If you are right, and evolution is the only answer, then we will all just be dirt-food when we die. But if you are wrong, and the intelligent design people are right and there is a God, then you’ll be in a tough spot.
By the way, did you ever read what the Kansas School Board had proposed? It doesn’t sound like it from your letter.
California Boy
The Church is funded entirely by your purchases of FSM merchandise. Thank you for your support.
An elaborate spoof on Intelligent Design, The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is neither too elaborate nor too spoofy to succeed in nailing the fallacies of ID. It's even wackier than Jonathan Swift's suggestion that the Irish eat their children as a way to keep them from being a burden, and it may offend just as many people, but Henderson, described elsewhere as a 25-year-old "out-of-work physics major," puts satire to the same serious use that Swift did. Oh, yes, it is very funny. -- Scientific American
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License. This means you're free to use the content but not sell it. More Details |
As a Christian i’m deeply offended by Cali Boy’s comments. Who are you to say who will be in a “tough spot,” and how do you know it wont be you? Treat others the way you want to be treated. There are no exceptions. I believe gay marrage should be legalized, because it’s legal for others. I believe a woman should have the right to an abortion, because it’s her body, not mine. I don’t believe these pastafarians will go to hell, because I don’t believe I’ll go to hell. They have faith, and as far as i’m concerned that’s good enough for me. Do not play God by judging, or condemming anyone. And that to me is what is most offensive.
Enlightened,
Let me begin by saying this: The traditional arguments for the existence of God are purely philosophical. They are not sufficient for proving the existence of God. They certainly are not sufficient for proving that Jesus is God.
This is my reply to your post on Oct 16th, 2006 at 3:20 pm:
/
You wrote, ” This does not mean the universe is not running down; but you don’t know if that means it’ll reverse course and rev back up….” - That possibility is only real if the universe is static. The universe is expanding and the expansion is accelerating. Richard Morris, an agnostic, does a good job of debunking that possibility in “The Big Questions”.
Next…never mind. I was going to reply to everything you wrote, but it’s pointless. Here’s the bottom line: As finite beings we have to subjectively interpret our observations. Science is not objective, because the scientist is always interpreting his observations. Further, he is always viewing from somewhere. Likewise, theology is not objective.
Here is the kicker: I live everyday as if human life has meaning. You live everyday as if human life has meaning. My conclusion (humans are intrinsically valuable) is logically consistent with my presupposition (an infinite and personal God created humans in His image). If you are an atheist, you conclusion (humans are intrinsically valuable) is not logically consistent with your presuppositions (life began with an impersonal explosion of impersonal matter).
You wrote, “Meaningful is not required to be quantified by an afterlife; it merely requires a purpose. That purpose can be self-driven; I could determine that my life had meaning if I left behind a legacy of philanthropy perpetuating beyond my demise. Further, I could determine that my life has meaning right now because I am impacting my environment.” - You are an existentialist and a romantic. Sure, your life has a self-defined purpose, but it’s an illusion. Once the entropy has increased to its maximum, you and your self-defined purpose are lost forever.
Keep it logical.
I really must go. Thanks for the reply.
Wow, Nic, wow. I often wonder if you really believe what you write or if you’re just having fun.
.
By your own arguments, you admit that there are things in the universe, sin being one of them, that are not the construct of God. As you argued, God is not omnipotent in that there are laws which he must obey. If God is the creator of all things, including the universe and all the laws that govern it, He must be responsible for all consquences of said universe. If he is not responsible, then He cannot be the creator. By your arguments God is not the creator of the universe.
.
If God is not the creator of the universe but we accept that He exists, then we must redefine Him as god (little g), not God (big G). So, who then created this universe and its little god? Yet another God?
.
You write, “He desired to have loving fellowship with beings who would obey Him,” You might want to look up the definition of fellowship. You cannot have fellowship with a master. Fellowship requires the participants be equals. If this was truly god’s desire, shouldn’t he have created a universe of other gods? Perhaps we are gods? Hmmm…
.
Finally, I have to respond to the playground analogy. You write in your latest response, “If you choose not to accept what He offers He has only one option, as a Gentleman, that is: Not to force it on you. He leaves you alone.” But he doesn’t leave you alone. He punishes you. He banishes you to an eternity of torture. This is not the act of a loving god. There is no redemption from Hell. No pardon. No get out of jail free card. Hell is pure punishment. There is no rehabilitation option. The more loving option would be the ‘blink’ you out of existence than torture you for eternity.
.
I believe from your own examples that god does not truly desire our love. The only thing that pleases god is obedience:
.
-Genesis 22:12 “…through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.”
-Exodus 19:5 “Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession.”
-Luke 11:28 “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”
-John 15:10 “If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father’s commands and remain in his love.”
.
The list could go on for pages.
.
I have a son. Sometimes he disobeys me. Although I don’t like it when he does, I don’t stop loving him. Even if some day he no longer loves me, I will still love him. That is love. That is not god.
.
RAmen.
Brother Rigatoni
Thank you for posting in the vein of what many of us here were under the impression religion was about.
Gill,
You wrote, “So does god need people to know he’s god?” - No because God exists in three distinct, yet unified persons. Before you say that that is crazy and impossible, you should not that laboratory observation has confirmed the plurality of location for sub-atomic particles. If particles can be in multiple places at once, why can’t God?
Let me clarify my definition of worship: God created us to be humans and enjoy the life He gave us. However, we are sinners in need of forgiveness. God freely offers that forgiveness. So to clarify, Worship = Be a human who has accepted God’s offer of forgiveness.
Goodbye.
Edit
Make that “what western religion is supposed to be about”
Oneeyedjack,
Some things are intrinsically impossible. That does not negate the fact that God is the creator of all things.
You wrote, “You cannot have fellowship with a master. Fellowship requires the participants be equals.” - God has created us in His image. He has called us friends.
I do not believe that the nature of hell is as you describe it. I believe that the fire and torture mentioned in the Bible are metaphoric statements for something, which will be much worse. I believe that there are levels of consciousness in hell. This answers the question: “How can a murder get the same punishment as a thief?” It’s really an involved topic, but if you’re interested, for some reason I doubt that you are, I will post on this topic. I posted an explanation of the existence or reality of hell on Sep 26th, 2006 at 6:06 pm.
Goodbye.
Ok I am back and a little drunk, I have been a good boy and done what my existential morals tell me to do and at least snogged (passionately kissed for those who are not British) a nurse.
But now to somethink more important, you say my veiw of Existentialism is too simplistic you are correct it is very simplistic but even the mighty and almost God like being that is (obviously there is no God but this guy comes close)Sartre could not explain Existentailism in less than a couple of hundred pages and even they you layman would have no idea. As I am not even clever enough to reach Sartres shoes I can’t hope to explain it in a paragraph, does not mean it is not correct though! Existentailsm may have been talked about by Christianity but it was never practiced by them, only Atheists have been able to practice such a rational moral view point.
-
-
Nic you say the the existential veiw point is incorrect and how can personal meaning be worth anything. This is the express view of the Nihilists, if you want to talk about rational thinking go no further then these guys. Please ask one of these guys about God, I always get a kick out of their responses
nic,
You pointed out that God exists in three distinct persons but you didn’t say what that has to do with his need or lack therof to let people know he is god. I don’t see how being multiple entities at one time has any effect on his ego.
It is nice to read your arguments as you obviously have researched them very well. I am so used to debating with people that know nothing about their own arguments let alone their oppositions arguments.
not to open an old wound or interrupt anything, or be completely off topic, but i saw the title of this this topic and glanced at what some people were saying, and i can’t help but ask, why can’t christians believe that God created Evolution? Personally, being a Christian and going to catholic schools my entire life, i think that it would be much more impressive that God made us from the smallest of cells and crafted us into the complex beings that we are today, instead of making us and BAM! humans were here, never to be changed again. Kinda like a work of art. You can’t just make a work of art; you have to put time, emotion, care, and compassion into it for it to truly be a work of art. You can’t manufacture that; time, emotion, compassion.
i don’t think God manufactured us either.
ps. you only have one life to live, are you going to spend it bitterly arguing on a computer over the internet about religion, which in turn is scared, special, and unique to each individual? Its like arguing about food, everyone likes different things for different reasons. Except when people argue about food they eventually accept that the other person is different from them for some genetic reason and give up trying to prove that their taste buds are better and perfect.
peace
NowtheworldhasMeaning,
I never said your existential perspective was simplistic. I said that your attempt to prove that God’s omniscience somehow made it impossible for us to have free will was entirely too simplistic. You used the chaos theory, but you stuck to a Newtonian model of the universe, a model, which is fine if your trying to land on the moon, but quite insufficient if your are attempting to understand free agents. You said man is not a machine, but can be compared to a machine, but then you rendered mankind as nothing more.
I said you existentialism was romantic.
Peace
Pastawy,
Thank you. I appreciate healthy debate, too. A lot of people here resort to name-calling; that’s unfortunate.
The Triune nature of God is amazingly intense. It is similar to quantum mechanics in that the Western mind has a hard time accepting it. The reason that God does not need people to recognize Himself is because He (I am now referring to any one of the three Personalities) has two other distinct and co-eternal persons, against whom He can recognize His Self. Typically people think that in order for God’s three distinct Personalities to be unified they have to be physically connected. The observation of 1 sub-atomic particle in multiple places has helped me to break away from this type of thinking.
Thanks for the interest.
” So to clarify, Worship = Be a human who has accepted God’s offer of forgiveness. “–oh! Now you’re changing things around. So which is it, eh?
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again–god created us to be imperfect, therefore we shouldn’t be punished for being imperfect. If there is a hell, then only those who DESERVE to go there should go there–murderers, for instance. Otherwise, they shouldn’t. I think god is wise enough to understand that at the end of the day, if a person’s done their best to be a good individual, then that’s all that really matters. And besides, what are we being forgiven FROM? Being imperfect as god him/her/itself created us? I don’t fancy the idea of begging for forgiveness so I can go to heaven…..I say, tally up my score and see where I belong. If I belong in hell, so be it. Why use the excuse that it’s ok ’cause I believe in god, so he’ll forgive me? Doesn’t change the fact that I did whatever I did.
-
So, I guess I’m halfway there….I like to think I’ve got the ‘be human’ part down, it’s a shame I don’t want nor accept god’s forgiveness for my screwups. Bring on the divine punishment!
Gill,
I qualified my definition of worship because while I assumed everyone would understand that I was writing from a Christian perspective, no one actually did. So I qualified my definition. Here is the deal if people were perfect, which the way He created us, we would need no forgiveness. However, we are no longer perfect. God knew we would stain ourselves; however, He also knew He had to allow for that possibility in order to have a real authentic relationship with us.
You wrote, “What are we being forgiven FROM? Being imperfect as God…created us?” and later, “…So He’ll forgive me? Doesn’t change the fact that I did whatever I did.” - Maybe forgiveness is a poor choice of words at this point. Lets say it this way: We need to accept Jesus’ offer to endure our punishment for us. God doesn’t overlook you sins when you get saved. They are punished. Jesus (God) is the recipient of your punishment. Punishment is probably a poor choice of words, as well. Lets say that the natural consequences of you deviation from God’s design earn you eternal separation from God (i.e. Life). It is intrinsically impossible for God to simply overlook your deviation.
Goodbye.
Gill,
I qualified my definition of worship because while I assumed everyone would understand that I was writing from a Christian perspective, no one actually did. So I qualified my definition. Here is the deal if people were perfect, which the way He created us, we would need no forgiveness. However, we are no longer perfect. God knew we would stain ourselves; however, He also knew He had to allow for that possibility in order to have a real authentic relationship with us.
You wrote, “What are we being forgiven FROM? Being imperfect as God…created us?” and later, “…So He’ll forgive me? Doesn’t change the fact that I did whatever I did.” - Maybe forgiveness is a poor choice of words at this point. Lets say it this way: We need to accept Jesus’ offer to endure our punishment for us. God doesn’t overlook you sins when you get saved. They are punished. Jesus (God) is the recipient of your punishment. Punishment is probably a poor choice of words, as well. Lets say that the natural consequences of you deviation from God’s design earn you eternal separation from God (i.e. Life). It is intrinsically impossible for God to simply overlook your deviation.
Goodbye.
whoa there me hearties…
.
If we were created perfect in the first instance why would we stain ourselves? i’ll grant you the pasta sauce gets everywhere, but he would know we would spill it - and therefore by definiton people were NOT perfect in the first place as the ability to “stain oneself” is obviously an imperfection. As a result God is still responsible for a flawed creation, he can’t have it both ways. the parent is responsible for the child, the manufacturer is responsible for his goods…
.
Also if God punishes Jesus (who is god) who accepts the punishment from himself on our behalf, isn’t this…
.
a) a bit creepy, punishing himself? a bit like he’s a masochist as well as a sadist - still, if S&M floats his pirate ship and it’s between consenting deities who are we to mock? and
.
b) on accepting the punishment for our flaws (which he created)without being asked he admits liability as creator and therefore is responsible for all our crimes, in which i have a compensation claim i’d like him to answer….
Science is for things that can be proven, Religion is for schitzophrenics.
E.G.
Definition of Schitzophrenic: A person that thinks something exists which no-one else can physically see.
Can you SEE God?
No.
I hope this has cleared up the Little issue of Science or Religion.
Nic,
.
You failed to address my original comment. In your own words, “He desired to have loving fellowship with beings who would obey Him.†The key here is “obey.” Obey implies a master/subservient relationship, not a relationship of peers.
.
The nature of hell is irrelevent to this discussion. Regardless of its exact nature, hell is not a desirable place to be and anyone condemned will be there for eternity. So, here we are again at the same point which you keep dodging. God does not act as you said, “If you choose not to accept what He offers He has only one option, as a Gentleman, that is: Not to force it on you. He leaves you alone.†This is not true. If you do not accept what he offers, then you will be punished in whatever form of hell that is. God is the ultimate “gotcha!”
.
RAmen.
Argh.. tooo long…. brain melting… what the hell did i miss?
.
Only one thing to do then…
Add another monster to the mix.
SO ATTENTION: HARD CORE READERS ONLY… LONG ARTICLE!!!
.
First off, id just like to point out that to me, the motivation of any divine being is not really a strong point. I personally dont believe in one, so i would rather consider the im/possibility of his existence rather than his reason for being, to me this all seems a touch too metaphysical (or would it be metapsychological?).
Also, the above posts are waaaaay to long to read, so forgive me if i repeat an earlier argument.
.
couple a points though…
.
Why does the christian argument so often include the assumption we would want to be forgiven by god, to live with by his side etc ad nauseum?
I for one hold a philosophical opposition to the idea that i need to be accepted or forgiven by a being that, given the ultimate power, the ability to fix the ails of the world, does nothing.
.
And please, before the argument of free will comes up again, consider this; Why does he not confirm his existence, empiracally, beyond all doubt? It would not remove the capability of humanity to govern their own actions, merely reduce the pain people inflict on one another in his name. At the very least, if he would like the human race to behave in a certain way, it would give us some guidance.
.
All it would take is one manifestation in a manner that could not be doubted. This is god after all, I am sure he could manage that.
.
Why would he prefer us to flounder in the dark? Dont argue that you should come to belief on your own, that a manifestation would remove the element of faith, because otherwise, you argue against the purpose of a miracle.
(A miracle, I hold to be any event that believers hold could have been performed solely by a god)
Basically, if faith should not require proof, then why does it need the trappings of supposed events of god?
.
Why do we need to be lectured on hellfire and brimstone.
.
WHY DO WE NEED RELIGION?
What purpose could religion hold except as a form of proof?
To guide us to the true path?
Why are we unable to do so ourselves?
I hold that each person can live their own life, sure they may make an ass of it, sure they may hurt someone else, but it is their choice to make. Afterwards, they can deal with the consequences, whether it be the weight of the law, or the gratitude of the public.
.
WHAT GIVES ANYONE THE RIGHT TO PREACH?
What gives any one person the right to teach their beliefs over any other? I believe what I believe, why should i believe what you do? (please remember, you came to this site, we are not arguing on a christian board here)
.
I’m atheist, but that doesnt mean im immoral, or nihilistic to the point of apathy. I am not going to go and steal or murder, rape or wound. I would rather act as a decent HUMAN being, and maybe, just maybe leave a legacy to the rest of humanity.
.
WHAT MAKES GOD THE ONLY REASON?
Yes, in time, all will be meaningless.
Yes, against the impossible implacability of entropy, it seems unreasonable.
But, y’know,is that any reason why i shouldnt help my race? Is it really so unimaginable that the satisfaction of living my life, of helping humanity, of simply being, is it’s own reward?
.
WHY SHOULD I HAVE TO BELIEVE?
If your god made us, maybe he made us to doubt deliberately.
Maybe he thought that mankind would better use their time by getting down to the business of whatever it is we do, rather then wasting time and resources to idolate him?
.
That is my two bob on the issue. What you make of it is your own, and whatever it is, just bloody deal with it yourself.
.
.
.
.
.
In other news…
.
spider, dont forget that not only that if jesus is god is it kinda masachistic, but you also have to wonder just how inbred you have to be to be your own father.
.
Adam, while its good to see you support us, its spelt schizophrenia, which refers to a deterioration and/or confusing of personalities.
After all, we cannot be elitist and superior if we spell like the fundamentalists :P
woops.. masOchistic… got all caught up in a cloud of smug…