- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117413
08 Nov 20
@rajk999 saidIt’s not “doctrine” and it’s not a “religion”.
This is a good example of a fabricated religion. Almost nothing of your doctrine is in the bible.
My post provides some background to my thoughts on why I reject some of the mainstream doctrines of contemporary Christianity.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117413
08 Nov 20
@secondson saidI don’t see how what you wrote leads to a conclusion that you are a literalist. It’s a non sequitur. Why be a literalist?
It's why I'm a literalist.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117413
08 Nov 20
@secondson saidThe notion that we have free will is erroneous within the context of the Bible and the concept of sin.
You see, that's why it isn't our fault that we were born with it. And it is for that reason that Christ assumed full responsibility.
BUT
Man has free will.
You have just said that we are different from Adam and we are born with sin and it isn’t our fault. I agree.
Paul wrestles with this in the letter to the church in Rome because. He is trapped in a body of sin. There is no “free will” not to sin, we are compelled to sin. We have no choice, it is our nature. To say that we have free will to not sin, but we still need salvation from sin doesn’t make any sense.
We are sinners. Period. We sin because we are sinners, we aren’t sinners because we sin. Do you see the difference.
God is accountable and responsible for this. He came, paid the price and redeemed his entire creation.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28791
08 Nov 20
@rajk999 saidLike how you continued the analogy.
Suppose the mangy old cat was also
- raping and killing baby cats around the village
- stealing and selling drugs to decent cats
- encouraging decent cats to attack your birds and hamsters etc
After you preached to this mangy cat and sent prophet cats [who he killed] to speak to this cat, without success, what would you do?
Before laying out how I would act, can you clarify if I am blessed with omnipotence, omniscience, and am perfectly loving?
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28791
08 Nov 20
@secondson saidAn interesting article about animal freewill: (I think you are too quick to reduce animal behaviour to just instinct).
Poor analogy. God didn't create cats in His image and likeness, nor do cats have free will. Cats act in response to instinct, as do all animals. Lab tests notwithstanding.
'Like us, I want to suggest, many animals have two-way powers. They are of course driven to do certain of the things they do by instinct (as are we) – but this is not in the least inconsistent with the admission that they have two-way powers. Instincts govern animals, as they govern us, in a general way – setting a specific range of goals, aims and behaviours, but often leaving it up to the animal itself to settle many of the precise details of where, when and how those goals will be pursued. More complex animals have greater freedoms in this respect than less complex ones – a dog, for instance, can decide whether to urinate now, or to run after the stick which has just been thrown for it instead; a spider seems likely to be far more narrowly constrained. But still, even a spider might be able to decide whether here or there is a better place to build its web, to take this or that route to a particular place, etc. There is evidence, indeed, that certain spiders possess quite remarkable abilities – for instance, there is a wonderful account of some observations made in the rainforests of northeastern Australia of the jumping spider, Portia, by Stim Wilcox and Robert Jackson. This spider preys on other spiders, and Wilcox and Jackson describe an occasion on which, having tried and failed to tempt a second spider out of the centre of its web by means of various strategies, Portia disappears from view for about an hour and finally reappears on a rock projection, high above the web of the target prey spider. She then lets herself down from the rock projection, and swings in on a thread to eat her prey. What seems remarkable about this account of Portia’s behaviour is the potential it suggests for forward planning, for spatiotemporal awareness, for the maintenance of intention over a significant amount of time, and in the absence of continuous perception of the desired object. Clearly, Portia’s general goal – to catch and eat spiders – is instinctively given; but equally clearly, I should argue, the choice of means to this end in a given case is settled by Portia, on the spot, in a manner sensitive to the affordances of the environment in which she finds herself.'
https://www.philosophersmag.com/essays/38-do-animals-have-free-will
08 Nov 20
1 edit
@ghost-of-a-duke saidYou are God or acting on his behalf [ie do as you think He would]. Those words you use are not in the bible and open to human interpretations which conflict with what the bible says about God. You are God here in this scenario. How would you treat the mangy cat? You are one of the atheists who knows the bible well enough to answer. 😀
Like how you continued the analogy.
Before laying out how I would act, can you clarify if I am blessed with omnipotence, omniscience, and am perfectly loving?
08 Nov 20
@divegeester saidThats fine. Nothing is wrong with that and I do the same thing. Except that where I depart from mainstream doctrines, it is supported by a statement from Christ or the Apostles. It is true that Christianity is full of delusional theories and doctrines especially about heaven and hell, punishment and reward. I sleep better at night knowing that my departure has some support from Christ.
It’s not “doctrine” and it’s not a “religion”.
My post provides some background to my thoughts on why I reject some of the mainstream doctrines of contemporary Christianity.
08 Nov 20
1 edit
@secondson saidAnd fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matthew 10:28 KJV)
"...quote some references instead of just giving us your opinion."
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28791
08 Nov 20
@rajk999 saidFirstly I would act in a way that you probably wouldn't understand. (This is not intended as a slight, but laying out the actions of an infinite being are unlikely to be comprehended by a finite being). - This is where the Bible frequently breaks down and betrays the human authorship behind the words. The reasoning is clearly that of finite beings who lack divine attributes (however you wish to label them).
You are God or acting on his behalf [ie do as you think He would]. Those words you use are not in the bible and open to human interpretations which conflict with what the bible says about God. You are God here in this scenario. How would you treat the mangy cat? You are one of the atheists who knows the bible well enough to answer. 😀
Even if we say I am merely all-knowing and all-powerful (in my role as deity) and that my expressed desire was to save all cats (even the lost ones) then I would deploy these abilities in a way that would bring that to fruition. 'Face the consequences of your actions' is a completely understandable, human strategy. It is not one I would deploy in my role as deity, especially if my genuine desire was to save all the cats. I would, for example, intervene more, and not care one jot if this infringed their freewill.
08 Nov 20
@ghost-of-a-duke said"Clearly, Portia’s general goal – to catch and eat spiders – is instinctively given; but equally clearly, I should argue, the choice of means to this end in a given case is settled by Portia, on the spot, in a manner sensitive to the affordances of the environment in which she finds herself.' "
An interesting article about animal freewill: (I think you are too quick to reduce animal behaviour to just instinct).
'Like us, I want to suggest, many animals have two-way powers. They are of course driven to do certain of the things they do by instinct (as are we) – but this is not in the least inconsistent with the admission that they have two-way powers. Insti ...[text shortened]... n which she finds herself.'
https://www.philosophersmag.com/essays/38-do-animals-have-free-will
What do we mean by "freewill"? Is it merely a set of choices limited by "the affordances of the environment" we exist in?
The chasm that exists between the choices of animals and insects and those of man raises the question, where's the equality between the two?
Animals have no capacity to make moral choices relative to their conduct and behavior. Animals have no freewill in the matter of choosing a lifestyle other than the one programmed into their DNA. Animals never ask the question, "what happens to me after I die"?
The definition of what we call "freewill" as applied to man and beast are worlds apart. By comparison animals have not the freewill afforded to man. In fact, I have no doubt whatsoever that no animal will be joining us in this discussion.
08 Nov 20
@rajk999 saidWhere's your point?
And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matthew 10:28 KJV)
Do you believe the Bible teaches that man is a triune being? Body, soul and spirit?
In the verse you quoted I see that spirit isn't included.
No doubt you have an explanation!
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117413
08 Nov 20
@rajk999 saidYou have admitted that you choose some parts of the bible over others. I do that too, I think it’s fine.
Thats fine. Nothing is wrong with that and I do the same thing. Except that where I depart from mainstream doctrines, it is supported by a statement from Christ or the Apostles. It is true that Christianity is full of delusional theories and doctrines especially about heaven and hell, punishment and reward. I sleep better at night knowing that my departure has some support from Christ.
08 Nov 20
1 edit
@secondson saidTriune being? Not seeing that in the bible. Spirit of man and the soul of man are one and the same thing. Regardless, it is preposterous nonsense for Christians to claim that God creates something which he cannot destroy. That alone conflicts with their other claim that God is omnipotent.
Where's your point?
Do you believe the Bible teaches that man is a triune being? Body, soul and spirit?
In the verse you quoted I see that spirit isn't included.
No doubt you have an explanation!
God created man, body and soul [or if you like body, soul and spirit].
God can also destroy completely, man, body and soul [and spirit]
Unless you can come up with a reference which supports the idea that the soul or spirit is indestructible, or that there was some promise by God that man would live forever, that doctrine is false