Of Christians, Ego and Delusion

Many a time the observation has been made of “inability to reason” of many Christians when discussing spiritual beliefs. From what I’ve seen, this is not unwarranted. A couple of recent examples from two different posters on this forum:

Those who are “born of God” cannot and do not sin, yet will continue to sin
Even when the above contradiction was pointed out, the poster insisted that he believed it to be true since it was in the Bible.

”You forget that one of Christ's commandments is also repentance (Matt. 6:12). Therefore, a sinner could be said to be keeping Christ's commandments if he repents, even though he had sinned."
This despite the fact that if the sinner had kept His commandments, there would have been no need for him to repent and despite the fact that repentance does not change the fact that he did not keep His commandments in the first place.

From what I could tell, both earnestly believed they had a reasonable position. In the words of Vince Lombardi, “What the hell is going on out here?”

Many spiritual traditions seem to point to the ego as the cause of delusion.

From the Random House College Dictionary:
Delusion, n. 4.Psychiatry. A fixed, dominating or persistent false mental conception resistant to reason.

Many Christians hold beliefs that are decidedly ego affirming such as: assurance of eternal life; assurance of love and acceptance from God; assurance that one can continue to commit sin and not lose the assurances above; etc. It’s not difficult to imagine ego defense mechanisms kicking into overdrive when beliefs such as these are threatened. As such, is there any wonder that many Christians exhibit an "inability to reason" when discussing spiritual beliefs?

Thoughts?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Many a time the observation has been made of “inability to reason” of many Christians when trying to discuss their spiritual beliefs. From what I’ve seen, this is not unwarranted. A couple of recent examples from two different posters on this forum:

[quote][b]Those who are “born of God” cannot and do not sin, yet will continue to sin
Even when the ...[text shortened]... echanisms kicking into overdrive when beliefs such as the above are threatened.

Thoughts?[/b]

Good point.
There are certain things that are universal to all humans. The delusion of the ego. Death.
I believe you have to start with the correct premise, put it into action and follow it through to its logical conclusions.
The ego will justify all sorts of behaviours in a bid to appear righteous before God.
Always remain realistic ,for at the back your mind, behind all those thoughts lies the inner voice of your dharma. It will get you back on track but sacrifices will have to be made.
Some will have to be hard on themselves, others will have to be good to themselves. Only you know what is right for you.
Only a strong conviction will carry you through to the other shore

Hey, let go of my ego!! 😠

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Many a time the observation has been made of “inability to reason” of many Christians when discussing spiritual beliefs. From what I’ve seen, this is not unwarranted. A couple of recent examples from two different posters on this forum:

[quote][b]Those who are “born of God” cannot and do not sin, yet will continue to sin
Even when the above contra ...[text shortened]... ristians exhibit an "inability to reason" when discussing spiritual beliefs?

Thoughts?[/b]

Being dull-witted is considered a positive boon in Christianity.

Just think of the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden. According to the myth, the serpent convinced Eve to eat the fruit from this tree with the promise that doing so would bring her wisdom. This act brought evil into the world. Ever since, knowledge has been associated with evil and arrogance. [Besides the fact that women have become thought of as easily corrupted and morally inferior.]

Add to this the idea that the average Christian sees any question put to their metaphysical framework not as an opportunity to rid their doctrine of inconsistency but rather as a test of their faith.

Yet another reason for Christians denying the primacy of logic is that they believe god is on their side: the most logical human is still fallible. How can they compete with the concept of perfection? They don't know 'god's plan'.

The bible can hardly lay claim to being the most internally consistent document in the history of the world. Illogic is at the very core of the bible and embracing it is considered a positive expression of one's faith.

Originally posted by Green Paladin
Being dull-witted is considered a positive boon in Christianity.

Just think of the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden. According to the myth, the serpent convinced Eve to eat the fruit from this tree with the promise that doing so would bring her wisdom. This act brought evil into the world. Ever since, knowledge has been associated with evil very core of the bible and embracing it is considered a positive expression of one's faith.

=================================================
Just think of the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden. According to the myth, the serpent convinced Eve to eat the fruit from this tree with the promise that doing so would bring her wisdom.
=======================================

The "promise" of God it was that eating of it would bring "death".

"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, of it you shall not eat; for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely DIE." (Genesis 2:17)

Of course if you are talking about the promise of the serpent ... it was a deceptive lie -

"For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will become like God, knowing food and evil" (Gen. 3:5)

That "promise" should have been ignored because it was attached to a lie " You shall not surely die! (v.4)

When a salesman comes to your door with a lie on the backend of something true, the smart thing to do is not take the bait. You seemed to have taken it by counting (Gen. 3:5) as the "promise" when the real "promise" man was to heed was in Gen. 2:17.

Strike one.


================================
This act brought evil into the world. Ever since, knowledge has been associated with evil and arrogance. [Besides the fact that women have become thought of as easily corrupted and morally inferior.]
===================================

The tree was not called "the tree of evil". It was "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil".

So you are only partially perceptive when you say it brought "evil" into the world.

Strike two.

It brought the knowledge of good and evil into the world. However, the problem as God had warned was that it brought death.

This death should not be understood as only the failing of the beating heart. It includes an all-incompasing weakness and feebleness to accomplish two things:

1.) Fully perform the GOOD that man knows.

2.) Fully escape the EVIL that man knows.

And if you haven't noticed, this has been the story of your life. Oh yes, you KNOW what is good. But many times you do not have the life power to DO the GOOD that you know.

Conversely, you surely KNOW the evil that you should NOT do, and even hate it at times. Yet you lack the life POWER to ESCAPE the evil that you know you should not do.

The tree of the knowledge of good and evil seems to have been false advertizing. It could have been named by God's enemy. But God warned man that the real nature of the tree was that it was of death -

"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, of it you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."

Man gained something that he is very proud of - the knowledge of good and evil. Man lost the life power to do the good that he knows or avoid the evil that he knows.

From latter revelation of the Bible I see that the tree of death, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil actually brought mankind into union with Satan the enemy of God. Man was "Satanified" and the evil spirit began to operate in him.



As for knowledge itself being the negative in God's eyes, that wouldn't hold. The writer of Genesis was obviously knowledgeable about some of the most basic issues of existence and human life. And God used that knowledge in the first few chapters of Genesis in such a way as cannot be found in any other book.

Knowledge of the origin of space and time
Knowledge of the origin of living things on earth
Knowledge of the origin of man
Knowledge of the purpose for man's creation
Knowledge of the first marriage
Knowledge of the origin of sin and death
Knowledge of the first family of man
Knowledge of the first murder
Knowledge of the origin of the first nomad
Knowledge of the first human city
Knowledge of the origin of metal work
Knowledge of the origin of musicianship
Knowledge of the origin of agriculture
Knowledge of the origin of human government
Knowledge of the origin of human languages
Knowledge of the first migrations of humans across the globe

I dare say that you could not find one other book on earth which dislpays in such economical terms knowledge of so many fundamentally important matters as Genesis. That is ONE book, not many.

==============================
Add to this the idea that the average Christian sees any question put to their metaphysical framework not as an opportunity to rid their doctrine of inconsistency but rather as a test of their faith.
===============================

Why did Ralph Waldo Emerson say " A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines " ?

There is great consistency with the revelation of the Bible. But there is also the need to look into matters deeper. Some superfiscial readers are quickly stumbled by what they see as inconsistencies which often times are really not contradictions.

Little minds purporting to be so much more intelligent than everyone else often boast gleefully that they have found "inconsistencies" in the Bible. But more often their "problem" have their root in superfiscial understanding of the larger picture of things.

There are some paradoxical things in the revelation of the Bible. There are some things difficult to reconcile. I have found none of them barriers to experiencing the God of the Bible and growing in the knowledge of Him.

==================================
Yet another reason for Christians denying the primacy of logic is that they believe god is on their side: the most logical human is still fallible. How can they compete with the concept of perfection? They don't know 'god's plan'.
========================================

Out of curiosity, what is your plan? Why are you here in this universe ?

Put aside God's plan (as is seen in many books of the Bible like Ephesians).

What is the plan of your existence here ? What does it matter to the universe that Green Paladin lived ? Why are you here ???

Here's a chance to show your good wisdom about the meaning of your life ? I am seriously all ears.

Why do you exist ?

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]=================================================
Just think of the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden. According to the myth, the serpent convinced Eve to eat the fruit from this tree with the promise that doing so would bring her wisdom.
=======================================

The "promise" of God it was that eating of it would bri ife ? I am seriously all ears.

Why do you exist ?[/b]

"Come down off the cross, we can use the wood."

I'm not interested in pursuing various doctrinal interpretations. Just because it is possible to interpret a biblical passage in a certain way doesn't mean that this is supported by history. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is alternatively known as the Tree of Knowledge.

I suppose you would disagree with this quote: "The serpent had suggested to Eve that eating the fruit would make one wise."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_Knowledge_of_Good_and_Evil

"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, of it you shall not eat; for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely DIE." (Genesis 2:17)
This is the kind of thing I'm talking about. Did they die that day? Or about 900 years later? Oh, right... a day is not a day.

You cite covering a wide range of topics as evidence for the writer of Genesis' knowledge. It's quite clear that your conclusion doesn't follow. Is J. K. Rowling an expert on aeronautics because she describes Harry Potter flying around on a broomstick? I very much doubt you would see her consulting at NASA.

I dare say that you could not find one other book on earth which dislpays [sic] in such economical terms knowledge of so many fundamentally important matters as Genesis.
How can its economy be considered an advantage?

Some superfiscial [sic] readers are quickly stumbled by what they see as inconsistencies which often times are really not contradictions.

Little minds purporting to be so much more intelligent than everyone else often boast gleefully that they have found "inconsistencies" in the Bible. But more often their "problem" have their root in superfiscial [sic] understanding of the larger picture of things.
Here again: the celebration of irrationality. This "deeper understanding" usually takes on an ad hoc character.

There are some paradoxical things in the revelation of the Bible. There are some things difficult to reconcile. I have found none of them barriers to experiencing the God of the Bible and growing in the knowledge of Him.
Thanks for proving my point. Entertaining paradoxical notions is not seen as cognitive dissonance but "a deeper understanding of scripture".

Out of curiosity, what is your plan? Why are you here in this universe ?

Put aside God's plan (as is seen in many books of the Bible like Ephesians).

What is the plan of your existence here ? What does it matter to the universe that Green Paladin lived ? Why are you here ???

Here's a chance to show your good wisdom about the meaning of your life ? I am seriously all ears.

Why do you exist ?

There is no plan. My personal philosophy is one of atheist existentialism tempered with rationalism. Life is a Sisyphean struggle characterised by the search for meaning in an absurd universe. There is no outside system of meaning that can take responsibility for your life. You are your own locus of meaning. I believe the moral life to be the most important. Why? Because I choose it. I live by Nietzsche's thesis of eternal recurrence. If I commit an immoral act I can't have the slate wiped clean by repentance.

Originally posted by Green Paladin
"Come down off the cross, we can use the wood."

I'm not interested in pursuing various doctrinal interpretations. Just because it is possible to interpret a biblical passage in a certain way doesn't mean that this supported by history. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is alternatively known as the Tree of Knowledge.

I suppose you woul commit an immoral act I can't have the slate wiped clean by repentance.

=============================
I'm not interested in pursuing various doctrinal interpretations.
=============================

But you are interested in putting forth your interpretation only, with mockery and boasting of the dimwittedness of other Bible readers.

Don't you think it is kind of arrogant for you to fire your interpretive arrows at the Bible and retreat into disinterest when those interpretations are examined ?

========================================
Just because it is possible to interpret a biblical passage in a certain way doesn't mean that this supported by history. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is alternatively known as the Tree of Knowledge.
=====================================

Knowledge has not always been condemned as evil and arrogance.
If so why would a medical doctor, Luke, be assigned by God as one of the writers of the four Gospels?

Proverbs 19:2 says "Also it is not good for a person to be without knowledge ..."

I would regard a broad generalization that either the Bible or Christians disdain knowledge as warped bias at best. Such a generalization is not objective about history.

I would agree that during the Dark Ages the clerical class locked up the Bible so that the common people could not read it. And there was some opposition to knowledge. But the unlocking of the Bible to be read by the populace, I think, was the catalyst to the so called Age of Enlightenment.

As much as it may serve a atheistic Anti Belief bigotry to generalize that Christians oppose knowledge, history would not verify such a bigoted position.

You would not like it if I generalized about history and said "Atheist are all immoral."

==================================
I suppose you would disagree with this quote: "The serpent had suggested to Eve that eating the fruit would make one wise."
===============================

This is what was said "You shall not surely die! For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will become like God, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree ... was desired to make one wise, sje took of its fruit ..."

So I have no real objection to your sentence. But this is what you wrote:

" This act brought evil into the world. Ever since, knowledge has been associated with evil and arrogance. [Besides the fact that women have become thought of as easily corrupted and morally inferior.] "

What brought sin and death into the world was their being joined to God's enemy Satan. You should read more of the Bible for a fuller understanding.

Paul writes about the fallen mankind - " ... the ruler of the authority of the air ... the spirit which is now operating in the sons of disobedience ..." (Eph. 2:2)

A cosmic evil and rebellious intelligence began to operate in man's being. I told you that we cannot fully perform the good that we know. Nor can we fully resist the evil that we know. I count this joining man with Satan as the main cause of corruption of human morality.


God used the symbol of eating because what we eat we assimilate into our being and it becomes us. As the nutrionists say "You are what you eat."

God is very wise. By using food He could convey to the majority of humans of reasonable intelligence that man's problem was that he has injested something foreign and damaging into his system.

The picture may be simple - that of man between two trees - the tree of life representing God's eternal and divine life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil reprenting God's enemy Satan.

Man was meant to take into his being the divine nature of God. Man was enticed to seek independence which really was not so. It was bondage to the Satanic spirit which now operates in man and seeking to ruin man for God's eternal purpose.

================================
"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, of it you shall not eat; for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely DIE." (Genesis 2:17)

This is the kind of thing I'm talking about. Did they die that day? Or about 900 years later? Oh, right... a day is not a day.
==================================

If you count only the physical being as all there is to man, that may be true. But the Bible refers to the spirit of man, the soul of man, and the body of man.

And spiritually his human spirit became comatose, deadened. Death began from the kernel of his being, his human spirit. Death then took time to work its way through the rest of his being until he physically expired.

Before I received Christ, part of my being was dead. I had no sense of a certain dimension of life which is now very real to me. I know something was missing but I did not know what.

That was the comatose human spirit, the kernel of man's innermost being. And it needs to be regenerated:

www.regenerated.net

The deadened human spirit can be made alive through receiving Jesus Christ. "In Him was life, and the life was the light of men" (John 1:4)

That word life there is not the Greek BIOS or Psyche, either physical life or psychological life. It is ZOE, the divine and uncreated life of God uniting Himself to man.

We must be born again.

====================================
You cite covering a wide range of topics as evidence for the writer of Genesis' knowledge. It's quite clear that your conclusion doesn't follow. Is J. K. Rowling an expert on aeronautics because she describes Harry Potter flying around on a broomstick? I very much doubt you would see her consulting at NASA.
==================================

There are tremendous differences between a Harry Potter novel and the Bible.

And just because the treatment is cursory of these subjects and not exhaustive, is no less impressive.

Within the first say 6 chapters of Genesis you have the mentioning of so many vital pieces of information. The treatment of them is not exhaustive. But they are mentioned in connection to God's overall plan of salvation.

The detail Moses gave to the construction of the Tabernacle with all of its measurements suggests that he was very intelligent to master many technical details. Had God revealed to Moses an exhaustive accoung of how He [God] created all things, then there perhaps would have been 60 books dealing with the construction of a water molecule alone.

So while the information is not exhaustive it is broad in scope. An that more so in an economical way than any other book in human history.

And the thought that the Creator of the universe is upscaled by man because he can land a man on the moon, I think is laughable.

Were it not for the precision of God's creation they might not have been able to apply the mathematics to know how to land on the moon.

I think the really wise people do not display your arrogance. Rather the more they learn the more they realize they do not know.

==========================
I dare say that you could not find one other book on earth which dislpays [sic] in such economical terms knowledge of so many fundamentally important matters as Genesis.

How can its economy be considered an advantage?
====================================

To keep one from getting distracted from the main point, it is an advantage.

How we die, exactly, God did not go into. That death pulls us all down since the sin of Adam is the main point. All the things are related to God's plan of salvation and His eternal purpose.


===================================
Here again: the celebration of irrationality. This "deeper understanding" usually takes on an ad hoc character.
==================================

No it doesn't. It involves reading the Bible with a willingness to have God change your life.

Maybe your stuck in considering the Bible as existing only to tickle your curiousity. No, the book is here to transform your life and bring you into fellowship with God. In this fellowship we see things both about life and ourselves in a deeper way.

When we come to the Bible we should have an attitude that we are simultaneously coming to God too. And if you allow His Spirit to work in your heart your insight into the Bible will deepen. How you think about yourself and others will also be transformed.

=====================
There are some paradoxical things in the revelation of the Bible. There are some things difficult to reconcile. I have found none of them barriers to experiencing the God of the Bible and growing in the knowledge of Him.

Thanks for proving my point. Entertaining paradoxical notions is not seen as cognitive dissonance but "a deeper understanding of scripture".
===============================

That is not what I said. Paradoxical matters in the Bible call for deeper experience and deeper understanding.

For example, you complain that it says that Adam would die that day yet he did not until 900 years latter or so.

Yet you have not realized perhaps that your having no fellowship with God is a spiritual death that you have. Some realize the lack real life.

Jimi Hendrix wrote a song called I Don't Live Today. In that song the rock musician complains that he feels like he does not live today. He says he feels like he is living at the bottom of a grave. There was in Hendrix a sense of death even as a successfully popular celebrity who should have been satisfied with life.

I think this sense of not really living was spiritual sense in the man. Though I cannot say for sure what he read in the Bible, I am confident that the Holy Spirit of God was working in him.

So likewise, in the mid...

continued from above:

So likewise, in the midst of a party or some enjoyment, many people sense a futility, an emptiness, an uneasiness, a inner hunger for something real, a lack of real peace.

Some of these people will be struck by the simple words of Jesus that we must be born again. That is if they come to the word of God with a willingness to be changed by God.

=============
There is no plan.
=================

When you look at the creation from the structure of the atom to the structure of groups of galaxies and all that is inbetween of animal and human life, you come to the conclusion that there is no plan ?

Aren't you even a little suspicious that the universe seems purposeful even though you do not know what that purpose is ?

Or maybe you have just dispaired that it is unknowable. It is at this point of dispairing that I would want to come to read the words of one like Jesus Christ with an open mind and a willingness, that if there is God, I would be opened to be touched by God.

===========================
My personal philosophy is one of atheist existentialism tempered with rationalism. Life is a Sisyphean struggle characterised by the search for meaning in an absurd universe.
=====================================

If that is the case I don't know why you were complaining about dim witted people. It shouldn't make any difference to you if people are dim witted or bright. For all is meaningless.

What advantage then has the keen witted over the dim witted ? It is all meaningless to you.

Do you think it is better to be keen witted about the abject vanity of a meaningless existence? "At least I am meaningless with my eyes opened"?

================================
There is no outside system of meaning that can take responsibility for your life.

You are your own locus of meaning. I believe the moral life to be the most important. Why? Because I choose it. I live by Nietzsche's thesis of eternal recurrence. If I commit an immoral act I can't have the slate wiped clean by repentance.
===================================

What is an immoral act ?

If I make my own meaning then can I make it by meeting you in a dark alley, clobbering your over the head, and stealing your wallet ?

Maybe I don't even want the wallet. May be I make my own meaning by just clobbering you over the head for fun.

There is no reckoning for my action. There is no Governor to be accountable in a final sense. I can be my own final governor. But, hey, that allows me to be strict with others but sloppy and merciful with myself. That allows me a double standard.

I will melt peacfully into the dust. There will be no judgment and no need for forgiveness because there is no final standard. I make my own meaning. Hitler makes his. Stalin makes his. Jack the Ripper makes his. Anything goes as long as we make our own meaning.

But I would ask: How in such an apparently meaningful design of life and creation is there such a meaningless moral anarchy ? Your philosophy allows for rampaging evil without fear of ultimate consequence.

This philosophy seems to dehumanize one. I am more impressed with the love of the Son of God and His redemptive death and resurrection for our deliverance from both the guilt of wrong doing and the power of wrong doing.

And I have experienced release from both the guilt of my sins and power to overcome my sinning. It has brought millions of us together in a brotherhood of enjoyment of God as our life.

www.godseconomy.org

Originally posted by Green Paladin
Being dull-witted is considered a positive boon in Christianity.

Originally posted by jaywill
The writer of Genesis was obviously knowledgeable about some of the most basic issues of existence and human life.

It just struck me that jaywills response to Green Paladin, demonstrated Green Paladins point rather well.

Seriously, how can anyone other than a Christian make the claim that the writer of Genesis was obviously knowledgeable about all the things that jaywill lists in his post. Who is it obvious too? Based on what facts? Clearly it is obvious to jaywill, but cant he see that it is not obvious to anyone else (except possibly some of his fellow Christians) ?

Originally posted by twhitehead
It just struck me that jaywills response to Green Paladin, demonstrated Green Paladins point rather well.

Seriously, how can anyone other than a Christian make the claim that the writer of Genesis was [b]obviously knowledgeable about all the things that jaywill lists in his post. Who is it obvious too? Based on what facts? Clearly it is obvious to ...[text shortened]... t he see that it is not obvious to anyone else (except possibly some of his fellow Christians) ?[/b]

Take the first matter - the origin of space and time.
Have you ever explained an alternative to God creating the universe ?

I don't recall you ever explaining why something exists rather then nothing.

What I do recall you doing is throwing up maybes', perhaps', here's a view, here's another view.

I just recall you never giving an alternative answer to a Creator. All you did was raise (what you seemed to think) were possible other explanations.

Making no commitment to one is the easiest defense, isn't it ?

Originally posted by jaywill
Take the first matter - the origin of space and time.
Have you ever explained an alternative to God creating the universe ?

I don't recall you ever explaining why something exists rather then nothing.

What I do recall you doing is throwing up maybes', perhaps', here's a view, here's another view.

I just recall you never giving an alternative an ...[text shortened]... /b] other explanations.

Making no commitment to one is the easiest defense, isn't it ?

You accuse me of arrogance but my position is based on what the best and brightest human beings have discovered over all of recorded history. And it still claims much less than yours. Your claim to knowledge is truly arrogant: that you know the origin of the universe, the origin of all living things on earth, etc.

Maybe you should start reading some different books.

Originally posted by jaywill
Take the first matter - the origin of space and time.
Have you ever explained an alternative to God creating the universe ?

I don't recall you ever explaining why something exists rather then nothing.

What I do recall you doing is throwing up maybes', perhaps', here's a view, here's another view.

I just recall you never giving an alternative an ...[text shortened]... /b] other explanations.

Making no commitment to one is the easiest defense, isn't it ?

Avoiding a commitment where there is a lack of knowledge seems to be rather prudent. If we don't know what created the universe (or if it was created), then pointing out some hypotheses seems to be the only logical course available.

Originally posted by rwingett
Avoiding a commitment where there is a lack of knowledge seems to be rather prudent. If we don't know what created the universe (or if it was created), then pointing out some hypotheses seems to be the only logical course available.

Are you commited to your loved ones? If so, do you know everything about them?

Originally posted by Green Paladin
You accuse me of arrogance but my position is based on what the best and brightest human beings have discovered over all of recorded history. And it still claims much less than yours. Your claim to knowledge is truly arrogant: that you know the origin of the universe, the origin of all living things on earth, etc.

Maybe you should start reading some different books.

=========================
You accuse me of arrogance but my position is based on what the best and brightest human beings have discovered over all of recorded history.
==========================

I asked you about arrogance when you put out there your opinion about what the Bible means followed quickly by saying your weren't interested in examining different interpretations.

In other words - "My view only, others need not give their views, because they bore me."


As for the best and brightest minds agreeing with you, I didn't notice that.

I didn't notice the best and brightest minds agreeing that there is no plan.

I didn't notice the best and brightest saying the universe was absurd or that life was a Sisyphean struggle, although they may have said it is a struggle.

And I don't see the best and brightest minds always agreeing with Fredrich Nietzsche.

And I don't think that God has rigged the universe so that only the best and brightest minds can know the truth about it. Just as a lovng father with many children of different aptitudes loves them all, I don't think the most essential truths about life can only be grasped by the smartest fellows in the class.

I think some bright people can know the truth and some dull people can also. I don't think God reserves AIR for only for people with large lungs. And I don't think he hides the truth from all who have not the biggest brains.

I think that is narrow and elites to think the most essential truth of life can only be figured out by the best and brightest. I think it sometimes alludes the best and brightest who lean only on their own understanding.

Then you wrote this:

" If I commit an immoral act I can't have the slate wiped clean by repentance. "

I agree that your repenting cannot wipe away any immoral act. But is the fact that Jesus Christ on His cross received the justice due the sinner, that can wipe away an immoral act.

Substitution of judgment upon Him in the place of judgment upon you can wipe away an immoral act as far as you are concerned. It is not as if God has overlooked your immoral act. Quite the contrary.

Not one single immoral act had been overlooked by God. But rather He has established a salvation that every immoral act was judged in the body of Jesus on His cross for all mankind.

And agreement with God concerning this causes a substitution to take place. Justice has been imputed on your behalf in Christ.

From the sinner's side it seems like free forgiveness. With God there is no such thing as free forgiveness. Every sinful act and every sinful life of all the human race was judged in Jesus on the cross of Calvary.

The forgiven sinner is not a sinner with a debt to pay. He is a sinner with a debt that has been paid.

==========================
Maybe you should start reading some different books.
============================

I read some different books. But that does not mean that I let go of what I have found to be the truth. And I can't see that a lot of "different books" have added any meaning to your life in your "absurd" universe.

Originally posted by rwingett
Avoiding a commitment where there is a lack of knowledge seems to be rather prudent. If we don't know what created the universe (or if it was created), then pointing out some hypotheses seems to be the only logical course available.

================================
Avoiding a commitment where there is a lack of knowledge seems to be rather prudent. If we don't know what created the universe (or if it was created), then pointing out some hypotheses seems to be the only logical course available.
===================================

That might be the case if one was agnostic. twhite, the atheist, insists that he knows there is no Creator.

He said he intuitively knows that God does not exist. So don't complain that I said he said he knows.

I think one of his alternatives therefore should logically be that maybe God created everything.

Among his several proposed hypotheses how is he so sure that one should not be a transcendent creating God with unlimited power and knowledge ?

"It just CAN'T be God" is his view. So his proposed hypotheses is really desperation to keep his mind closed. That's obsession.