|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
An explaination well deserved...
Since this is my first post, I'm going to make it a good one. I'm going to explain what Satanism truly is according to its founder, Anton Levey.
Satanism has nothing to do with evil beings or devilworshiping sacrifices. In Satanism, Satan is simply used as a symbol for what a Satanist believes in. The main points in Satanism the contradict most "white-lighter" religions are:
- The belief in Indugence, instead of absidence. Why should you hold yourself back on Earth while you are here?
- The belief that humans simply animals. Sometimes worse but also sometimes better then those that walk on all fours.
- The belief in vengance instead of turning the other cheek.
- The belief that most sins in other religions are simply human nature.
- The belief that god exists, but not everything is controlled by God, and you do not have to please God.
- The belief that prayer and hope DO NOT work. Everything that happens in life is caused by something Earthly, and that only hard work pays off.
Those are mainly the only differences between Satanism and other religions. They don't worship "Evil" things and hurt people. Actually, in all honesty, they are not violent at all unless something has been done to them first.
Satanism has nothing to do with evil beings or devilworshiping sacrifices. In Satanism, Satan is simply used as a symbol for what a Satanist believes in. The main points in Satanism the contradict most "white-lighter" religions are:
- The belief in Indugence, instead of absidence. Why should you hold yourself back on Earth while you are here?
- The belief that humans simply animals. Sometimes worse but also sometimes better then those that walk on all fours.
- The belief in vengance instead of turning the other cheek.
- The belief that most sins in other religions are simply human nature.
- The belief that god exists, but not everything is controlled by God, and you do not have to please God.
- The belief that prayer and hope DO NOT work. Everything that happens in life is caused by something Earthly, and that only hard work pays off.
Those are mainly the only differences between Satanism and other religions. They don't worship "Evil" things and hurt people. Actually, in all honesty, they are not violent at all unless something has been done to them first.
Absolutely right...It seems Hollywood and the media have confused Satanism with Devil-worship. Two completely different beliefs.
In other words: I'm a selfish bastard, and there's a religion just for me! YEAH!
Yeah; it's evil. Just not in the OMGBBQ!1!!one! sacrificing-virgins kind of way...
HM
Yeah; it's evil. Just not in the OMGBBQ!1!!one! sacrificing-virgins kind of way...
HM
You mention that Satanists believe in God, do they believe in an afterlife too?
From what you have said it doesn't sound like an 'evil' religion, just selfish. If being selfish and materialistic is evil, then I could point the finger at a few [insert faith here] I know.
From what you have said it doesn't sound like an 'evil' religion, just selfish. If being selfish and materialistic is evil, then I could point the finger at a few [insert faith here] I know.
^ IT all depends on what kind of satanist you are. Before posting, maybe read something?
Either youre a symbolic satanist, satan being for you a symbol of joy and a happy life without restrictions, what the topic starter said.
But there is also the satanism in which the followers actually believe in some powerful entity. Dont really remember about this, but I know there is this "branch", I think it may have something to do with Seth.
And ofcourse there is the kiddy satanism, all the poor kidos who break into graveyards to smash some crosses and burn some poor cats. The last ones are the worst, because they really, REALLY sin, the fourth satanic sin, self-deceit. Just read more about it on wiki, it tells you all about it.
And besides, its not what somebody calls himself and does in that name, its about who one really is because its easy to call oneself a satanist and burn some cats and get negative media attention. Now, if I told my family that I hold onto some of the satanic beliefs Id be one helluva loser for them, something evil. Just because the media has created a blood thirsty, cat burning, virgin defiling image of a satanist.
Either youre a symbolic satanist, satan being for you a symbol of joy and a happy life without restrictions, what the topic starter said.
But there is also the satanism in which the followers actually believe in some powerful entity. Dont really remember about this, but I know there is this "branch", I think it may have something to do with Seth.
And ofcourse there is the kiddy satanism, all the poor kidos who break into graveyards to smash some crosses and burn some poor cats. The last ones are the worst, because they really, REALLY sin, the fourth satanic sin, self-deceit. Just read more about it on wiki, it tells you all about it.
And besides, its not what somebody calls himself and does in that name, its about who one really is because its easy to call oneself a satanist and burn some cats and get negative media attention. Now, if I told my family that I hold onto some of the satanic beliefs Id be one helluva loser for them, something evil. Just because the media has created a blood thirsty, cat burning, virgin defiling image of a satanist.
| Quote: |
| And ofcourse there is the kiddy satanism, all the poor kidos who break into graveyards to smash some crosses and burn some poor cats. The last ones are the worst, because they really, REALLY sin, the fourth satanic sin, self-deceit. |
Actuly that "satanism" is a myth, an urban legoned..
Satanism is not evil. Its just a philosophy.
| iZen wrote: |
| Since this is my first post, I'm going to make it a good one. I'm going to explain what Satanism truly is according to its founder, Anton Levey.
|
Actualy there are is a vast slew of belief systems that fall under the catagory of satanism. Satan is actualy a word for "against", more or less rebellion. Satanists are nothing more than Extreme Anarchists, the majority of them are not even close to being considered a religion.
I am a Christian and have read the Satanic Bible during my long journey to Jesus Christ.
Anyway, I found the main part of the Satanic Bible VERY interesting and appealing. Basically it is the way many people live their lives today anyway. The attitude seemed to be - me first and forget the rest.
But in the context of evil no it is not evil, in my opinion and if my meory serves me right this is even covered in the actual book itself otherwise Anton LeVey himself has covered it at some time.
Anyway, I found the main part of the Satanic Bible VERY interesting and appealing. Basically it is the way many people live their lives today anyway. The attitude seemed to be - me first and forget the rest.
But in the context of evil no it is not evil, in my opinion and if my meory serves me right this is even covered in the actual book itself otherwise Anton LeVey himself has covered it at some time.
Alright, as for do they believe in an afterlife or not, they do. God is all forgiving, thus, you do not have to please him in life. Also please define "evil". If you are going by the general term of evil, what is moraly wrong, well then you would be correct. But, Morals are what the majority of the populus believes if right, worry about ethics. Ethics are what, no matter what race or creed you are, is right or wrong (ex: rape and murder). In Satanism, indulgence in not evil, and nor is it selfish. Being selfish implies that you are crossing the boundary of others rights, but once again, that is Ethically wrong.
C'tair, don't look to wiki for answers about Satanism. Go check out the Satanic Bible. Those are words by Anton Levey himself.
Satanism is not an urban myth, it was established by Anton Levey, with the Church of Satan.
C'tair, don't look to wiki for answers about Satanism. Go check out the Satanic Bible. Those are words by Anton Levey himself.
Satanism is not an urban myth, it was established by Anton Levey, with the Church of Satan.
| woodenbrick wrote: |
| You mention that Satanists believe in God, do they believe in an afterlife too?
From what you have said it doesn't sound like an 'evil' religion, just selfish. If being selfish and materialistic is evil, then I could point the finger at a few [insert faith here] I know. |
This is true. The guidelines of satanism you posted seem materialistic and selfish but not evil.
The truth about satanism and evil in general is that it starts out with smalls things like a little revenge and ends up big.
So is it evil?
Yes, but not in itself. It is evil because it leads straight to the greater sin.
On a side note, you forgot in your vote to add an option "I am a Christian, so I refuse to not touch this subject". The poll as it is unfair 
| Zampano wrote: |
|
The truth about satanism and evil in general is that it starts out with smalls things like a little revenge and ends up big. So is it evil? Yes, but not in itself. It is evil because it leads straight to the greater sin. |
Sins are based purely on religion. What one religion finds as a sin, may not be one in another religion.
| iZen wrote: |
| God is all forgiving, thus, you do not have to please him in life. |
Thats a contrediction. An all forgiving means forgiving any one, no matter how harable they are, no matter what they do, what they beleve and what they fallow.
Some information on satanism.
http://www.churchofsatan.com/home.html
The Nine Satanic Statements
http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/NineStatements.html
| Quote: |
| 1. Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence!
2. Satan represents vital existence instead of spiritual pipe dreams! 3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom instead of hypocritical self-deceit! 4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates! 5. Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek! 6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires! 7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development,” has become the most vicious animal of all! 8. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification! 9. Satan has been the best friend the Church has ever had, as He has kept it in business all these years! |
The Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth
http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/Eleven.html
| Quote: |
| 1. Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.
2. Do not tell your troubles to others unless you are sure they want to hear them. 3. When in another’s lair, show him respect or else do not go there. 4. If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat him cruelly and without mercy. 5. Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal. 6. Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved. 7. Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained. 8. Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself. 9. Do not harm little children. 10. Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food. 11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him. |
The Nine Satanic Sins
http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/Sins.html
| Quote: |
| 1. Stupidity—The top of the list for Satanic Sins. The Cardinal Sin of Satanism. It’s too bad that stupidity isn’t painful. Ignorance is one thing, but our society thrives increasingly on stupidity. It depends on people going along with whatever they are told. The media promotes a cultivated stupidity as a posture that is not only acceptable but laudable. Satanists must learn to see through the tricks and cannot afford to be stupid.
2. Pretentiousness—Empty posturing can be most irritating and isn’t applying the cardinal rules of Lesser Magic. On equal footing with stupidity for what keeps the money in circulation these days. Everyone’s made to feel like a big shot, whether they can come up with the goods or not. 3. Solipsism—Can be very dangerous for Satanists. Projecting your reactions, responses and sensibilities onto someone who is probably far less attuned than you are. It is the mistake of expecting people to give you the same consideration, courtesy and respect that you naturally give them. They won’t. Instead, Satanists must strive to apply the dictum of “Do unto others as they do unto you.” It’s work for most of us and requires constant vigilance lest you slip into a comfortable illusion of everyone being like you. As has been said, certain utopias would be ideal in a nation of philosophers, but unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately, from a Machiavellian standpoint) we are far from that point. 4. Self-deceit—It’s in the “Nine Satanic Statements” but deserves to be repeated here. Another cardinal sin. We must not pay homage to any of the sacred cows presented to us, including the roles we are expected to play ourselves. The only time self-deceit should be entered into is when it’s fun, and with awareness. But then, it’s not self-deceit! 5. Herd Conformity—That’s obvious from a Satanic stance. It’s all right to conform to a person’s wishes, if it ultimately benefits you. But only fools follow along with the herd, letting an impersonal entity dictate to you. The key is to choose a master wisely instead of being enslaved by the whims of the many. 6. Lack of Perspective—Again, this one can lead to a lot of pain for a Satanist. You must never lose sight of who and what you are, and what a threat you can be, by your very existence. We are making history right now, every day. Always keep the wider historical and social picture in mind. That is an important key to both Lesser and Greater Magic. See the patterns and fit things together as you want the pieces to fall into place. Do not be swayed by herd constraints—know that you are working on another level entirely from the rest of the world. 7. Forgetfulness of Past Orthodoxies—Be aware that this is one of the keys to brainwashing people into accepting something new and different, when in reality it’s something that was once widely accepted but is now presented in a new package. We are expected to rave about the genius of the creator and forget the original. This makes for a disposable society. 8. Counterproductive Pride—That first word is important. Pride is great up to the point you begin to throw out the baby with the bathwater. The rule of Satanism is: if it works for you, great. When it stops working for you, when you’ve painted yourself into a corner and the only way out is to say, I’m sorry, I made a mistake, I wish we could compromise somehow, then do it. 9. Lack of Aesthetics—This is the physical application of the Balance Factor. Aesthetics is important in Lesser Magic and should be cultivated. It is obvious that no one can collect any money off classical standards of beauty and form most of the time so they are discouraged in a consumer society, but an eye for beauty, for balance, is an essential Satanic tool and must be applied for greatest magical effectiveness. It’s not what’s supposed to be pleasing—it’s what is. Aesthetics is a personal thing, reflective of one’s own nature, but there are universally pleasing and harmonious configurations that should not be denied. |
| iZen wrote: |
|
C'tair, don't look to wiki for answers about Satanism. Go check out the Satanic Bible. Those are words by Anton Levey himself. |
I was basing my reply on the 9 satanic statements, the eleven satanic rules of Earth and the nine satanic sins, which I consider to be basicly satanism in a pill.
The whole ideology of satanism is close to nihilism, maybe less "negative" in terms of beliefs, and with less skepticism.
Anyways, satanism being evil, its a hard topic because first we would have to define "evil". While for many christians the sole philosophy of satanism seems evil, it might not be so for other people, for example maybe pagans (just an example, I dont have much knowledge on the subject of paganism).
I wonder why Satanist use the name "Satanist" ??
-sorry double post-
| el sol wrote: |
| I wonder why Satanist use the name "Satanist" ?? |
The reason why Satanism was given it's name is because they use Satan as the symbol of their religion.
| The Conspirator wrote: |
| Thats a contrediction. An all forgiving means forgiving any one, no matter how harable they are, no matter what they do, what they beleve and what they fallow. |
No, it is not a contrediction. When I say that God is all forgiving, I mean that under any circumstance he will forgive us. Look at a parent with their child for example. A parent will always forgive their child for a wrong doing.
| Quote: | ||
No, it is not a contrediction. When I say that God is all forgiving, I mean that under any circumstance he will forgive us. Look at a parent with their child for example. A parent will always forgive their child for a wrong doing. |
Unless you do not believe in him or believe the wrong thing. So unless you believe and fallow the one "right" form of Christianity, your not going to be forgiven, your to hell. So in the end, its not what you do, its what you believe and fallow. Thats not all forgiving, all forgiving would be forgiving anyone, in life or afterlife no matter what they have done, believe and fallow.
| The Conspirator wrote: |
| Unless you do not believe in him or believe the wrong thing. So unless you believe and fallow the one "right" form of Christianity, your not going to be forgiven, your to hell. So in the end, its not what you do, its what you believe and fallow. Thats not all forgiving, all forgiving would be forgiving anyone, in life or afterlife no matter what they have done, believe and fallow. |
1) Well, if you don't believe in God, you're not exactly going to be asking forgiveness from Him, now will you?
2) At the same, you need to ask for it. That's it. That's the only catch; if you ask, it's yours, if you don't ask, it ain't going to happen...
HM
| HereticMonkey wrote: | ||
1) Well, if you don't believe in God, you're not exactly going to be asking forgiveness from Him, now will you? 2) At the same, you need to ask for it. That's it. That's the only catch; if you ask, it's yours, if you don't ask, it ain't going to happen... HM |
Thats an excuse, that dose not work. What is boils down too is this, "fallow this religion or suffer for all eternity." That is what it is. There is no evidence for God so its ludicrous and insane for God to expect people to believe in him let alone ask him for forgiveness for something trivial like homosexuality or believing in this other god(s).
| Zampano wrote: |
| On a side note, you forgot in your vote to add an option "I am a Christian, so I refuse to not touch this subject". The poll as it is unfair |
I agree with this slightly. I am a Chrsitian and still quite happy to deal with the subject. In fact I enjoy dealing with such subjects, always wise to look at all sides of a discussion and not simply forge ahead believing your beliefs are correct all of the time.
I guess I'm a bit confused (again)...Ok, LaVey created the Church of Satan in 66, so now Satanism ONLY refers to his followers? Satanism didn't exist before that? And other current groups with different devotions towards Satan are not satanists? That seems to be rhetorical nonsense.
Check any dictionary and while you will sometimes find reference to Lavey, I think you will find that Satanism has a much broader meaning. Satanist have been around for as long as the concept of Satan has existed and their views and beliefs are at least as varied as "christians". I think your post is only appropriate for a particular sect of "Satanists".
Check any dictionary and while you will sometimes find reference to Lavey, I think you will find that Satanism has a much broader meaning. Satanist have been around for as long as the concept of Satan has existed and their views and beliefs are at least as varied as "christians". I think your post is only appropriate for a particular sect of "Satanists".
| The Conspirator wrote: |
|
Thats an excuse, that dose not work. What is boils down too is this, "fallow this religion or suffer for all eternity." That is what it is. There is no evidence for God so its ludicrous and insane for God to expect people to believe in him let alone ask him for forgiveness for something trivial like homosexuality or believing in this other god(s). |
1) You can't "fallow" a religion; you can make a field "fallow" (intentionally not using the field so as to allow it to become fertile again), but the same doesn't apply to religion. (I wouldn't note the misspelling normally; it's just the second time it's been used).
2) Obvious Free Will Issue: You need to allow the person the choice to follow their path, no matter where that path lies. In other words, you need to make the choice of whether or not you want to be saved.
3) You're also assuming that committing a sin bars your path from salvation; it doesn't. That, of course, assumes that homosexuality is a sin, which is a matter of debate right in a number of churches.
HM
| HereticMonkey wrote: |
| 2) Obvious Free Will Issue: You need to allow the person the choice to follow their path, no matter where that path lies. In other words, you need to make the choice of whether or not you want to be saved. |
Your assuming free will exists. The problem is there is no logical way for free will to exist, you can logically explain hoe determinism can exist and even fate but with free will you run into problems. Especially if you add in an omniscient bing. If you add in an omniscient god then free will becomes an impossibility (as if it was logically possible before) you can not have a bing that knows the actions your going to take before you do them and have free will.
And when you add omniscients you come to another problem, if an omniscient god exists, that god knew I would be an atheist long before I was even burn yet that god wonts me to believed in him and ask him for forgive for my sins and if I don't I go to hell. This god wonts me to believe in him and he knew that I would not and cause I don't I'm going to hell when I die. Now thats insane.
| Quote: |
| 3) You're also assuming that committing a sin bars your path from salvation; it doesn't. That, of course, assumes that homosexuality is a sin, which is a matter of debate right in a number of churches.
|
I didn't say that, I was pointing out that you have to believe in him and if you don't, you go to hell, which means no only the majority of people in the world but the vast majority of people who has existed are in\will go to hell. And before you say "freewill" again. If god made him self known to every one, that would not impede there free will. And even if it did the free will argument dose not cut it cause there are allot of people who don't deserve free will. Dose a child predator deserve to have free will? No. Yet this god values the free will of a child predator over the free will of the child he will rape and murder. The child did not have free will, in practising his free will, the child predator took away the child's free will..
Edit: forgot something.
| Quote: |
| That, of course, assumes that homosexuality is a sin, which is a matter of debate right in a number of churches. |
| Quote: |
|
Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. 18:29 For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit them shall be cut off from among their people. 1 Kings 14:24 And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel. 15:12 And he took away the sodomites out of the land, and removed all the idols that his fathers had made. Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. |
In other words: Your interpretation of Christianity is the ONLY one that matters. It wouldn't phase me, except that you are looking to tear it down, and so you need to bear that in mind that, like any other huge organization, there will be a number of different interpretations.
As part of that, you need to realize
Predestination is a concept that's never taken. It keeps coming back, but it just never sticks. The problem is that it removes the concept of sin from the mix; after all, if it's something God knows that you're going to do, then why should you ask forgiveness for it? It's something that you can't help but do, right? So why should it be considered a sin if breathing, eating and living aren't considered sins as well?
As such, God may know that you are going to sin, but He has no control over it: To sin or not to sin has to be the person's choice in order to be considered a sin, as it's the motivation that makes it a sin or not. Consider murder: If I kill someone in order to commit a crime or to see someone die, that's murder. On the other hand, if I do it in order to defend myself or someone else, or as part of the military, then it's considered acceptable (within limits; self-defense is limited to appropriate force, and even military missions have a limit on who and why they can kill).
But, if someone wouldn't have a reason that they were killing (as they were predestined to do it), then it's just not a sin. So predestination isn't a major force in Christian thought...
So, if you wish to deny God, that's your choice, not your destiny. You make the choice to deny your salvation, and thus suffer for it.
HM
As part of that, you need to realize
Predestination is a concept that's never taken. It keeps coming back, but it just never sticks. The problem is that it removes the concept of sin from the mix; after all, if it's something God knows that you're going to do, then why should you ask forgiveness for it? It's something that you can't help but do, right? So why should it be considered a sin if breathing, eating and living aren't considered sins as well?
As such, God may know that you are going to sin, but He has no control over it: To sin or not to sin has to be the person's choice in order to be considered a sin, as it's the motivation that makes it a sin or not. Consider murder: If I kill someone in order to commit a crime or to see someone die, that's murder. On the other hand, if I do it in order to defend myself or someone else, or as part of the military, then it's considered acceptable (within limits; self-defense is limited to appropriate force, and even military missions have a limit on who and why they can kill).
But, if someone wouldn't have a reason that they were killing (as they were predestined to do it), then it's just not a sin. So predestination isn't a major force in Christian thought...
So, if you wish to deny God, that's your choice, not your destiny. You make the choice to deny your salvation, and thus suffer for it.
HM
| HereticMonkey wrote: |
| In other words: Your interpretation of Christianity is the ONLY one that matters. It wouldn't phase me, except that you are looking to tear it down, and so you need to bear that in mind that, like any other huge organization, there will be a number of different interpretations. |
No. Its is the common doctrine of Christianity.
| Quote: |
| As part of that, you need to realize
Predestination is a concept that's never taken. It keeps coming back, but it just never sticks. The problem is that it removes the concept of sin from the mix; after all, if it's something God knows that you're going to do, then why should you ask forgiveness for it? It's something that you can't help but do, right? So why should it be considered a sin if breathing, eating and living aren't considered sins as well? As such, God may know that you are going to sin, but He has no control over it: To sin or not to sin has to be the person's choice in order to be considered a sin, as it's the motivation that makes it a sin or not. Consider murder: If I kill someone in order to commit a crime or to see someone die, that's murder. On the other hand, if I do it in order to defend myself or someone else, or as part of the military, then it's considered acceptable (within limits; self-defense is limited to appropriate force, and even military missions have a limit on who and why they can kill). But, if someone wouldn't have a reason that they were killing (as they were predestined to do it), then it's just not a sin. So predestination isn't a major force in Christian thought... So, if you wish to deny God, that's your choice, not your destiny. You make the choice to deny your salvation, and thus suffer for it. HM |
You missed my point by miles.
If there is an omniscient bing then there is no free will, I don't have a choice, this is how I was going to be, weather this is fated or determined this is how I am not cause of my choice. And God knew I would be this way long before I was burn yet he did nothing to show me evidence of his existence yet he will send me to hell fore not believing in him even though showing him self to me in a tangible way would in no way shape or form take away my free will, he's not forcing me he simply showing him self to me. And this God would value the free will of evil people over the free will on Innocent people, he would value the free will of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Ganges Khan, Ceaser, Cortés, serial killers, serial rapists, child molester, child predator, murders, rapists, those who torture people and many other evil people who's actions, in the practising of there free will, took away took away the free will of billions. If free will is so important to God how come he didn't intervene to protect the free will of those billions of people? Surely the free will of majority is more important than the free will of few evil people.
| The Conspirator wrote: |
| You missed my point by miles.
If there is an omniscient bing then there is no free will, I don't have a choice, this is how I was going to be, weather this is fated or determined this is how I am not cause of my choice. And God knew I would be this way long before I was burn yet he did nothing to show me evidence of his existence yet he will send me to hell fore not believing in him even though showing him self to me in a tangible way would in no way shape or form take away my free will, he's not forcing me he simply showing him self to me. And this God would value the free will of evil people over the free will on Innocent people, he would value the free will of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Ganges Khan, Ceaser, Cortés, serial killers, serial rapists, child molester, child predator, murders, rapists, those who torture people and many other evil people who's actions, in the practising of there free will, took away took away the free will of billions. If free will is so important to God how come he didn't intervene to protect the free will of those billions of people? Surely the free will of majority is more important than the free will of few evil people. |
I can see what you are saying here, but there is one thing I would like to say about it. Even though God may feel that free will is very important, that does not mean that he must protect others free will. In my opinion it is not his position to interfer with the happenings on Earth. But, by giving us free will, we are given the ability to infringe upon others free will.
| The Conspirator wrote: |
|
No. Its is the common doctrine of Christianity. |
Not really. There may be some confusion between "predestination" and "prophecy": There's a big difference between saying that this is what is to come (prophecy) and that everyone has a very specific path (predestination). Even us mortals can predict some basic future events, such as climate, orbits, etc.; however, this doesn't mean that specific events (who will win a lottery, for example) can be predicted.
Read: A trend can be predicted, because it's made of events that are somewhat consistent, but small events are still somewhat random.
| Quote: |
| You missed my point by miles. |
Just because I refute your point doesn't mean that I missed it. Rather, you're just not being convincing.
| Quote: |
| If there is an omniscient bing then there is no free will, I don't have a choice, this is how I was going to be, weather this is fated or determined this is how I am not cause of my choice. |
Two points: Being omniscient just means that you know what's coming up; it doesn't mean that the person has the ability to enforce it. Also, omnipotence doesn't mean that the person has to use that ability at all times.
Personally, I reaching the conclusion that our universe is God's Big Experiment for his thesis project, and so therefore He interferes as little as possible...
| Quote: |
| If free will is so important to God how come he didn't intervene to protect the free will of those billions of people? Surely the free will of majority is more important than the free will of few evil people. |
Because free will implies that you can impose yours over that of others. You can make decisions that alter the lives of others. The ability to make a decision implies that you can make a choice that affects numerous others decisions on one level or another.
For what it's worth...
HM
| iZen wrote: |
| I can see what you are saying here, but there is one thing I would like to say about it. Even though God may feel that free will is very important, that does not mean that he must protect others free will. In my opinion it is not his position to interfer with the happenings on Earth. But, by giving us free will, we are given the ability to infringe upon others free will. |
But if God dose not interfere in the world, such a god would not care if I believe in him or not. The point I'm making is, God wonts me to believe in him and if I don't I go to hell, this knew I would not believe in him before I was burn yet dose nothing in order to get me to believe in him even though he knows what it would take and what wouldn't work. The reason many Christens give for this is the free will argument which dose not work.
| HereticMonkey wrote: |
| Not really. There may be some confusion between "predestination" and "prophecy": There's a big difference between saying that this is what is to come (prophecy) and that everyone has a very specific path (predestination). Even us mortals can predict some basic future events, such as climate, orbits, etc.; however, this doesn't mean that specific events (who will win a lottery, for example) can be predicted. |
We didn't quite understand each other. I didn't say fate was part of Christan doctrine, I said I said for an omniscient bing to exist free will is an impossibility.
| Quote: |
| Two points: Being omniscient just means that you know what's coming up; it doesn't mean that the person has the ability to enforce it. Also, omnipotence doesn't mean that the person has to use that ability at all times.
Personally, I reaching the conclusion that our universe is God's Big Experiment for his thesis project, and so therefore He interferes as little as possible... |
I didn't say god controls us, I said free will is an imposibility if there is an omnitsiont bing.
| Quote: |
| Because free will implies that you can impose yours over that of others. You can make decisions that alter the lives of others. The ability to make a decision implies that you can make a choice that affects numerous others decisions on one level or another. |
But you can also force you will onto others, you can imprison them, torture them, program them and kill them. And in doing so taking away there free will.
| The Conspirator wrote: |
|
We didn't quite understand each other. I didn't say fate was part of Christan doctrine, I said I said for an omniscient bing to exist free will is an impossibility. |
In some of my posts in the original thread Free Will vs. Determinism I explained how it is actualy possible that there could be a god who knows all and yet you still have free will.
A basic summary:
The timeline splits at every choice, god knows all OUTCOMES, and therefore on your line of witness "what you were going to choose".
I am a devout Christian and it is hard to determine whether or not I think satanism is evil... At first I was going to say no, because I know a satanist. Then I remembered everything about satanism I learned from him. It seems to me like it would be the desperate clingings onto life and what is 'good' in this life for someone without hope in whatever comes after. It seemed very ruthless to me, very self-centred. I guess I would have to say in the end that yes, I consider satanism as evil. But, I also consider most things evil, like myself, humanity, governments, organized religion, etc. So, with the eyes of the world it is neither good nor evil, but with sanctified eyes, it is just as evil as everything else.
Conspirator: Ime hevin uh problehm undastandin ur splling...
So, in other words, God has to bow to your ego in other to get you to believe in Him, or He doesn't exist? Why should someone who is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent do something just to show that He exists if all that He's done prior hasn't worked?
Then let me simplify things: Your position is founded on personal belief, and is not rooted in any Christian doctrine. That doctrine supports free will, for without free will the concept of sin, even original sin, is simply not possible. Worse, it destroys any concept of responsibility for one's actions; after all, if you are simply going with the way you were fated to go, then who could possibly blame you for what you did? In short, without free will, there is no sin.
How? Just because that being knows what you will do, does not mean that he takes the choice away from you. You still need to make the decision one way or another; just because someone has seen the decision being made, and can see the results of that decision, doesn't mean that you can't make the decision.
So do a number of diseases, accidents, even your own decisions. The bottom line is that just because there are limits to free will, doesn't eliminate the concept altogether...
HM
| The Conspirator wrote: |
| The point I'm making is, God wonts me to believe in him and if I don't I go to hell, this knew I would not believe in him before I was burn yet dose nothing in order to get me to believe in him even though he knows what it would take and what wouldn't work. |
So, in other words, God has to bow to your ego in other to get you to believe in Him, or He doesn't exist? Why should someone who is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent do something just to show that He exists if all that He's done prior hasn't worked?
| Quote: |
| We didn't quite understand each other. I didn't say fate was part of Christan doctrine, I said I said for an omniscient bing to exist free will is an impossibility. |
Then let me simplify things: Your position is founded on personal belief, and is not rooted in any Christian doctrine. That doctrine supports free will, for without free will the concept of sin, even original sin, is simply not possible. Worse, it destroys any concept of responsibility for one's actions; after all, if you are simply going with the way you were fated to go, then who could possibly blame you for what you did? In short, without free will, there is no sin.
| Quote: |
| I didn't say god controls us, I said free will is an imposibility if there is an omnitsiont bing. |
How? Just because that being knows what you will do, does not mean that he takes the choice away from you. You still need to make the decision one way or another; just because someone has seen the decision being made, and can see the results of that decision, doesn't mean that you can't make the decision.
| Quote: | ||
But you can also force you will onto others, you can imprison them, torture them, program them and kill them. And in doing so taking away there free will. |
So do a number of diseases, accidents, even your own decisions. The bottom line is that just because there are limits to free will, doesn't eliminate the concept altogether...
HM
| Aredon wrote: | ||
In some of my posts in the original thread Free Will vs. Determinism I explained how it is actualy possible that there could be a god who knows all and yet you still have free will. A basic summary: The timeline splits at every choice, god knows all OUTCOMES, and therefore on your line of witness "what you were going to choose". |
Theres an error there. Go would not be truly be omniscient, he would only be right in one of those realists and in all others wrong, that not true omnipotence, simply guessing and in one reality you get it right. And know all possible options is not omniscient cause thats knowing possibility's, not whats actually going to happen.
| HereticMonkey wrote: |
| So, in other words, God has to bow to your ego in other to get you to believe in Him, or He doesn't exist? Why should someone who is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent do something just to show that He exists if all that He's done prior hasn't worked? |
Fist, there is no evidence for the existence of God and God has done nothing to show him self. All evidence says that all things happen by natural processes and there is no evidence that God is in the gaps he have in our knowledge.
Second, God being omniscient God knows what it would take to prove his existence and being omnipotent he has the power to do it and if God wonted me to believe in him he would but he dose not, so he ether dose not wont me to believe, dose not care or dose not exist. given that there is no evidence for God than the most plausible answer is God dose not exist.
| Quote: |
| Then let me simplify things: Your position is founded on personal belief, and is not rooted in any Christian doctrine. That doctrine supports free will, for without free will the concept of sin, even original sin, is simply not possible. Worse, it destroys any concept of responsibility for one's actions; after all, if you are simply going with the way you were fated to go, then who could possibly blame you for what you did? In short, without free will, there is no sin. |
Than God is not omniscient but omniscients (god is all knowing) is part of the doctrine as well leading to a paradox. They are maturely exclusive, one or the other you can't have both.
| Quote: |
| How? Just because that being knows what you will do, does not mean that he takes the choice away from you. You still need to make the decision one way or another; just because someone has seen the decision being made, and can see the results of that decision, doesn't mean that you can't make the decision. |
If God knows what you are going to do before you do it than you actions have been predestined or else else God could not know with any certainty that what you would do before you do it. To have omniscient, you need fate, with out fate, you can not know everything that has happened is happening and will happen.
| Quote: |
| So do a number of diseases, accidents, even your own decisions. The bottom line is that just because there are limits to free will, doesn't eliminate the concept altogether... |
If free will is so important to God than why dose he not protect free will?
| Quote: |
| We didn't quite understand each other. I didn't say fate was part of Christan doctrine, I said I said for an omniscient bing to exist free will is an impossibility. |
Well, if you believe in what I believe in(that God does not control us, rather It watches us. God uses science to regulate the earth without need for It to regulate It by itself for a reason beyond our understanding) then you can say that free will does in fact exist.
I'm not sure what's worse: The logic or the spelling...
Except that God is assumed to be omniscient. Either that, or His guesses are 100% accurate, which is virtually the same thing.
In your perspective God doesn't exist. If that's so, then why are you so worried about His limits? After all, He doesn't exist, then why bother defining limits? Are you a closet Christian?
Or, God could value your free will enough that He throws out proof that He exists, and is up to you to decide if He exists or not. I know it's a dodge, but if faith is important to Him (and it is, based on The Bible), then he would be more interested in you believing in Him based on faith rather than absolute proof.
At least you got the punctuation right, I guess...[twitch]
No, you just need to be real good at guessing...or have a perspective outside the normal space-time continuum. Which He could do with his omnipotence, or be there already (He is omnipresent). We are limited to looking at time in one direction; however, God isn't. It's just not useful to limit God the same way we are or you really get into some interesting issues...
Paradox issue: In order to protect free will, you would need to limit it as well. I'm really not seeing an issue here: You either need to allow that one person's free will occasionally trumps that of another, or that neither has any free will.
HM
| The Conspirator wrote: |
| Theres an error there. Go would not be truly be omniscient, he would only be right in one of those realists and in all others wrong, that not true omnipotence, simply guessing and in one reality you get it right. And know all possible options is not omniscient cause thats knowing possibility's, not whats actually going to happen. |
Except that God is assumed to be omniscient. Either that, or His guesses are 100% accurate, which is virtually the same thing.
| Quote: |
| Fist, there is no evidence for the existence of God and God has done nothing to show him self. All evidence says that all things happen by natural processes and there is no evidence that God is in the gaps he have in our knowledge. |
In your perspective God doesn't exist. If that's so, then why are you so worried about His limits? After all, He doesn't exist, then why bother defining limits? Are you a closet Christian?
| Quote: |
| Second, God being omniscient God knows what it would take to prove his existence and being omnipotent he has the power to do it and if God wonted me to believe in him he would but he dose not, so he ether dose not wont me to believe, dose not care or dose not exist. given that there is no evidence for God than the most plausible answer is God dose not exist. |
Or, God could value your free will enough that He throws out proof that He exists, and is up to you to decide if He exists or not. I know it's a dodge, but if faith is important to Him (and it is, based on The Bible), then he would be more interested in you believing in Him based on faith rather than absolute proof.
| Quote: |
| Than God is not omniscient but omniscients (god is all knowing) is part of the doctrine as well leading to a paradox. They are maturely exclusive, one or the other you can't have both. |
At least you got the punctuation right, I guess...[twitch]
| Quote: |
| If God knows what you are going to do before you do it than you actions have been predestined or else else God could not know with any certainty that what you would do before you do it. To have omniscient, you need fate, with out fate, you can not know everything that has happened is happening and will happen. |
No, you just need to be real good at guessing...or have a perspective outside the normal space-time continuum. Which He could do with his omnipotence, or be there already (He is omnipresent). We are limited to looking at time in one direction; however, God isn't. It's just not useful to limit God the same way we are or you really get into some interesting issues...
| Quote: |
| If free will is so important to God than why dose he not protect free will? |
Paradox issue: In order to protect free will, you would need to limit it as well. I'm really not seeing an issue here: You either need to allow that one person's free will occasionally trumps that of another, or that neither has any free will.
HM
| HereticMonkey wrote: | ||
Except that God is assumed to be omniscient. Either that, or His guesses are 100% accurate, which is virtually the same thing. |
No,it would just be the laws of probability. If Aredon is correct, than there are reality's where humans who have made predictions are always correct and there actions are always correct, there not omniscient, that just happens to be the reality that they are correct in all things, the same applies for god.
| Quote: | ||
In your perspective God doesn't exist. If that's so, then why are you so worried about His limits? After all, He doesn't exist, then why bother defining limits? Are you a closet Christian? |
Cause I'm in a country thats overwhelmingly Christan and most believe illogical and stupid thing cause of there religion.
| Quote: | ||
Or, God could value your free will enough that He throws out proof that He exists, and is up to you to decide if He exists or not. I know it's a dodge, but if faith is important to Him (and it is, based on The Bible), then he would be more interested in you believing in Him based on faith rather than absolute proof. |
Than why dose God not protect my free will from those who would negate my free will with there actions?
| Quote: | ||
No, you just need to be real good at guessing...or have a perspective outside the normal space-time continuum. Which He could do with his omnipotence, or be there already (He is omnipresent). We are limited to looking at time in one direction; however, God isn't. It's just not useful to limit God the same way we are or you really get into some interesting issues... |
That dose not solve the problem. For God to be omniscient, free will can't exist and for free will to exist, God can not be omniscient. They are mutually exclusive.
| Quote: | ||
Paradox issue: In order to protect free will, you would need to limit it as well. I'm really not seeing an issue here: You either need to allow that one person's free will occasionally trumps that of another, or that neither has any free will. |
No. If free will is so important to God than he would take steps to protect it, he dose not, thus free will is not important. If some one brakes into my house and tortures and murders me, his free will negated mine. If God truly cared about free will, than he would value the free will of the Innocent and majority over the freewill of the evil few who would negate you or my free will with there actions.
Is the free will of a child predator more important than the free will of the dozens of children he would rape and kill? Was the free will of Hitler more important than the free will of the 12 million murdered cause of him?
Here's what I get out of true Satanism:
Laziness and unwillingness to follow rules.
Yeah, it's evil.
Laziness and unwillingness to follow rules.
Yeah, it's evil.
Aside from this thread drifting slightly off-topic... 
If you read my post(s), we talked about how on your line of witness God would be omniscient becuase he effectively knows what is going to happen to you. It has little or nothing to do with "guessing" which timeline you are on. My theory says God witnesses everytimeline when you do not, and therefore knows the ending of every timeline, and therefore is omniscient in each
. Though I see your point, it is a matter of perspective. The general run-down is you, being on your line of witness, would never know that there was a seperate timeline from your own, and therefore God would be omniscient on the line of choices you made. Though you made them, on that timeline they were all pre-determined. It is a bit complicated, and hopefully you understand what I'm trying to say
Becuase by protecting YOUR free will and denying someone elses, you have effectively chose who gets free will and who doesn't, therefore defeating the purpose.
God doesn't interfere when human action is involved, around 90% of the time. (we are assuming he does exist) Becuase, when someone makes a choice to perform an action that would adversly effect you. Then that person is exerting their free will to choose to do that to you, and therefore YOUR feelings cannot be defended at the cost of their free will. However, if someone chooses to kill you, they have made that choice. That does not mean god cannot step in to stop you from dying if he still has need of you and your purpose. The choice was made and free will was exerted, if God is to intervene it will be during those situations and those situations only. That is to say, when free will is preserved.
Here is a copy of my original post:
Also, under deeper consideration of my theory, it has crossed my thoughts that by having a possible timeline where everyone makes the correct choices, as you said, that would effectively be a sinless timeline. Would that not be considered a heaven of some sort? (However, that is also assuming there is actualy a possible timeline of that kind, when fairly often some person making a right choice can be debated as bad or good. As well as the fact that some good choices may be very bad for other people. On top of that on ocasion someone's right choice may be the direct cause of someone elses wrong choice.) So actualy, in afterthought, I think haveing that sort of timeline would be basicaly impossible, and if not the equal of the "space-time lotery".
Last edited by Aredon on Fri Feb 23, 2007 9:03 pm; edited 3 times in total
| The Conspirator wrote: | ||
Theres an error there. Go would not be truly be omniscient, he would only be right in one of those realists and in all others wrong, that not true omnipotence, simply guessing and in one reality you get it right. And know all possible options is not omniscient cause thats knowing possibility's, not whats actually going to happen. |
If you read my post(s), we talked about how on your line of witness God would be omniscient becuase he effectively knows what is going to happen to you. It has little or nothing to do with "guessing" which timeline you are on. My theory says God witnesses everytimeline when you do not, and therefore knows the ending of every timeline, and therefore is omniscient in each
. Though I see your point, it is a matter of perspective. The general run-down is you, being on your line of witness, would never know that there was a seperate timeline from your own, and therefore God would be omniscient on the line of choices you made. Though you made them, on that timeline they were all pre-determined. It is a bit complicated, and hopefully you understand what I'm trying to say
| The Conspirator wrote: |
| Than why dose God not protect my free will from those who would negate my free will with there actions? |
Becuase by protecting YOUR free will and denying someone elses, you have effectively chose who gets free will and who doesn't, therefore defeating the purpose.
God doesn't interfere when human action is involved, around 90% of the time. (we are assuming he does exist) Becuase, when someone makes a choice to perform an action that would adversly effect you. Then that person is exerting their free will to choose to do that to you, and therefore YOUR feelings cannot be defended at the cost of their free will. However, if someone chooses to kill you, they have made that choice. That does not mean god cannot step in to stop you from dying if he still has need of you and your purpose. The choice was made and free will was exerted, if God is to intervene it will be during those situations and those situations only. That is to say, when free will is preserved.
Here is a copy of my original post:
| Aredon wrote: | ||
I have a similar view of the continueum, I view the timeline as more of a web, each choice and action causing a split in the timeline to two seperate timelines. We witness this one because we are unaware of the other timeline's exsistance. Just as two people in seperate rooms do not know of the other person's presence unless otherwise informed. This implies to me that God actualy exists outside of the continueum and views all the possible outcomes of your actions. Therefore, leting him "know" what you will do. Becuase of which if you exist on one timeline it could be argued that becuase you witness only the choices made on that plane of the continueum, that the choices are "pre-determined" by that timeline's path, so in that way it could be viewed as determinism. Even though every choice you make is your own, you would still be tied to only one timeline of witness. My views on the world always seem to be overly complexe and often times I can't find all the words I need to describe them. I hope I described this well, feel free to post any questions about it
I will also agree with LeviticusMky, in the sence that I have often thought that the laws we use to "define" our universe, could very well only exist in the small area that we are able to actualy observe, for all we know the laws of gravity, light, sound, time, etc. bend and/or change outside our galaxy. On that note perhaps the laws we use to define our universe came into existance when we thought them up. Maybe gravity is here becuase when we were born everyone else was on the ground so our universe became limited just as their's
~H out |
Also, under deeper consideration of my theory, it has crossed my thoughts that by having a possible timeline where everyone makes the correct choices, as you said, that would effectively be a sinless timeline. Would that not be considered a heaven of some sort? (However, that is also assuming there is actualy a possible timeline of that kind, when fairly often some person making a right choice can be debated as bad or good. As well as the fact that some good choices may be very bad for other people. On top of that on ocasion someone's right choice may be the direct cause of someone elses wrong choice.) So actualy, in afterthought, I think haveing that sort of timeline would be basicaly impossible, and if not the equal of the "space-time lotery".
Last edited by Aredon on Fri Feb 23, 2007 9:03 pm; edited 3 times in total
| Aredon wrote: | ||||
Aside from this thread drifting slightly off-topic...
If you read my post(s), we talked about how on your line of witness God would be omniscient becuase he effectively knows what is going to happen to you. It has little or nothing to do with "guessing" which timeline you are on. My theory says God witnesses everytimeline when you do not, and therefore knows the ending of every timeline, and therefore is omniscient in each . Though I see your point, it is a matter of perspective. The general run-down is you, being on your line of witness, would never know that there was a seperate timeline from your own, and therefore God would be omniscient on the line of choices you made. Though you made them, on that timeline they were all pre-determined. It is a bit complicated, and hopefully you understand what I'm trying to say |
I missed your point.
But in such a situation we still would not have free will. If each decision we make splits the time line into two or more different reality's, all passable choices will be made. If you have to come to a decision, all choices will be made just in different reality's, thus you don't have the free will too make that choice since all choices will be made.
| Quote: | ||
Becuase by protecting YOUR free will and denying someone elses, you have effectively chose who gets free will and who doesn't, therefore defeating the purpose. God doesn't interfere when human action is involved, around 90% of the time. (we are assuming he does exist) Becuase, when someone makes a choice to perform an action that would adversly effect you. Then that person is exerting their free will to choose to do that to you, and therefore YOUR feelings cannot be defended at the cost of their free will. However, if someone chooses to kill you, they have made that choice. That does not mean god cannot step in to stop you from dying if he still has need of you and your purpose. The choice was made and free will was exerted, if God is to intervene it will be during those situations and those situations only. That is to say, when free will is preserved. |
But in inaction the out come is the same. Some one free will is negated.
Think about it this way, a serial killer is killing people, now this one serial killers actions would negate the free will of many people. Now if God steeped in a took away at lest a small part of the serial killers free will, the free will of many people would be protected. But God sent, the free will of the 1 serial killer is more important than the free will of his many victims. Now all God has to do is manipulate one part of his personality (say, make him less obsessive), by manipulating that one part he prevents or stop the serial killer and the majority of his free will remain. But God doesn't. so ether the free will of one man is more important than the free will of many or free will is not important or not a factor.
Another thing
Exodus
| Quote: |
| 11:10 And Moses and Aaron did all these wonders before Pharaoh: and he LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go out of his land. |
God had no problem hardening the Pharaohs heart and untimely punishing the people of Egypt for the Pharaohs refusal to set the Israelite people free. So God has no problem in denying some people there free will but refuses to act to save the free will of many from a single person?
My beliefs on free will are:
1) No body has free will no matter what.
2) No one should have free will if it were even possible.
If people had absolute free will, there would be a constant crossing of personal rights. This right here is very unethical. No one should have their rights crossed, especially by another human being. With complete free will, we would be able to rape and murder as much as we wanted without and repercussions. This ladies and gentlemen, would be a very bad situation.
1) No body has free will no matter what.
2) No one should have free will if it were even possible.
If people had absolute free will, there would be a constant crossing of personal rights. This right here is very unethical. No one should have their rights crossed, especially by another human being. With complete free will, we would be able to rape and murder as much as we wanted without and repercussions. This ladies and gentlemen, would be a very bad situation.
| iZen wrote: |
| My beliefs on free will are:
1) No body has free will no matter what. 2) No one should have free will if it were even possible. If people had absolute free will, there would be a constant crossing of personal rights. This right here is very unethical. No one should have their rights crossed, especially by another human being. With complete free will, we would be able to rape and murder as much as we wanted without and repercussions. This ladies and gentlemen, would be a very bad situation. |
Nothing is stopping you from raping or murdering anyone except your morals. You were raised in an environment that showed that rape and murder is morally wrong, and so your civilized side keeps you from committing such acts. It's just simple human restraint to me. If historical texts did not exist to make murder or rape such a horrible thing, it would happen more often.
Some more about freewill.
| Quote: |
|
Acts 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed. Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) 9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 2 Timothy 1:9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, Ephesians 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, 2 Thessalonians 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: |
So you ran "predestination" through a search engine and through in some other verses...Nifty.
Some of those verses deal with prophesy, which is different than predestination (and it's not just a semantics issue). In essence, prophesy deals with events happening, whereas predestination deals with the soul and where it goes. Predestination can also refer to prophesy that has already happened.
You also have some verses about shaping and who serves who. Religions tend to enforce a strict hierarchy (note the caste system); this is part of their stabilizing influence, for good or ill.
You also have verses that deal with hardening of the heart due to specific events; the heart would have been hardened due to the events involved anyway (standard psychology: There are some actions that make the person colder).
As for the Pharoah: This is one of the few cases where free will was usurped. So I guess if you use a machine gun, something will hit...That said, God was just highlighting what was already there; The Pharoah had no intention of letting the slaves go from the beginning, and had already been given warning that letting them go would be a good idea. In essence, the hardening was a punishment, and meant to humiliate him. One of the more interesting punishments...
HM
Some of those verses deal with prophesy, which is different than predestination (and it's not just a semantics issue). In essence, prophesy deals with events happening, whereas predestination deals with the soul and where it goes. Predestination can also refer to prophesy that has already happened.
You also have some verses about shaping and who serves who. Religions tend to enforce a strict hierarchy (note the caste system); this is part of their stabilizing influence, for good or ill.
You also have verses that deal with hardening of the heart due to specific events; the heart would have been hardened due to the events involved anyway (standard psychology: There are some actions that make the person colder).
As for the Pharoah: This is one of the few cases where free will was usurped. So I guess if you use a machine gun, something will hit...That said, God was just highlighting what was already there; The Pharoah had no intention of letting the slaves go from the beginning, and had already been given warning that letting them go would be a good idea. In essence, the hardening was a punishment, and meant to humiliate him. One of the more interesting punishments...
HM
[Random thought of the day]What about Buddhism?[/Random thought of the day]
Buddhism seems interesting. I like the idea of meditating. But you can meditate without being Buddhist too.
I'll have to agree with many (if not most) of the Satanist beliefs. However not so much of Vengeance. It is good to forgive, and it makes you feel better. Vengeance keeps it going, whatever it is.
Buddhism seems interesting. I like the idea of meditating. But you can meditate without being Buddhist too.
I'll have to agree with many (if not most) of the Satanist beliefs. However not so much of Vengeance. It is good to forgive, and it makes you feel better. Vengeance keeps it going, whatever it is.
| HereticMonkey wrote: |
| So you ran "predestination" through a search engine and through in some other verses...Nifty.
Some of those verses deal with prophesy, which is different than predestination (and it's not just a semantics issue). In essence, prophesy deals with events happening, whereas predestination deals with the soul and where it goes. Predestination can also refer to prophesy that has already happened. You also have some verses about shaping and who serves who. Religions tend to enforce a strict hierarchy (note the caste system); this is part of their stabilizing influence, for good or ill. You also have verses that deal with hardening of the heart due to specific events; the heart would have been hardened due to the events involved anyway (standard psychology: There are some actions that make the person colder). As for the Pharoah: This is one of the few cases where free will was usurped. So I guess if you use a machine gun, something will hit...That said, God was just highlighting what was already there; The Pharoah had no intention of letting the slaves go from the beginning, and had already been given warning that letting them go would be a good idea. In essence, the hardening was a punishment, and meant to humiliate him. One of the more interesting punishments... HM |
Did you reed those?
| Quote: |
| Acts
13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed. |
They were ordained to believe and eternal life.
| Quote: |
| Romans
8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. |
Go new for knew and predestined them.
| Quote: |
| 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) |
Your not getting into heaven do to your deeds but cause God called you.
| Quote: |
| 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? |
God makes people in certain ways, he made me to be an atheist, he made you to believe.
| Quote: |
| 2 Thessalonians
2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. |
God sends them a delusion and then damns those who don't believe in him even thou he sent them the delusion.
| Quote: |
| 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: |
God Chose from the beginning who he will save.
I can't help but notice than when debating the bible, I'm quoting the bible. Do you not have a bible? You should, you Christan. Do you not feel ike going through it?
http://bible.com/
http://www.biblegateway.com/
http://www.bible.org/
Try these, there bibles online, multiple versions and translations.
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com
Heres is a skeptical view of the bible
http://www.evilbible.com/
Heres a site that points out all the evil in the bible.
| The Conspirator wrote: |
|
I can't help but notice than when debating the bible, I'm quoting the bible. |
Yes, but do read anymore than just what you quote? After all, it's also pointed out that anyone can choose to be in the Book of Life, as well as take their name out...
Sorry; I'm sort of nervous about quoting specific verses because I'm sort of scared with how far you would take them out of context...
| Quote: |
| Heres is a skeptical view of the bible
http://www.evilbible.com/ Heres a site that points out all the evil in the bible. |
I would go, but I think I'll let you keep the monopoly on misquoted and out of context verses...
HM
| HereticMonkey wrote: |
|
As for the Pharoah: This is one of the few cases where free will was usurped. |
Actualy I disagree completely. This is an example of God influencing someone, not an example of him bypassing free will. Though I supose its open to translation..
| The Conspiritor wrote: |
| But in inaction the out come is the same. Some one free will is negated.
Think about it this way, a serial killer is killing people, now this one serial killers actions would negate the free will of many people. Now if God steeped in a took away at lest a small part of the serial killers free will, the free will of many people would be protected. But God sent, the free will of the 1 serial killer is more important than the free will of his many victims. Now all God has to do is manipulate one part of his personality (say, make him less obsessive), by manipulating that one part he prevents or stop the serial killer and the majority of his free will remain. But God doesn't. so ether the free will of one man is more important than the free will of many or free will is not important or not a factor. |
Free will referes to the ability to make a choice without anything else CAUSING your choice to become... If you make a choice to do something, you have made that choice. The action, however, can be negated while preserving the free will of the choice.
What you are suggesting sounds more like a proposition of some kind of super-free will where you can make any choice at any time regardless of whether or not there are things to choose from. Which, I must say confuses me slightly. If i'm swinging a bat at you becuase i chose to, your choices become: take the hit, or dodge somehow. You are suggesting by swinging the bat im removing your ability to choose some option that didn't exist in the first place
Therefore if someone chooses to kill someone, that person's choices become: Die quite, Die screaming, or escape. It in no way negates free will, but i supose it would negate your bizzare concept of super-free will. I fail to see how the serial killer is negating anyone elses free will as choices are based on a cause-effect system. Where you make a choice based on the event that just happened, you can't choose outside the box... If somone is about to kill you, you can't choose outside the confines of the options available...
| HereticMonkey wrote: | ||
Yes, but do read anymore than just what you quote? After all, it's also pointed out that anyone can choose to be in the Book of Life, as well as take their name out... |
Yes, have you read it at all?
| Quote: | ||
Sorry; I'm sort of nervous about quoting specific verses because I'm sort of scared with how far you would take them out of context...
I would go, but I think I'll let you keep the monopoly on misquoted and out of context verses... |
I haven't quoted anything out of context, that is what it says. Read them.
When the bible says "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestined", "God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned." and "Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?" there is no other way to interpret it than God controlled the future.
 |