I think im athiest

[Eh Im Canadian]

Well, you are absolutely right, I was trying to sugar coat it. But heres a question. If you know someone is going to kill someone, and you dont do anything about, aren't you too blame as well? So you are guilty for whatever choice you make, no doubt about that. But wouldn't God be responsible for those deaths as well. Theres a quote by Dante, that guy who wrote the Inferno about going to hell. Here's what he said. The hottest place in hell is reserved for those who in times of crisis do nothing" Something like that. Anyway, so that would mean God is supposed to go to hell, since he doesn't stop what happens. Of course, Dante could be full of crap, but that's not what i am trying to prove. So the whole problem with this entire subject is whether or not you believe in a higher power. So here is my new theory. You know what the energy gradient is right? It is the concept that energy follows the path of least resistance, so it is aligned with more stable energy. Whenevr you try to go against it, you strain and lose more energy. So our choices must go with the gradient or against it. If we make the choice that costs us the most energy overall, we made the wrong choice. Now since energy flows with he gradient, and energy could be moving faster than time, then energy would already be where it wanted to go by the time we use it. So the energy would have flowed in the pattern, and it already "knew" what was happening. Not that it makes much of a difference but hey. Just a theory!

 

Yeah sorry, I phrased my previous post badly, It was meant to say that since there is not a lot I can do about it, just go through with life anyway. [/i]

[Ingrid]

Hey, Canadian,

 

I am impressed by your intelligence and culture! When I referred to Satanism, I was referring to people who enjoy hurting others. LaVey is a sophisticated thinker who actually gives good people a better grasp on reality and different means to protect themselves.

 

To Cure of Ars :

 

I grew up in many different Third World countries and there is one thing they have in common : a lack of spirituality, a lack of order, a lack of respect, a lack of consideration. Rape is common and almost normal, theft everywhere, debasing of others rules : perhaps you have not lived very long in those countries. Why do you think they all want to come to North America or Europe : because here everything is better. Nobody is crossing a river to immigrate to South America, nobody is hiding in a boat to immigrate to Asia, nobody is stealing passports to enter illegally to Africa. Nobody is spending their live savings to go there, they all want to come here because here there is more order, more respect of the law, more consideration towards human beings.

 

About Free Will :

 

More than 75% of women who had an alcoholic father will marry a man who will be an alcoholic. Most pedophiles feel attracted by children in the age range when they themselves were raped. Parenst who abuse their children were themselves abused.Can you choose not to be a thief if all the members of your family are thiefs and you don't understand why stealing is bad?

 

I don't think there is 100% free will. In fact, very few people in civilized countries choose freely to be evil, they do so because of their circumstances, because of resentment, often when they are reacting against their repressive parents or against a REPRESSIVE RELIGION, for some reason. On the other hand, whether criminals are responsible or not for their acts, they are still dangerous for social stability and should be prosecuted and stopped. We have no obligation to feel compassionate towards them. Often times their parents are responsible for having children in less than perfect circumstances, but society does not have to pay for the consequences of their parents' acts.

[Eh Im Canadian]

Thank you, and yeah, you are right about all the stuff you said, except I will have no choice but to disagree with you on free will. While you may be brought up in a society where whatever bad thing that is practiced is viewed as normal, you still get the choice to decide what you want. It's not like your brain is incapable of thinking about something, it is more of you don't know that it is wrong. So you can choose not to be a thief, but whether you make that choice is up to you.

[Rahll]

Free Will: This depends on your definitaion of what free will is. My definitation of free will is that the furture is not pre-determined in such a way as that it can be reveled. This is different than simply saying that the furture is not pre-determined.

 

The difference is that under my view, if one were to be able to some how calculate all of the varibles (an infiniate ammount) of the universe, they would be able to predict the furture.

 

Do we have free will?:

 

""f on any given day our "choices" are made on the basis of knowledge, inclinations, urges and attitudes --

and if inclinations and attitudes and urges and knowledge are based pretty much entirely on sensory input, past experience (learning) and biology past and present --

and if we can't be expected on any given day to be able to "choose" what past experiences, attitudes, sensory experiences and biology we've had and have --

then would that mean that what we call "choice" is really just the experience of finding out the result of the compution our brain does when faced with a decision to make?""

 

In other words, without a purly random element (which is philisophically impossible) everything is, at it's lowest form predetermined. We cant choose what information to use when we make a descision, nor can we choose what experiances to utilize, because as soon as we change the way we think, our thought process has changed, and the a new equation for our decision is made.

 

Back to the original post: Man is selfish, it's a survial insticnt, the highest evolved instinct. Every single thing we do, every action we take, we do it because we either enjoy it, or we we would enjoy the altertinitve less. If I were to donate all of my money and cloths to the poor, when I broke it down, I would be doing it because it made me feel good.

 

So then, what is self reflection, if everything we do, is for our own good above all, then how do we change our behavior. This is were a society comes in. Through society we can change what we perceive as being good or bad, and thereforeee change our actions. These thought of what is good and bad for ourselves eventually turn into morals.

 

I am an athiest, but yet have morals. However, I understand that my morals are not absolute, and that as I gain knowledge, my morals and principals will change.

 

So live your life for yourselv, and only foryour self. Do whatever makes you happy, likely that will envolve carying for someone else, loving someone else, and generally being a good person. But never forget that you are ultimaly doing everything for yourself, as that is the best way to survive.

[guitarman]

Talking about free will .... I believe everyone can do whatever he wants to do. You can donate a sum of money to the Charity, you could buy chocolates for a friend, you can steal a wallet or set fire at someone else's porch. But whatever you do has consequences.

 

I agree with Rahll. Man IS Selfish. Whether you are an Aethist, Christian, Satanist or anything at all. A church Pastor could choose his line of work because he thinks he's doing God's will. But why does he want to do God's will. Is it because he loves God so much that he wants to delicate his life for him? Or is it because he wants to live the right way that he might result in a fuller and more peaceful lifestyle? But whatever the case .... there is nothing wrong with doing something for yourself .... in fact ... we all ought to take care of ourselves. As long as selfishness is not conveyed to the extent of hurting others .... there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

 

But as for the concept of free will that has been mentioned at the earlier posts ... i beg to differ. I don't believe that anyone in this world are free to think. If you claim to be a free thinker and yet you think about Naked women all the time ... you're not free to think are you? We are all bounded by desires, values and opinions. Even if you think you are free ... being obstinate about your concept of free will doesn't exactly makes you a person who thinks freely does it? It only make you a person who is binded by your concept of free will.

 

"Do unto others what you want others to do unto you"

 

Whatever you choose to do has a consequence to it. If free will means you can do anything under the sun, you can kill, steal and rape. But if you are caught ... it means you are caught. You will be charged in court ... hung or even electrocuted. So in this case .... do you exactly have free will at all?

 

We all have influences on the way we think from our Families, Schools, Friends, Religious practices, especially TV and MUSIC!! Like it or not, whether you choose to deny these influences when you reach a certian age ... you will still live according to what you have been influenced. The music you listen to ... the Lyrics you sing a long .... the TV programmes are some of the Biggest sources of influence on young people. The Define what is cool ... what is nice ... what is right .... and people actually follow it. YOu think that gives you a free will to think? Is there anyone who would want a revolution on the media? Abdolutely not ... because people find solace and sense of belonging when they turn on their stereo and television ... whether or not these media hits them give negative concepts or not!!

 

Who gives them the right to tell people what is nice and cool? Some people have lived their lives according to what's depicted on television. You can dye your hair, pierce your nipples, drink tonnes of liqour, talk like a rock star all you want. It will be good if you are doing it as you are, as you feel it. But are you really yourself when you do that? And does that give you the right to discriminate someone who is not as "Cool" as you are? If so, define "cool" ... and define Originality? It's all in that little electronic box called TV.

 

Personally, I am a Christian. But I don't and never agree in imposing my beliefs on other people. But i will share when I'm asked. I will rebuke when challenged. And since this is a Forum ... I will contribute.

 

As for the erroneous deeds that were committed throughout the history of the Christian Church .... i am ashamed of that too. The Church, what ever the case, is still managed and consists of people. And human makes mistakes ... Christians are not perfect. But you can blame God just because of what his followers had done. And you can't doubt his existence just because of the absense of intervention. Faith is unseen. You don't hope for something that is seen .... you only hope for something that is not seen. That is the concept of Faith. You can call it stupid .... Naive. But maybe to some people, Faith gives them hope .. and hope gives them the reason to live. And it gives them energy to go on.

 

You want the truth? And do you think you can find the truth by reading more articles, surfing the net and reading all the books in the Library? Then let me tell you the truth. The truth is .... you can NEVER EVER Find the Truth even with Centuries of Research .... even if you read ALL the books in the world!! Issues that has been under debate for centuries has never found an answer ... what makes you think that any of us can so called find and "Determine" the truth?

 

Truth is found in your heart. Whatever you believe in. For me, I found my truth in God ... in Christ Jesus .... in the death of his cross that redeemed me from my sins past future present. You can choose to believe in something else called free will. You can deny Christ and try to convince someone else to do it. But you can't take away the joy that Christianity has brought to my life. Again, for this ... I believe no one in this world is free to think. thereforeeee there must be a system of believe that everyone adopts. Even if he chooses to worship the toilet and finds joy in that .... no one can stop him ... and there will be a end result to his faith.

 

Hence whatever that makes you happy ... whatever that can enables you to live life abundantly ... that will be truth for you.

 

As for the church "inflicting guilt on others" for a wrong deed ..... I don't believe in that either. I believe a Believer in Christ is transformed not by his own effort .... but by the transformation in Christ. Galatians 5 mentions Fruits of the Spirit .... and works of the Flesh. Discipline is a fruit of the spirit ... and definitely not WORKs of the flesh. thereforeeee we CANNOT attain the fruits of the spirit by the works of the flesh.

 

"God has given us all things pertaining to LIFE and GODLINESS according to the knowledge of Jesus".

 

Hence the key to living a Christlike lifestyle ... is NOT trying to meet up the standards of God ..... but to appreciate the death of Jesus by reading the bible and meditating on his word. In this case ..... there is NO Guilt involved!

 

In fact ... God hated those who inflict Guilt on others. A good Examples are the Pharisees. Jesus Called these people a "brood of Vipers" .... because they think of themselves as Holy and righteous by inflicting Guilt on those who are not as "Holy" as they are. And the sad this is .... there are heaps of people in the church who are as hyprocritical as they are .... And I hope for whoever reads this ... PLEASE Do not doubt nor get agry at God because of Mistakes made by his followers. They are learning too ... and they had their bad experiences too.

 

I backslided because of that. Because of the very same reason that many of you felt. I felt guilty ... too dirty for God. I was angry at the flaws of the church and I even tried to deny Christ. But ya know what I realised? I realised that denying Christ is just as good as denying that my name is Glenn Fong. It's so impossible!! No matter how much i tried to tell myself God is not there ..... it failed. And no matter what the church had done .... it never stained the Holiness of God.

 

Anyone can enjoy anything under the sun .... Sports, Food, Travelling, Arts, Diving, Cars, Materialism, etc. But not everyone can enjoy the Spiritual peace and comfort. There are many aspects that makes a person whole. Family, Social, Work, Hobbies, and religon is definitely one of them.

There is nothing wrong with being an Aethist .... but it will be so sad ... cause you are missing something in life.

[guitarman]

I wrote:

 

As for the erroneous deeds that were committed throughout the history of the Christian Church .... i am ashamed of that too. The Church, what ever the case, is still managed and consists of people. And human makes mistakes ... Christians are not perfect. But you can blame God just because of what his followers had done. And you can't doubt his existence just because of the absense of intervention. Faith is unseen. You don't hope for something that is seen .... you only hope for something that is not seen. That is the concept of Faith. You can call it stupid .... Naive. But maybe to some people, Faith gives them hope .. and hope gives them the reason to live. And it gives them energy to go on.

 

There was a Typo error ... I meant to say ... "You CAN"T Blame God just because of what his followers had done." Sorry about that.

[Rahll]

Wow inteligent conversation, this is rare.......

 

Yes being selfish is ok, and should be embraced. The pope, arguably one of the most holyest people in the world is the pope because he enjoys being it. He may not like it all the time, but every action he takes, every thing he does, he does it because he feels that it's right, and good, and because it gives him enjoyment or satisfaction doing it. When someone embraces god, lives their life by the bible, ect, they do it because, for them, it feels right. If it didn't feel right, they wouldnt do it. It's an incredible simple principal, yet I think the majority of people fail to realize it.

 

Again, about free will. I agree, no one has any kind of true free will, however, in order to function as a society we have to pretend we do. If no one believed in any kind of freewill, there would be no change. Afterwall, why change somethign that can't be changed. We would go through our lives, knowing that someone else knew how everythign was going to end up. And since it was allready determined how we would end up, there would be no point in doing anything else. Again, I'm an athiest but playing the devil's advociate (no pun intended) does God know the furture? If there is no free will, and God is all knowledgeable, then he allready knows who is going to heaven, and who is going to hell. thereforeeee there is no such thing as redemption. If you fate is known by God the moment you are born, then you can't change it.

 

It's for these reasons that I think free will is defined as a furture that cannot be determined. Not by man, not by God, not by anything. So while we don't truly have Free Will, as everything we do will always be a sum of our experiances and bilogy, we will never be able to predict the furture, thus allowing us to change.

 

When I speak of free will, its from a fundemental principal, the lowest form it can be broken down to. What you refer to, is free will in a society. For that then yes we do have free will, a person can do anything they want, and yes there our consequences, both perceived good and bad. But thoes consequesns serve only as a deternat, and not as an absolute block to our actions. Society judges what actions are good and what are bad, there are no moral absolutes, and societ's morals are constintanly changing.

 

As for the media, yes is has a huge ammount of influence, but not as much as so many other things. The meda is only one small source we get our personality from, family is much much larger. So is the society in which one lives.

 

As for sharing your ideas, please please do. My own philosphy cannot grow unless it is chalanged, and I hold no notion that my ideas and philosphy will always be this way. As I gain more information, my philosphy will grow, change, and adapt, I may even one day find God, or religion. However, right now, there are too many inconsistencies in all religion to allow me to believe in one. I peronally believe that religion was invented as a way to explain the unexplainable. As humans evolved, we developed inteligence, and along with that, a sense and purpose of life, beyond that of eat, survive, reproduce. All of a sudden humand evolved into self-aware beings. And with self-awarness comes the reality that we, as an individual, are going to die. Once humans began to realize this, they feared it, feared it because it was an end, and feared it because it was beyond their control. To avoid this fear, to get past death, the human mind began to see a devine force in things, a power greater than themselves, something that would allow them to exist beyond death. Thus religion is created, along with all of it's values and ways. Every single religion, (there are over 700 docuemented relgion's sects) have some form of an afterlife. From the simple release of energy into another plane, all the way to reincarnation. All religion has a way for our experiances and "self" to survive death.

 

For me, I couldnt accept this. It seemed like the easy way out. I have instead come to accept the fact that when I die, I will cease to exist. My experiances, memories, and everything else that is me, will be no more. This is ok, and once I really started thinking about it, it reveled some marviouls conclusions. The most important, was that I actually feared death less. As when I die, I will be no more, thereforeeee I will not be able to experience anything. The moment I die, there will be no more pain, no more happieness no more nothing. I dont fear death, because death is nothing. That aside, I still have a very healthy instinct to avoid death at all costs.

 

Finally, as for truth, this is where my views differ. Truth is philosphy unobtainable, truth is the only true constant. It's hard to explain....truth is what something is, regardless of wheather anyone knows it or not. Truth cannot be messured, because any messurement, no matter how percise, will always be someome distorted by the way the messurment was taken, or the way the society views things.

 

We say that the sky is blue. Is that truth? No, philosphcy we cannot know the sky is truly blue because we cannot accoutn for every known varible, every known fact in the universe. We only know that the sky is blue because we can observe that it is, and we can create knowledge that it is. This does NOT mean that absolute truth doesn't exist, it just means that we will never be able to perceive it.

 

Because of this, we have an unreachable goal, a reason to live. I live for knowledge. My goal is to know everything there is to know, I understand that this will never happen, but it is my goal none the less. Knowledge gives us more enjoyment, and increases our chances of survual. Knowledge, and enjoyment are my highest and only moral pursiuts.

 

The way you view God, is the way I view the universe. The only difference, is that I dont apply human standards and reason to the universe. The universe exists, independent from anything anyone or anythign does. There is nothing outside the universe, as my definitation of the universe is everything. Everytnhign is resides in, and has been created by the universe, however the universe is not inteligent, is not alive, it is simply there, because without it nothing would exist. There is no purpose to the universe, other than to exist.

[Cure of Ars]

Hence the key to living a Christlike lifestyle ... is NOT trying to meet up the standards of God ..... but to appreciate the death of Jesus by reading the bible and meditating on his word. In this case ..... there is NO Guilt involved!

 

You are a brother in Christ but you are mistaken. The Bible does not teach that we should not try to live up to his standards. The Bible teaches the opposite.

 

 

"So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect." (Matt 5:48)

 

The way we may be sure that we know him is to keep his command ments. Whoever says, "I know him," but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoever keeps his word, the love of God is truly perfected in him. This is the way we may know that we are in union with him: whoever claims to abide in him ought to live (just) as he lived. (1 John 2:3-6)

 

Guilt like physical pain has its purpose. It tells us when somthing is not right and when we should change our behavior. I am a social worker and work with some people that never feel guilty even when they hurt people. These type of people have antisocial personalities. I'll keep my guilt just as long as it's in touch with reality.

[Eh Im Canadian]

Ok, I havent been here in a while, and I just checked up on all the new athiest posts. First of all, I have to argue with Rahll. There is such thing as free will. Everything can be predetermined, that is true. But, just because something knows what you are going to do doesnt mean you don't have free will. Human beings aren't like water. You can't make a path for them, and them watch them follow it. So even if a higher power or the energy flow of the universe can know exactly what course of action you will take, you still chose to do it. The fact that you have that choice is what gives you free will. So the fundamental principle that we don't have free will based on that something knows what will happen can't be true. Even if something knew what we were going to do, as long as it doesnt do anything about it, like change our past, free will is safe. Changing our future is a different thing. So maybe free will doesnt exist for humans, but for something it does. You can never be sure about things you don't have proof on. And since you can't actually prove anything, everything is uncertain. thereforeeee, there are no fundamental principles, no laws, nothing that is always "so". Something will always change the rule.

 

Now about the selfish thingy. I can't argue with that, because it is absolutely true. We do things because in the end, we think it will benefit us somehow. Even if we tell oursleves it is absolutely selfless, we will always think "Hey, at least I am building muscles" , or "Well, this will at least get me to heaven a lot faster!". We either had a reason previously, or when the time comes, make a reason to go do it. This isn't wrong, it is a survival issue. If we didn't have this sense of self-preservation, we either would have killed ourselves out of depression, or someone else would have. Needless to say, the human race would be a lot smaller.

 

Theres one more thing that I need to say. And that is "To each his own". If you like being Christian, then all power to you. If you don't then thats just as good. The problem is, when people start acting on what people believe in. That is why a lot of people don't like organized religion. I am on of those people, because I think that if people don't think up their own ideas, they will never learn to think on their own. So by being Christian, you are just following what was right for someone else. If it is right for you, then either you are fooling yourself, or are remarkably similar to the person who made up the religion.

[Rahll]

Argument!!! Yay, Thank you.......

 

As for free will. I think we are both actually agreeing. It's that our definitations of free will are diferent.

 

If I understand you corectly, you determine free will being that we have a choices, and that as long as we dont know what thoes choices will be, we have free will, because we can choose to act a certian way as oppsed to a different way. On this, I completely agree......

 

However, my definitation of free will, is a lot more broad, one that encompses everything. I think of free will as not only a philosphyical principal, but also as a law. And that is, that there is no truly random element in the universe. Or more specifically, Everything is the universe is dependent on something else in the universe, in some way. This is one of the principals of the realtivity theory. Everything in the universe is realitive to somethign else. Folowing this logically, then another law is that if every variable and principal was known about the universe, than everything could be predicted with 100% certinaity. This furtur expands to say that since everything is dependent on something else, that if one were able to travel backwards in time, and were able to observe and record the past, without chaning any of the universal constants, then thigns would happen exactaly as they did before. This is acutally impossible, any action changes the universe. It's for this reason that free will does exist, but for me, in the grand scheme of things it is only a perception. Free will is realitive to everything, and thus isnt truly free.

 

As far as absolute truth. This is a debate that has been raised ever since the earliest of times.

 

You can never be sure about things you don't have proof on. And since you can't actually prove anything, everything is uncertain. thereforeeee, there are no fundamental principles, no laws, nothing that is always "so". Something will always change the rule.

 

The debate is between the abosolute truth, also known as the Law of Idenity, and the uncertintany principal. These rules/principals cover both science and philosphy. The Law of Idenity was first purposed by Aristotle ver 2000 years ago and states simply, that A=A. A=A, such a simple statement with such amazing reflections. A=A REGARLESS of weather someone or something can prove it or not. What exists, exists, weather or not it is perceived.

 

We will never be able to truly perceive what something is, because perception is only achieved through experiance and knowledge. Where as absolute truth is achived through a true constant.

 

There are laws that are always "so", fundemental truths that can never be changed. Without them, there would be no universe, no nothing, and no nothing to percieve them. When I speak of perception, I speak of it outside of the human context, rather perception is a philisophical princiapl for determinging what something is. However, something doesnt ahve to be perceived for it to be true.

 

By saying there are no true laws, no true fundemental principals, you are saying that there is nothign beyond perception. If this is true, then nothign truly exists until it is perceived. The age old addage of "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around, does it make a sound". This is what the uncertinty principal is all about. If you believe in absolute truth, then you believe that the tree does make a sound becuase, even tho you have no way of proving it, (there is no one there to actually hear it), the tree makes a sound anyways. Whereas if you dont believe in absolute turth, then the tree does not make a sound, because nothing exists until it is perceived.

 

Thank you for taking the time to respond to me. I cannot grow in my views, nor will they change unless others question them.

[Rahll]

Hah! That argument applies to all of philosphy. Philosphy is important because it changes the way you act, and discussing it (at least for most) is one of the best ways of reinforcing it.

[Eh Im Canadian]

Well, everything would be right, except for one thing. Nothing is constant. Everything is always changing, and nothing can ever remain the same.

 

 

Yep, that "who cares" philosophy is exactly what I am talking about. Except the predetermined part. You gotta leave that one out, because if something was predetermined, it would have to follow a set of laws.

 

 

Then there is another question to think about. If you have ever seen The Matrix, then you almost certainly remember the scene where Morpheus is talking to Neo about "What is real". And he mentions that real is just electrical impulses interpreted by our brain.

 

So, what you think is real, might just be what your brain is telling you. It doesnt mean that is what it is, it justs means that your brain got that little electric signal that said it was. The whole point is, real is what you think is real, so if you think you have free will, you can go up and change what you have told yourself your fate is.

 

If you think you have no free will, then you think everything you do is to fulfill your destiny. Since your destiny is unknown, it changes every time you do something, unless it has been preordained by some higher power. Of course, that higher power could be wrong and we'd be back to sqaure one.

 

So I guess the whole debate is whether the things / beings that know what you are going to do are right all the time or not. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. But since you never hear them say anything, then you can't tell.

 

I have my own theory on this matter. I think that everything in the universe tries to follow the path of least resistance. So, whatever is most efficient will last the longest. Whatever is least efficient will the shortest. So you aren't preordained, it is just you will most likely make the choice that is most efficient. Hey, it's just a theory.

 

 

Now I have a question for you Rahll. It's about the A=A thingy. There are ways to prove that A doesnt equal A. You can do it with any system if you take the time to do it. With our number system, you can prove 1 = 99/100. Since nothing can actually be equal, because everything is slightly different, Aristotles theory must be wrong. Theres an old saying, "You can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time". So that basically says, something might work repeatedly for a few circumstances, might work occasionally for every circumstance, but it won't work repeatedly for every circumstance.

 

So back on the subject of free will. Am i correct in saying that there is an infinite number of things that could happen at any given moment? Assuming I am, then that would say, that an 1 out of those infinite number of things that could happen, did. And usually, these given moments are in close relation to the previous given moment, so they kind of follow a path. And that is saying that everything we do is predetermined, because it follows a general path of the previous instances. That doesnt mean is has to however. You could take a bath, and all of a sudden as you reach for the soap, you are in a 7-eleven eating a candy bar. That would be a little variation from the normal path. It doesnt mean it will happen, it just means that it could. Its like having a privilige that we will never get a chance to use,

[guitarman]

Cure of Ars .... I don't mean to say who is wrong and who is right. But if you read the book of Romans .... salvation is really not about us meeting God's standards ... because if that is the case .... YOU are going to HELL ...

 

Romans 2:23 ... all have sinned and fall short the glory of God.

 

You mentioned about the verse when Jesus said .... "be perfect because your heavenly father is perfect." In this verse, if you are taking into context of an achievement in Holiness to attain a state of perfection that God can accept us, then NONE of us will go to heaven ....

 

But rather, when we are told about Holiness ... it is referring to Jesus. It's Jesus in us that makes us perfect ... not our good deeds. Because Jesus had fulfilled God's law of Covenant thru Blood and forgiveness once and for all .... we then, can enter into God's covenant to accept Jesus into our lives and "Be Perfect". So to be perfect is not about us .... it's about Christ.

 

Righteousness is not attained by human standards. There is not even one man in the bible that is perfect enough to meet God's standard of righteousness. Notice how every "man of God" fell at some point in their lives? Beside Enoch and Elijah ... when God took them to heaven instantly without death.

 

Romans spoke about Righteousness as being a Gift .... NOT an achievement. (Romans 5:15 - 17) But because it was the early Church ... and for most conservative doctrines, many bible interpretors cannot accept the fact that Righteousness cannot be attained. Everone wants to be part of the reward ..... no one could accept the fact that they can't do anything at all to attain perfection. Where in the first place ... it is received rather than attained.

 

I am one living example ... when doctrines which pushes me to discipline didn't work .... but doctrines of Grace changed me forever. After Christ died .... man no longer need to work .... it's God's work .....

 

 

LET GO, LET GOD

[guitarman]

Cure of Ars,

 

It was pride .... It was pride that Lucifer was driven from heaven .... it was pride that constitude the fall of Israel (old testiment) ..... it was pride that had driven the early church into War .... it was Pride that drove the Pharisees to Cruxify Jesus .... It was pride that the church denied many doctrines .... It was pride that caused many to turn away from the Church .... and I say this to my shame for the very believe that I endorse .... and that me too ... cannot escape from this entity.

 

Hence if there is a prayer ... i pray that God will unveil our eyes to see .. wisdom to discern ....

 

"For I am the Vine, and you are the branches, apart from me, you can do nothing." John 15

 

"Grace and peace be multiplied to you through the knowledge of Christ Jesus" 2 Peter 1:2

 

"But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace." - Romans 11:6

 

" .... you who are seeking to to be justified by the Law; you have fallen from Grace."

[ComputerGuy]

Ultimately, "god" gave us a choice in life, what we do with it is up to us. If he did not want us to make the choices we make, he would not have given us this option.

 

That is my view on the subject.

[Eh Im Canadian]

The only thing I have to say about this is Acts 10:15

 

"Do not call anything impure that God has made clean." (said by The Lord)

 

So if God has made something clean, then it must be so, at least according to the Bible. So, since anyone who is baptized is made clean, if you are baptized, then you are pure!

[Cure of Ars]

Cure of Ars .... I don't mean to say who is wrong and who is right. But if you read the book of Romans .... salvation is really not about us meeting God's standards ... because if that is the case .... YOU are going to HELL ...

 

 

 

You are right in the that we are not able to earn heaven. No amount of work I do can equal heaven. So there is no way to deserve heaven. If I were to try to meet God's standards without his grace there would be no doubt that I would fail. But once I receive God's grace and become a child of God then my actions can have merit. Heaven is by grace alone. It is an unearned inheritance in the family of God. But if I do not work in the family of God by the Graces that God has given me then it is possible to forfeit the inheritance of heaven.

 

 

You mentioned about the verse when Jesus said .... "be perfect because your heavenly father is perfect." In this verse, if you are taking into context of an achievement in Holiness to attain a state of perfection that God can accept us, then NONE of us will go to heaven ....

 

By God's grace we can and before we can enter heaven we have to be made clean and perfect because "nothing unclean will enter" (Rev 21:26) Santification is a process.

 

But rather, when we are told about Holiness ... it is referring to Jesus. It's Jesus in us that makes us perfect ... not our good deeds. Because Jesus had fulfilled God's law of Covenant thru Blood and forgiveness once and for all .... we then, can enter into God's covenant to accept Jesus into our lives and "Be Perfect". So to be perfect is not about us .... it's about Christ.

 

I agree except we have to participate in God's grace. We have to work out our salvation with fear and trembling. (Phil 2:12-13)

 

Romans spoke about Righteousness as being a Gift .... NOT an achievement. (Romans 5:15 - 17) But because it was the early Church ... and for most conservative doctrines, many bible interpretors cannot accept the fact that Righteousness cannot be attained. Everone wants to be part of the reward ..... no one could accept the fact that they can't do anything at all to attain perfection. Where in the first place ... it is received rather than attained.

 

It's both, First we receive God's own life through grace and then we are able to do Gods work and merit. This is why Romans also talks about rewards;

 

God, who will repay everyone according to his works: eternal life to those who seek glory, honor, and immortality through perseverance in good works, but wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness. (Rom 2:5-8)

 

God has done: by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for the sake of sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, so that the righteous decree of the law might be fulfilled in us, who live not according to the flesh but according to the spirit. (Rom 8:3-4)

 

 

I am one living example ... when doctrines which pushes me to discipline didn't work .... but doctrines of Grace changed me forever. After Christ died .... man no longer need to work .... it's God's work .....

 

 

Your right, but we still need to participate in his grace.

[Rahll]

First, for a mathmatic principal. A always equals A. It's the first law of mathmatics. You are correct is stating that when you subsititue A for a value, then they will never be equal. This is because, the number system is infiniate, and because of that, there is infiniate percision in any calculation. thereforeeee 1=1 is not an absolute truth, because 1 could be 1, or it could be 1.0000000000001. or it oculd be 1.(infiniate 0's1). However, this is not what the Law of Idenity is stating. The law states that A = it's self. When you compare A to itsself, even tho you cant mathmatacaly that A is identical to another A, you can say that A is infinitaly identical to it's self. As the core definitation of identical is that there are no possible changes. This extended and trancends the infinite realm. So whereas the percision to which A is eqal to its self can never be trule known, we can still know that A will always always be equal to A. This is the core of modern mathmatics, and is an accpeted LAW (not principal) by all.

 

Aristotle applied the same concept to philosphy. With "A" being absolute truth, and our perception being the way to messure that truth.

 

What you say about electrial impulses is true. Our perception is based on electiral impulses which are based on stimuli and biloigy. Because they are based on something else, nothing will ever be truly ture for us. But this doesnt mean that absolute truth doesnt exist. As with the law of idenity, we can come infinitaly close (1.000000000infinity1) to perceiving absolute turth (A) but we will never be able to fully do so. However, just because we cant do the exact infinite percision of A (absolute truth) doesnt mean that absolute truth (a) doesnt exist. nor does it mean that absolute turth cant be compared to it's self.

 

So how does this apply to the cosmos? That is in your next question.

 

Yes you are correct, but this does not mean that anything can happen at any time. Even though there are an infinite amount of varibles in the universe (for the universe is in it's sefl infinite) these varibles still have to follow the absolute truths of the universe. Since we can never fully comprehend these absolute truths, we can never fully compregend every possible outcome, thus for our perception an infinite number of things could happen at any time, but to the universe, the out come is known, because the universe is based on absolute prinicpals.

 

finally, tieing this in to free will. Just as we cant fully perceive all the varibles of the universe, we cant compregend every single possible outcome for an action, thus we have the perception of free will.

 

However, to the universe, every single possible action, varible and outcome exists, and thereforeee there is no true or absolute free will.

[Eh Im Canadian]

Huh? I didnt really understand that last sentence. At least understand how it helped your choice.

 

"However, to the universe, every single possible action, varible and outcome exists, and thereforeee there is no true or absolute free will."

 

Wouldn't that be saying that we do have free will because since it all exists, we only get to choose one, thereforeeee we can make our own decision? That would be like doing a task and not doing it at the same time. You can't eat and sandwhich, and at the same time not eat that same sandwhich. That would be having 2 choices at the same time. Since we only can choose one of them, then we have choices we can make.

 

Now about that A=A thingy. What if he was wrong? He has no evidence to back it up. I could say "Brown cow = Brown cow", and if I was a famous philosopher / mathematician, then everyone could say "Hmm, he has a point!". The point is, Aristotle's ideas were accepted because he was right about some stuff, so they figured he was right about all stuff. Its also like saying if everyone jumped off a bridge, would you do it too? Just because some "law" works almost all the time with our system, doesn't mean our system is the right one. There are no laws, because everything is always changing. We can't make laws that the universe will follow. Maybe it'll work some of the time, but it isn't absolute. Our math systems are flawed as you have admitted witht the 99/100 thingy. So if it is a law that is the core of our mathematics, won't it be flawed as well? Maybe we just haven't found a suitable example to prove why it's wrong yet.

[Rahll]

Hehe, valid points.

 

And I'm pretty much agreeing with you. As for free will, yes we have free will because we can only choose one action, alls I'm saying is that that action is not truly unknown. It is and foever will be unknown to us, but because there is nothing truly random, there can be no such thing as true free will.

 

As for the math principal. First, there is proof that A=A. The law of idenity is the foundation of ALL of our current math concepts, and while I don't fully understand the proof or it myself, I know that it exists, and that it is accepted as a mathmatical law, and not just a mathmatic principal.

 

here are no laws, because everything is always changing. We can't make laws that the universe will follow.

 

The key thing there is that "We can't make laws that the universe will follow" and to that I agree. WE never will be 100% certian that a law existsm, or that it is absolute. However, there are still absolute laws that the universe has to follow, we just will never fully known them, as it would require the knowledge of everything, which is impossible. But even tho we will never be able to make a law with absolute certinity, theys till exist. If there was no true absolute for the universe, then there would be no order whatsoever, and no principals, no matter, no life. The univserse has to follow it's own rules, or it woudlnt be a universe.

[Eh Im Canadian]

That is a good point. The universe would have to follow it's own rules, or it wouldn't be a universe. But anything that we can think of is possible, thereforeeee the universe must either not be a universe, or there is no such thing as a universe. It is a complex problem, and I am not entirely sure I really understand it.

[Eh Im Canadian]

Here is a proof that 1 cannot equal 1.

 

for the purposes of this proof, if I add an " n" to the end of a number it means it is repeating ( e. g. .9999999999999......)

 

.1n = 1 / 9

.2n = 2 / 9

+________

.3n = 3 / 9

 

 

thereforeeee

 

.3n x 3 = .9n and 3 / 9 x 3 = 9 / 9 = 1

 

.9n = 1

 

 

 

From this we can conclude that 1 will equal .99999999.

 

Basically, this means that 1 doesn't equal 1.

 

You can replace 1 with A, and you will get the same results.

 

So I guess our laws are wrong then, because A can't equal A

 

I guess we'll just have to design a new one or something, because the one we've got sure as heck doesn't work too well.