TheFinalWord Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 I don't see it. link? Here you go: http://www.loveshack.org/forums/mind-body-soul/spirituality-religious-beliefs/531642-god-not-god-discussion 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Author NGC1300 Posted October 25, 2015 Author Share Posted October 25, 2015 I don't know what you're talking about. You said Godwin's law is only internet humor. Godwin's law is based on a form of a fallacious argument. Either it is or isn't. Developing strawman arguments doesn't undermine the point Let's forget about concentration camps. What if I instead used the term 'labor camp', or 'dungeon'? The thesis of my argument stays the same, yet you wouldn't be able to introduce 'Godwind's law'. So, if you're still seeing a fallacious argument, by all means expound. Where does it say that in the bible? Too many places. See Mark 16:16 for just one example. Again, stop with the scapegoat scenarios (that's part of the evil god strawman you don't seem to like) what about you? Is your going to hell based on your choice? I'm not sure what you're getting at. I obviously don't believe in Hell, but according to Christian doctrine it exists. I've heard of Jesus, but reject the claim of his divinity. According to Christians, this means I've chosen to go to Hell. Again, it's quite cut and dried. Link to post Share on other sites
TheFinalWord Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 (edited) Let's forget about concentration camps. What if I instead used the term 'labor camp', or 'dungeon'? The thesis of my argument stays the same, yet you wouldn't be able to introduce 'Godwind's law'. So, if you're still seeing a fallacious argument, by all means expound. What exactly is your argument? I would prefer you don't keep changing your argument. A Nazi concentration camp is nothing like the theological concept of hell. You will have to define what you mean by labor camp/dungeon. Otherwise I will say something and you will say "no I mean some earlier definition", ergo concentration camps were around centuries before the Nazi's. Too many places. See Mark 16:16 for just one example. If you know such a specific verse, than you should also know what the bible says about people that have never heard. I'm not sure what you're getting at. I obviously don't believe in Hell, but according to Christian doctrine it exists. I've heard of Jesus, but reject the claim of his divinity. According to Christians, this means I've chosen to go to Hell. Again, it's quite cut and dried. What I am getting at is you personally do have a choice. If hell is real, you have chosen to go there. That's a lot different than a labor camp, or whatever forced system you can concoct. Can you see the difference? Edited October 25, 2015 by TheFinalWord Link to post Share on other sites
Author NGC1300 Posted October 25, 2015 Author Share Posted October 25, 2015 What I am getting at is you personally do have a choice. If hell is real, you have chosen to go there. That's a lot different than a labor camp, or whatever forced system you can concoct. Can you see the difference? Yes, hell is worse. At least you can die and leave a labor camp. With hell, you're in anguish for eternity. You are forced into labor camps. You are also forced into eternal Hell if you decide to reject Jesus. Notice he can't just leave you alone, or deny you entry into his Kingdom. No, you're condemned to suffer for eternity. This is vile and evil. Link to post Share on other sites
TheFinalWord Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 (edited) Yes, hell is worse. At least you can die and leave a labor camp. With hell, you're in anguish for eternity. You are forced into labor camps. You are also forced into eternal Hell if you decide to reject Jesus. Notice he can't just leave you alone, or deny you entry into his Kingdom. No, you're condemned to suffer for eternity. This is vile and evil. What you are calling vile and evil is a strawman version of the doctrine of hell. Hell is what you want (or at least what you've espoused in this thread): separation from God. You think God is evil. In hell you will get what you want, complete separation from a God you consider evil. The same attitude you have towards God now, you will carry into eternity. To force you into an eternity with God, what I would call heaven, would be to against your free will choice. If you think spending eternity without God would be tormenting (I agree), then change the outcome and accept Christ. It's your choice. Unlike a concentration camp, the decision is up to you. Edited October 25, 2015 by TheFinalWord Link to post Share on other sites
buck3200 Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 What you are calling vile and evil is a strawman version of the doctrine of hell. Hell is what you want (or at least what you've espoused in this thread): separation from God. You think God is evil. In hell you will get what you want, complete separation from a God you consider evil. The same attitude you have towards God now, you will carry into eternity. To force you into an eternity with God, what I would call heaven, would be to against your free will choice. If you think spending eternity without God would be tormenting (I agree), then change the outcome and accept Christ. It's your choice. Unlike a concentration camp, the decision is up to you. So what are those that have no knowledge of Christ to do ? 1 Link to post Share on other sites
BC1980 Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 (edited) So what are those that have no knowledge of Christ to do ? You raise another good question. We don't all start on a level playing field do we? When it comes to belief, certainly, someone raised in Iran as a Muslim should not be held the same standard as me, a person born in a Christian family? Edited October 25, 2015 by BC1980 2 Link to post Share on other sites
buck3200 Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 This is why I feel that most organized religions have the DETAILS wrong. But I fear dictating what others should think as much as I fear being disarmed. Two sides of the same coin I would say.... Link to post Share on other sites
BC1980 Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 (edited) This is why I feel that most organized religions have the DETAILS wrong. But I fear dictating what others should think as much as I fear being disarmed. Two sides of the same coin I would say.... You can't dictate someone's beliefs. You can use government to dictate which beliefs are legal to practice. At various times in England's history, it was a punishable offense to be Catholic or Protestant (depending on the monarch). It's very ironic that the Puritans came to America looking for religious freedom because they were so intolerant themselves. The Puritans were responsible for executing Quakers simply because they believed something different. I think it comes down to doctrine vs. one's own conscience. Which one rules out and why? Religious doctrine is based on certain people's (people in power) interpretations of scripture. My own conscience might object for various reasons, so who is to say who is correct? On another thread, we were talking about how the Catholic's Church's official doctrine is against birth control, but it seems as though most Catholics have decided that they believe differently. They have decided that their own conscience trumps official church doctrine. So then the question becomes: what is the point of church doctrine? I think when it comes to the problem of God and suffering, there have been many attempts to reconcile the two. Obviously, all of it is opinion, but people tend to want black and white answers. I wonder if there is any official doctrine on the idea of God and suffering in any Christian denominations? Obviously, the problem of God and suffering coexisting has been one of the biggest problems for Christianity. Edited October 25, 2015 by BC1980 1 Link to post Share on other sites
TheFinalWord Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 So what are those that have no knowledge of Christ to do ? Study the topics of general vs. special revelation. Each person is held accountable to God based on the light revealed to them. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
TheFinalWord Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 I think it comes down to doctrine vs. one's own conscience. The bible states that yes, some actions are based on our conscience. "All things are permissible, but not all things are profitable." However, we should also contrast our conscience against the bible and continuously submit our conscious to the will of God. Paul for example, had a right to receive offerings from the Corinthian church, but instead worked so as to not burden the church. If we are executing our conscience correctly in true humility our resulting actions will serve to unburden others and put others first, rather than our own desires. This is a heavier doctrine, not everyone can receive. Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising any question on the ground of conscience. For “the earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof.” If one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience. But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for the sake of conscience— I do not mean your conscience, but his. For why should my liberty be determined by someone else's conscience? If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks? So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. Which one rules out and why? Religious doctrine is based on certain people's (people in power) interpretations of scripture. My own conscience might object for various reasons, so who is to say who is correct? On another thread, we were talking about how the Catholic's Church's official doctrine is against birth control, but it seems as though most Catholics have decided that they believe differently. They have decided that their own conscience trumps official church doctrine. So then the question becomes: what is the point of church doctrine? We should each study the scriptures and continuously seek to reflect our own thoughts and actions against the Word of God. We should not simply leave it up to any church or institution. I personally think we Christians need to hold ourselves to a higher standard. The bible warns to continuously check our own selves and the preaching of others to ensure we are not falling into false teaching. I think when it comes to the problem of God and suffering, there have been many attempts to reconcile the two. Obviously, all of it is opinion, but people tend to want black and white answers. I wonder if there is any official doctrine on the idea of God and suffering in any Christian denominations? Obviously, the problem of God and suffering coexisting has been one of the biggest problems for Christianity. It's only a problem for those that do not believe God is just. It's often used as a method to not hold one's self accountable. As Cain said, am I my brother's keeper? It's not a problem for me because I accept that God would be justified in condemning me for my sins. I am only saved through Christ. Those that believe God is just, know that all things will work according to his will and all will be judged perfectly. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts