You didn't actually answer the question.

"You have to go on and be crazy. Craziness is like heaven."
Jimi Hendrix

Open your mind! Stop having such a closed point of view! I already admited that my views are not logical, no need to quote these big names. But I'm not a stereotypical crazy mad fucker, I'm pretty normal if anything, but, fuck, I sure am proud to believe in crazy things.


I'm entirely bonkers. But if you listen up, I'll tell you a secret... All the best people are.

I think you mean ambiguous.

I should note that I'm not a christian because I would otherwise go on a murderous rampage; if I wasn't a Christian, I don't know what I'd do, but the reason I'm a Christian is because I genuinely believe that the Bible is the true word of God.

And I do find it a lot more...comfortable? to have a religion which is logical; if I weren't a Christian I wouldn't be any religion that is illogical. I guess for some people they don't care about logicality, but logic is merely a way of working with possible facts to try establish truth, and I think one can certainly benefit from having a certain amount of logic in one's life.

Thx.

@Lanth - It is illogical to tell yourself you believe in something that you know the evidence does not point toward. I would have hoped that this would not have needed elucidation, but alas:

A series of premises will lead one to a specific conclusion. If the premises are sound and valid, the conclusion will be true. If one believes the premises to be sound and valid, yet substitutes the conclusion with one more appealing, than one is committing a non sequitur, a logical fallacy. This is why it is illogical to believe in known falsehoods.

The true mystery, however, is why one would suffer a 'crippling anxiety or insecurity' from the truth in the first place. What poor, wretched soul must live a lie in order to live in peace? Treating an illness that severe by self-administering delusions is akin to putting a bandage over a septic wound.

If God is perfect, He would be just. If He is imperfect, it is possible that He could be just. It is just as likely that He is unjust. As an agnostic, I cannot know.

One man says that babies go to heaven. Another might say that babies have a special, tortorous Hell. We do not have undeniable evidence that tells us one way or another. The Bible is not the only religious text. The same writer you linked, Rich Deem, also says that God is not fair. Of course, he goes on to say that "fair" would mean condemning all humans to Hell. Whether God is fair depends on your definition of "just".

If you were being logical, I would argue that, to maximize your chances of getting into heaven, you would become a member of as many religions as possible.

@oh_man I believe that the premises of my beliefs are sound and valid; I draw logical conclusions from said premises. Now, it's possible that my premises are false, just as it is possible for any premise of any system of thought to be false. All philosophies, religions, and systems of thought must make one assumption at least; for some, that is that what they can see, touch, smell, hear, and taste is real. For others, it is that the Bible is true. For others, it is that aliens exist. But I have yet to see any argument that when taken all the way back to its beginning, it does not rely on at least one assumption.

For you to insinuate that what I believe is a lie, a self administered delusion, etc. would be flaming, except I find it laughable that you clearly think that the same can't be said of you.
EDIT
Except that the premise of my beliefs (the Bible is the true and infallible word of God) logically leads to the conclusion that other religions are false. And I am saved in a fair few different religions anyway even if I don't believe in them.

This is the argument from inconsistent revelations, a critique against Pascal's Gambit (an 'argument' for believing in a God which has been repudiated long ago and many times).

But it is not that simple. These religions have many different creeds and customs that you must follow in order to get your ticket to paradise. Many of them also make claims that if you are in other religions you will go to hell/purgatory. Then there's the notion of Gods not accepting inauthentic belief, especially such 'catch-all' beliefs as this. Then of course, there is the huge waste of time you are risking by following all these rotes and rituals, prayers and church-ceremonies, and so forth. I think it is far more logical to not subscribe to any of the (notably, man-made) religions at all.

The great philosopher-king Marcus Aurelius said it best: “Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Jan 5 2012, 4:16 am by Oh_Man.

Supposing this is what you believe, and supposing it just so happens that my god is the real god, and you were wrong, and you went around telling christians such as myself that they are wrong and bashing their beliefs whenever given the opportunity, I don't think it matters how just or unjust my god is.

I agree with you there. You would have to subscribe to non-exclusive religions if you were going by pure probability. However, the marginal benefit of subscribing to another religion always decreases.

I agree with this. It is a good reason to live a good life whether you believe in one god, a million gods, or no gods at all.

As for the problem of evil and God's omniscience/omnipotence/omnibenevolence, this may be of interest. Of course, Plantiga uses a strange definition of "omnipotent." According to him, (from what I understand of the link) God can do anything, but not visualize a world of both free will and no moral ills.

My critiques toward the 'free will' defence for the problem of evil is as follows:

God has free will.
God never acts immorally.
If God has free will and is absolutely moral, why cannot he create others the same? Apparently, he has already done this with the angels. Though, maybe they just are 'almost always' moral (Lucifer being the prime example here).

Then there is the topic of paradise. It is said that in paradise no one is immoral. Yet presumably people in paradise still retain their free will. So clearly humans can be moral and have free will, why not just create them like that in the first place?

And of course, as you said, the 'omnipotence' issue. If he 'can't' do something, then he is not omnipotent.

God has free will, and he mostlikely values the fact that he has free will, and decided to give free will to everyone else.

I still don't understand this whole "God has to do everything in his power to make life perfect everywhere all the time for everyone." reasoning.
I'm pretty sure the Bible doesn't say that. Does anyone have any evidence of that.

Besides, If God HAD to do only benevolent things, HE wouldn't have free will and would therefore not be omnipotent. It's an illogical question.

That is what it is to be omnibenevolent. A benevolent being could create sin, and omnibenevolent being could not.

God has free will? Source please.

Omnipotence.

Right, I went back and re-read your other posts and you said the same thing. I agree with that.

I initially read your statements not as saying it was illogical, but saying it was bad or making a value judgement. My argument against that is that certain individuals deluding themselves may actually end up with a better life in the long run (see this quite commonly with people who convert to christianity or other religion after a life of crime, for example) or bettering for society at large. But those beliefs would still be illogical, no matter whether they were overall good or bad for the individual/society.

I told you already, what can be discussed with 100% certainty is how to tackle the Bible - what it says, what it means, the author(s) purposes, lessons, themes, etc. These we can scrutinize and have a decent debate over so instead of ending your arguments with blanket "how can we know anything for sure" statements it's far more effect for you to find some arguments/scripture/citations that potentially support your what-if theories.

We have scripture which convincingly points to "babies going to heaven." Find me this scripture that say babies "Have a special, torturous Hell." The issue here is what the Bible says/means/etc, not our tangent what-if scenarios (because if we do go there, there will be no end to our discussions). And yes this God is unfair at times because he is also merciful and loving - the biblical God has more than one attribute. If you want this discussion to continue, then I suggest you find examples of where this God is unjust in a bad way (i.e. favoring negative things to happen to you) because that's something we can probe further (wait on second thought, that belongs in a different topic).

How does free-will follow from being able to do anything? A machine that controls a rocket can launch the rocket, but it doesn't mean it is going to.

If their God is incapable of doing things freely than there is a limit to its power. Which means it is not omnipotent.

The limit is not with the power itself, it's with the wielder.