Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   God and Sheri S. Tepper
Geno
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 99 (42622)
06-11-2003 8:13 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by crashfrog
06-11-2003 6:53 PM


Deism Defined
Sounds great!
Let me throw a quote out. As I implied, I haven't really made up my mind about Atheism or Deism (or Agnosticism for that matter). I saw in a different topic that you gave a website for Atheism and I thought, hey--I wonder if Deism has one? Believe it or not, they do! No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.deism.com
The quote I have is from a different site, however:
quote:
The general tenets of Deisim may be summarized as follows (my numbers):
1--The Bible, though it contained important truths, was not divinely inspired;
2--that many important Christian theological tenets -- the divinity of Christ, the doctrine of the Trinity, and the theory of atonement for sins -- were the results of superstition or invention and had to be rejected.
3--They believed that God, the creator of the universe, was perfect, but worked by choice through unchangeable laws, and that miracles, therefore, were impossible.
4--They believed in free will, that man, made in God's image, could himself eventually become perfect by studying Nature, which reflected the divine perfection,
5--and that practical religion, for the individual, consisted in achieving virtue through rational conduct.
The influence of Deistic beliefs and premises can be traced in numerous eighteenth- and nineteenth-century works: Pope's Essay on Man, Shelley's poems, and Wordsworth.
Of course, the grand-daddy of American Deism is Thomas Payne. [there-that puts us back in good graces with the "book nook" theme!]
Sorry for that long summation, but I felt I had to define the position somewhat if I was going to continue to espouse it (or ultimately reject it!)
Would you agree that Atheism shares tenets 1, 2 and 5?
Tenet 3 is problematic. Some parts you would probably accept, others of course will not work.
Tenet 4 is probably the heart of the difference though, wouldn't you agree?
If you find the exercise interesting, I would like to hear your reaction overall to the quote and then an Atheist position on the tenets (amplify as you like).
Thanks!
Geno

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by crashfrog, posted 06-11-2003 6:53 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by zephyr, posted 06-12-2003 11:10 AM Geno has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 17 of 99 (42630)
06-11-2003 8:56 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by mike the wiz
06-11-2003 8:03 PM


is this derived from personal experience?
That, and statistical evidence. No force intercedes in human events in a way distinguishable from random chance. Suffering and happiness are distributed at random.
i guess my point is is that i could say God is a personal God.the only evidence that i exist to you is that i am typing back to you,however does this mean because you have relatively no scientific evidence , that means i do not exist?
Your text is in fact scientific evidence of your existence. So I don't know what your point is with this. God's never posted on any internet message boards, to my knowledge; he's certainly never talked to me personally; and the Bible does not impress me as the "word of god" or whatever. it's obviously the words of all-too-human people.
Anyway, I love to talk to people, so I'm certainly happy to talk to you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by mike the wiz, posted 06-11-2003 8:03 PM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by mike the wiz, posted 06-12-2003 10:42 AM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 24 by mike the wiz, posted 06-12-2003 12:15 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 18 of 99 (42667)
06-12-2003 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by crashfrog
06-11-2003 8:56 PM


'Your text is in fact scientific evidence of your existence.'
so then why is nt Jesus' text proof of his existance to you crash?
'Anyway, I love to talk to people, so I'm certainly happy to talk to you.'
ok, i just thought you were a bit angry with me , i called you self righteouss once when i was not meant to (general human condition)i am sorry about that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by crashfrog, posted 06-11-2003 8:56 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by PaulK, posted 06-12-2003 11:23 AM mike the wiz has replied
 Message 21 by zephyr, posted 06-12-2003 11:27 AM mike the wiz has replied

  
zephyr
Member (Idle past 4551 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003


Message 19 of 99 (42668)
06-12-2003 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Geno
06-11-2003 8:13 PM


Re: Deism Defined
quote:
Would you agree that Atheism shares tenets 1, 2 and 5?
Atheism as I see it, and as I lean toward it (though not quite embracing it) would readily agree with those.
quote:
Tenet 3 is problematic. Some parts you would probably accept, others of course will not work.
Well, in crash's words, that's the kind of God that we may as well forget about. I mean, what kind of a relationship can one have with a silent and invisible deity? One-sided, to say the least, absent of feedback. Impossible to verify, and thus based on a truly blind faith. Still, for a deist and an atheist, the ultimate conclusion seems the same: supernatural intervention doesn't happen.
quote:
Tenet 4 is probably the heart of the difference though, wouldn't you agree?
Again, for practical purposes, (though this one is maybe more open to argument) I find this tenet and the probable atheist response equivalent for practical purposes. Most atheists I know are well-educated in the natural sciences, at least compared to the average layman. They believe in free, rational thought and working to avoid human suffering. While not necessarily striving for perfection or believing themselves to be the image of God, many work for the good of others and, in doing so, could be said to achieve virtue through their conduct.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Geno, posted 06-11-2003 8:13 PM Geno has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Geno, posted 06-12-2003 6:08 PM zephyr has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 20 of 99 (42669)
06-12-2003 11:23 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by mike the wiz
06-12-2003 10:42 AM


Are you claiming to know of a document actually written by Jesus ?
An original ? Or even a copy ?
And if you did have one would that not just be evidence of Jesus, the man ? It wouldn't surprise me if there was a real historical person behind the stories in the Gospels.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by mike the wiz, posted 06-12-2003 10:42 AM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by mike the wiz, posted 06-12-2003 12:06 PM PaulK has not replied

  
zephyr
Member (Idle past 4551 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003


Message 21 of 99 (42670)
06-12-2003 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by mike the wiz
06-12-2003 10:42 AM


quote:
so then why is nt Jesus' text proof of his existance to you crash?
That's not a great comparison. The gospels themselves do not claim to be written by Jesus. Each one is *proof* that somebody existed in the past and wrote a book, but not really proof of anything else. Crash didn't say your posting here was proof that everything you say is true, accurate, inspired by God, and inspiring enough to change his whole life, did he?
I know, based on my understanding of the system I am using right now, that the most likely explanation for the words I see on my screen is this:
Somebody, somewhere, sits at a terminal much like mine and enters text via a keyboard or other device, also much like mine. By entering commands in the computer, which are translated to machine language and processed by a CPU, he causes this text to be encoded and transmitted via electrical and/or light pulses through a series of switches and routers to a server which formats the text and allows me to receive it via a similar process, and my computer displays the text on my screen. This person uses the name "mike the wiz" to identify his posts among those of other members.
This is a reasonable conclusion because it can be explained in detail by mechanisms I have observed and understand. It makes no unnecessary assumptions, and allows me to build on this knowledge by associating you with a particular identity and beliefs of which you have shared some. For example, I may assume your name is Mike and you're a creationist seeking further scientific knowledge. However, I'm open to other possibilities, because those things would not be verified unless I met you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by mike the wiz, posted 06-12-2003 10:42 AM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by mike the wiz, posted 06-12-2003 11:58 AM zephyr has replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 22 of 99 (42671)
06-12-2003 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by zephyr
06-12-2003 11:27 AM


'This is a reasonable conclusion because it can be explained in detail 'by mechanisms I have observed and understand. It makes no unnecessary assumptions, and allows me to build on this knowledge by associating you with a particular identity and beliefs of which you have shared some. For example, I may assume your name is Mike and you're a creationist seeking further scientific knowledge. However, I'm open to other possibilities, because those things would not be verified unless I met you.'
you have answered well , and very logically may i add.
you are also right i have shared beliefs of mine with you,also i have not lied or offered you anything because ther is no reward or purpose in doing so.
'That's not a great comparison. The gospels themselves do not claim to be written by Jesus'
however when Jesus speaks they do claim that those are the words he said.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by zephyr, posted 06-12-2003 11:27 AM zephyr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by zephyr, posted 06-12-2003 12:19 PM mike the wiz has not replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 23 of 99 (42673)
06-12-2003 12:06 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by PaulK
06-12-2003 11:23 AM


'Are you claiming to know of a document actually written by Jesus ?'
no ,(i am not claiming anything i am pointing at the facts). not directly but if God Jesus and the holy spirit are the trinity then the people who wrote his words were directly influenced by the holy spirit.
i also remember a scripture which says (not qouted however)neither think what you shall say because it will be the holy spirit that speaks.i could ask you are you claiming that there is no gospel?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by PaulK, posted 06-12-2003 11:23 AM PaulK has not replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 24 of 99 (42675)
06-12-2003 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by crashfrog
06-11-2003 8:56 PM


'it's obviously the words of all-too-human people'
it is the inspired word of God -not 'whatever'
also this is a very convenient conclusion as you are not a witness to God, however i think a fantastic and intelligent mind called 'crashfrog' IS a brilliant and special design made by God , and i have eperienced God ,no he has not directly spoke to me but if some of the things that have happened to me are chance then i expect to win the lottery every day from now on.dismissing the bible completly from your mind as human words is illogical,the witnesses are thousands are they all lying?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by crashfrog, posted 06-11-2003 8:56 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by zephyr, posted 06-12-2003 12:22 PM mike the wiz has replied

  
zephyr
Member (Idle past 4551 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003


Message 25 of 99 (42677)
06-12-2003 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by mike the wiz
06-12-2003 11:58 AM


quote:
you have answered well , and very logically may i add.
you are also right i have shared beliefs of mine with you,also i have not lied or offered you anything because ther is no reward or purpose in doing so.
Right. At the moment I have no reason to think so. All I'm saying is that I wouldn't put money on my idea of who you are. It's not personal
quote:
however when Jesus speaks they do claim that those are the words he said.
Of course they do. They claim it. There's plenty of room for skepticism about the origin and accuracy of the texts, as well as the person of Jesus himself. Today, the only people who seem to hear from him are those who choose to. Again, skeptic's field day. Our minds play tricks on us all the time. Even St. Augustine said that most people who thought God was talking to them had simply imagined what they expected him to say.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by mike the wiz, posted 06-12-2003 11:58 AM mike the wiz has not replied

  
zephyr
Member (Idle past 4551 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003


Message 26 of 99 (42678)
06-12-2003 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by mike the wiz
06-12-2003 12:15 PM


quote:
if some of the things that have happened to me are chance then i expect to win the lottery every day from now on
People tend to forget (or never learn) that the odds of something happening are often unrelated to past results. A coin toss is a memoryless system, as are many chance events.
I've seen people interpret some seriously mundane events as acts of God, just because they were so convinced that all good came from him. It's more about perspective than anything else.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by mike the wiz, posted 06-12-2003 12:15 PM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by mike the wiz, posted 06-12-2003 12:33 PM zephyr has replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 27 of 99 (42682)
06-12-2003 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by zephyr
06-12-2003 12:22 PM


'I've seen people interpret some seriously mundane events as acts of God, just because they were so convinced that all good came from him. It's more about perspective than anything else.'
but when you ask for very very specific thing to happen and it happens that surely is answered prayer , will you concede that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by zephyr, posted 06-12-2003 12:22 PM zephyr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by NosyNed, posted 06-12-2003 2:17 PM mike the wiz has not replied
 Message 29 by crashfrog, posted 06-12-2003 3:11 PM mike the wiz has not replied
 Message 30 by zephyr, posted 06-12-2003 3:18 PM mike the wiz has replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 28 of 99 (42695)
06-12-2003 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by mike the wiz
06-12-2003 12:33 PM


but when you ask for very very specific thing to happen and it happens that surely is answered prayer , will you concede that?
No I wouldn't. There are a very large number of prayers uttered everyday. And a large number of things happen everyday. There are almost certainly going to be coincidental joinings of those 2 things. It would require more than individual anecdotal uncontrolled instances to be very meaningful to me. I'm a bit stubborn.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by mike the wiz, posted 06-12-2003 12:33 PM mike the wiz has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 29 of 99 (42706)
06-12-2003 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by mike the wiz
06-12-2003 12:33 PM


but when you ask for very very specific thing to happen and it happens that surely is answered prayer , will you concede that?
Not really, because of all the prayers that humans utter, the vast, vast majority (99%+) go totally and completely unanswered. (Unless you think an implied "no" counts as an answer. )
Especially prayers to "know God's will." In every study I've heard of, people who think they're praying and getting god's will wind up reporting their own particular will on whatever subject. If everybody who prays to now god's will winds up recieveing god's will, how come they almost never agree with each other on what that will is?
It's like, why do indian rain dances work? Because they dance until it rains. Eventually, everything that could reasonably happen, happens. It's not answered prayer, just random chance through the filter of human experience.
[This message has been edited by crashfrog, 06-12-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by mike the wiz, posted 06-12-2003 12:33 PM mike the wiz has not replied

  
zephyr
Member (Idle past 4551 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003


Message 30 of 99 (42708)
06-12-2003 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by mike the wiz
06-12-2003 12:33 PM


quote:
but when you ask for very very specific thing to happen and it happens that surely is answered prayer , will you concede that?
There is always a chance of you getting the particular thing you wanted. Maybe it would have happened if you hadn't prayed, but nobody ever thinks about that. It means nothing unless compared to the number of times you ask for a very very specific thing and get the complete opposite. Of course, there's always an explanation: you didn't pray enough, you prayed selfishly, God answered but he just said no, etc. etc.... IMHO, these have all been manufactured to explain why prayer is not effective in real life as it was in the Bible, and why even the most faithful believers cannot tell a mountain to move from here to there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by mike the wiz, posted 06-12-2003 12:33 PM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by mike the wiz, posted 06-12-2003 7:37 PM zephyr has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024