of life?
I honestly can't remember which kind of animal came first.
/shrug I suppose (don't take this as my answer, I'm just saying it's possible).
Post by
Skreeran
I like this Sims analogy. I really do. I really, really like it.
Alright, so I build a house (the universe), with the possibility for all sort of bad things to happen. I build the house out of wood, and don't put any door in it.
I propagate my house with Sims. I make them very bad at cooking, and I make it very easy for them to start fires. (I give them the ability to enter into Sin very easily.)
Alright, so they're probably doomed, though they don't realize it. My newborn Sims aren't very intelligent, relative to myself, and they cannot see how doomed they are.
So I hook my son up on another computer through LAN. He makes a Sim. His Sim pops up in the house, and begins warning people that they are doomed, and that they have somehow earned the judgment of the Sim-god who controls the program that they live in, and that he can save them.
Some believe him, some think he's crazy, talking about computer programs and omnipotent "players". The ones that believe him stay in the house, long after my son turns off his computer. So do the ones who don't also stay.
So, finally I let the fire start. The house is burning. Now I only take out the ones who listened to my sons, and I leave my Sims that thought he was crazy in to burn.
Now, how is this wrong?
First of all, I am the creator. I created a place where they could easily and inevitably burn. I gave them a chance to be taken out, but it was unbelievable at best. And finally, I let them burn, despite my power to take them out.
Post by
Squishalot
Now, how is this wrong?
You tell me - how is it wrong? You're the player, you can do whatever you like. In fact, you can ask your son to tell your Sims that you're the most loveable player in the world. But at the end of the day, if they don't listen, irrespective of how good you are, you're still God to them, and whatever you do, goes.
I propagate my house with Sims. I make them very bad at cooking, and I make it very easy for them to start fires. (I give them the ability to enter into Sin very easily.)
Realistically, the Sims equivalent of entering sin is your best mate hacking into your game and telling them to use the stove. Up until that point, you'd already given them instructions that they could do whatever they wanted, except use the stove, and they would have followed those instructions to the letter.
I gave them a chance to be taken out, but it was unbelievable at best.
Well, there are a billion plus people who obviously don't think it's that unbelievable, no? We might not be two of those people, but certainly, people do believe.
Post by
MyTie
You know, we've covered a lot of topics.... some of them very difficult. I imagine some of you are very confused. I'd like to make QUITE clear where I stand. I have a short bit I'd like you to watch that summarizes my position clearly.
I think you'll all agree.
Post by
MyTie
Can we have you liver then?
Yeah, all right. You talked me into it.
Post by
Squishalot
You know, we've covered a lot of topics.... some of them very difficult. I imagine some of you are very confused. I'd like to make QUITE clear where I stand. I have a short bit I'd like you to watch that summarizes my position clearly.
I think you'll all agree.
Heh. Hear hear.
Post by
Interest
You know, we've covered a lot of topics.... some of them very difficult. I imagine some of you are very confused. I'd like to make QUITE clear where I stand. I have a short bit I'd like you to watch that summarizes my position clearly.
I think you'll all agree.
I don't usually walk into debate threads, but I liked MyTie's view of life in this case.
Post by
Skreeran
Now, how is this wrong?
You tell me - how is it wrong? You're the player, you can do whatever you like. In fact, you can ask your son to tell your Sims that you're the most loveable player in the world. But at the end of the day, if they don't listen, irrespective of how good you are, you're still God to them, and whatever you do, goes.Well, I tend to think that God's portrayal as merciful and all-loving is hypocritical with the parts where he is sadistic and cruel.
I propagate my house with Sims. I make them very bad at cooking, and I make it very easy for them to start fires. (I give them the ability to enter into Sin very easily.)
Realistically, the Sims equivalent of entering sin is your best mate hacking into your game and telling them to use the stove. Up until that point, you'd already given them instructions that they could do whatever they wanted, except use the stove, and they would have followed those instructions to the letter.Unless I created the one who told them to use the stove, knowing that he'd tell them to use the stove.
I gave them a chance to be taken out, but it was unbelievable at best.
Well, there are a billion plus people who obviously don't think it's that unbelievable, no? We might not be two of those people, but certainly, people do believe.Point is, you can't blame the people who didn't believe.
Post by
Squishalot
Well, I tend to think that God's portrayal as merciful and all-loving is hypocritical with the parts where he is sadistic and cruel.
This is the thing (from an agnostic's perspective) - does it really matter how he's portrayed? Consider that from the Jews' perspective, he is, indeed, someone to be feared and respected, dictator style. It was only the introduction of Jesus that changed things. (Multiple personality disorder? Bi-polar? Who knows.)
Unless I created the one who told them to use the stove, knowing that he'd tell them to use the stove.
I did a bit of research on this. God created 'all things in heaven and on earth', but there's no specific passage relating to the creation of the angels. So it's actually quite difficult to tell whether God created Satan, and indeed, how much control he had over Satan. If you compare it to, say, the Greek pantheon, Zeus clearly is the father / creator of the other Gods, but he has no control over what they do. The concept of an omnipotent God may apply only to universal things - as far as we're concerned, God can do anything, in our universe, but that says nothing about God's interactions in the spiritual realm. (postulating here)
Point is, you can't blame the people who didn't believe.
Of course you can. Darwin talks about how things may have evolved, showing some sort of timeline that is 'evidence' of evolution, and you would ridicule those who refuse to believe in evolution. Jesus came down and healed sick people, cured the incurable, walked on water, right in front of their eyes. Other prophets like Elijah brought people back from the dead. There was plenty of evidence for the people at the time. Why wouldn't they believe?
Post by
Orranis
This is the thing (from an agnostic's perspective) - does it really matter how he's portrayed? Consider that from the Jews' perspective, he is, indeed, someone to be feared and respected, dictator style. It was only the introduction of Jesus that changed things. (Multiple personality disorder? Bi-polar? Who knows.)
Retcon, in ma opinion.
I did a bit of research on this. God created 'all things in heaven and on earth', but there's no specific passage relating to the creation of the angels. So it's actually quite difficult to tell whether God created Satan, and indeed, how much control he had over Satan.
Actually, if you read Genesis, 26 And God said: 'Let us make man in
our
image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.' Rabbinic scholars accept that this means that the Angels existed before the dawn of the world, sometimes even thought to represent lesser aspects of God's self. If you compare it to, say, the Greek pantheon, Zeus clearly is the father / creator of the other Gods, but he has no control over what they do.You're Greek mythology is not top quality, I'll just say that.
Of course you can. Darwin talks about how things may have evolved, showing some sort of timeline that is 'evidence' of evolution, and you would ridicule those who refuse to believe in evolution. Jesus came down and healed sick people, cured the incurable, walked on water, right in front of their eyes. Other prophets like Elijah brought people back from the dead. There was plenty of evidence for the people at the time. Why wouldn't they believe?
We're not talking about people of that time, who may or may not have observed miracles. We're talking about people of our time, who the closest thing they've seen to Jesus's miracles is a really ^&*!ing cool lizard. If your argument worked two thousand years ago, it should work now, unless it happens to no longer be two thousand year ago.
Post by
Squishalot
Rabbinic scholars accept that this means that the Angels existed before the dawn of the world, sometimes even thought to represent lesser aspects of God's self.
Yes, there are other mentions of how the angels cheered when God created the world. But there's very limited information.
You're Greek mythology is not top quality, I'll just say that.
Isn't it? It's likely that I could be wrong - feel free to correct me.
We're not talking about people of that time, who may or may not have observed miracles. We're talking about people of our time, who the closest thing they've seen to Jesus's miracles is a really ^&*!ing cool lizard. If your argument worked two thousand years ago, it should work now, unless it happens to no longer be two thousand year ago.
Well no, my response was specifically in relation to Skree's idea of sending his son into the Sims game and trying to convince those people present at the time.
As far as their descendents are concerned (i.e. us), why would you believe anything historical, that you don't see with your two eyes? The Bible, if it's true, is a historical account (perhaps embellished in some areas, as are all historical accounts) of the miracles that Jesus did. What makes it any less believable than stories of Greek warriors defending Athens?
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
Evolution is pretty far fetched, all things considered. You're talking about genetic mutations that randomly happen, unpredictably.
There have been faith-based healings in the past, though uncommon. The Vatican uses evidence provided by medical scientists and doctors to first disprove the possibility that a patient's 'cure' was caused by science / human means, before chalking it up to the intercession of a (would-be) saint. Why does this make it less credible than evolution as a theory, just because we can't demonstrate it at will? When was the last time Man evolved beyond
Homo sapiens
in a positive way?
Post by
Orranis
Evolution is pretty far fetched, all things considered. You're talking about genetic mutations that randomly happen, unpredictably.
I could almost understand denying evolution, but you're arguing that some people deny mutation?
Plus, random and unpredictable are very different things. As you've asked many times before, "Do you believe in quantum randomness?"
Edit: Also, assuming a soul exists, what does it matter if your in hell if you have no nervous system? What does it matter if your in heaven if you have no dopamine or dopamine receptors?
Post by
Adamsm
For the first; there are no mutations; if they go against God, they are an agent of the Devil.
For the second; your soul is your core essence, when your tortured in Hell, it's your soul that's being attacked, tormented and torn apart. When your in Heaven, it's like living the best day of your life for all eternity.
Post by
Orranis
For the second; your soul is your core essence, when your tortured in Hell, it's your soul that's being attacked, tormented and torn apart. When your in Heaven, it's like living the best day of your life for all eternity.
You've failed to answer my question. No matter how my soul is torn apart, without a nervous system I can only imagine I won't feel the slightest thing.
Without dopamine, my body won't be able to feel happy, no matter what events transpire.
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Adamsm
For the second; your soul is your core essence, when your tortured in Hell, it's your soul that's being attacked, tormented and torn apart. When your in Heaven, it's like living the best day of your life for all eternity.
You've failed to answer my question. No matter how my soul is torn apart, without a nervous system I can only imagine I won't feel the slightest thing.
Without dopamine, my body won't be able to feel happy, no matter what events transpire.
In other words, your Soul is just like your body once your dead; so whatever you felt in life, you'll feel while burning in Hell, or relaxing in Heaven.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.