Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Palindrome wrote:
Who would have thought that East Germany was so advanced?

Daily reminder to never get near a thread with religion as a subject.

 Peregrine wrote:
.

 generalgrog wrote:
Yes and a deeper point about............ hope.

Lol? The thought of your god being omnipresent doesn't really inspire hope. More like screaming in terror?

If you dont believe, don't scream. if you believe and think you are on the wrong side of God, then go ahead. I am with GG on this, its nice to remain under the wing no matter where i go.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
First, attributing an attribute onto another being isn't arrogance. It might be flattery or exaggeration, but it's not arrogant for me to say "my friend is super smart."

Yeah, but saying your friend is smart (presumably with good reason) is very different from declaring, with no good reason, that your god is everywhere, even in places where your religion is a trivial minority. It's arrogant because it dismisses all other equally valid (that is, not valid at all) beliefs and assumes that yours is the universal and correct one. It's the same kind of thing as telling someone you'll pray for them when they state a belief you don't agree with.

If you truly believe that there is no reason, than a person isn't arrogance, they are delusional. I suppose you could argue for self importance, but really, if you're trying to be insulting, be technically correct about it.

True, I suppose I should give god credit for having higher ambitions than mere genocide. However, the Bible is full of incidents where god commands his chosen people to go wipe out a rival nation or culture (complete with smashing their babies against rocks), so it's safe to say that god is a fan of both omnicide and genocide.

Fun Fact: there is almost no human act of depravity you can't justify with the Bible. Some truly awful stuff goes on in the old testament. You'd almost think that, I dunno, the way god and man related changed in the New Testament.

Nah, that would be Hell, the place where you hope you go when you die. A place where god is omnipresent would be hell, a place of horrible suffering.

Are you just quoting Marylin Manson lyrics? That should be written on tear stained notebook paper, it's so emo.

Lol? The thought of your god being omnipresent doesn't really inspire hope. More like screaming in terror?

You should only be afraid of what exists.

Always amazing how many believes certain people have, considering they don't believe in him anyway.

The concept of God is kinda scary.

So, the Bible states that he's omnipotent and all-knowing. He creates you knowing everything you'll ever do and who you are. God makes you with flaws, and then he sends you to Hell for them. Like "I'll make this guy a murderer, I'll judge him for it and then I'll punish him for it".

 LoneLictor wrote:
The concept of God is kinda scary.

So, the Bible states that he's omnipotent and all-knowing. He creates you knowing everything you'll ever do and who you are. God makes you with flaws, and then he sends you to Hell for them. Like "I'll make this guy a murderer, I'll judge him for it and then I'll punish him for it".

the idea of divine omnipotence has more to do Aristotle than the scripture, actually. The nature of the biblical god changes throughout the book. Early church thinkers were well steeped in Greek philosophy, and imparted in the god of Abraham the omnipotent logos of the greeks.

The key for me, as a Christian, is that what you have to understand about omnipotence is that it's power beyond power. When you create the laws of logic, they do not bind you. So yes, God can create you, knowing everything, and still give you free will.

Polonius wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:The concept of God is kinda scary.

So, the Bible states that he's omnipotent and all-knowing. He creates you knowing everything you'll ever do and who you are. God makes you with flaws, and then he sends you to Hell for them. Like "I'll make this guy a murderer, I'll judge him for it and then I'll punish him for it".

the idea of divine omnipotence has more to do Aristotle than the scripture, actually. The nature of the biblical god changes throughout the book. Early church thinkers were well steeped in Greek philosophy, and imparted in the god of Abraham the omnipotent logos of the greeks.

The key for me, as a Christian, is that what you have to understand about omnipotence is that it's power beyond power. When you create the laws of logic, they do not bind you. So yes, God can create you, knowing everything, and still give you free will.

I've always had a hard time getting my mind around that. If God creates a man as a murderer when he could've chosen to make the man a pacifist, I don't really think its fair to the man. He's just a puppet; he can't be blamed for his actions. It's God, the guy who controls everything there ever was and will be, that's pulling the strings and making the murderer kill people. And it's also God that killed the murderer, it's God that created hell and created Satan to rule over hell, and its God that condemned the murderer he killed to go to hell for killing, which God made him do.

And again, if people don't think he is real, then why care if he is a donkey cave?

d-usa wrote:And again, if people don't think he is real, then why care if he is a donkey cave?

I care about him being a donkey cave for the same reason I whine about Talos being a Mary Sue and get into arguments about the strength of Orks.

Fictional universes can be engrossing. Discussing them can be interesting. At the very least, it can pass the time.

 LoneLictor wrote:

d-usa wrote:And again, if people don't think he is real, then why care if he is a donkey cave?

I care about him being a donkey cave for the same reason I whine about Talos being a Mary Sue and get into arguments about the strength of Orks.

Fictional universes can be engrossing. Discussing them can be interesting. At the very least, it can pass the time.

Fair enough then I guess.

 LoneLictor wrote:
I've always had a hard time getting my mind around that. If God creates a man as a murderer when he could've chosen to make the man a pacifist, I don't really think its fair to the man. He's just a puppet; he can't be blamed for his actions. It's God, the guy who controls everything there ever was and will be, that's pulling the strings and making the murderer kill people. And it's also God that killed the murderer, it's God that created hell and created Satan to rule over hell, and its God that condemned the murderer he killed to go to hell for killing, which God made him do.

It's because you're thinking small. God isn't a star trek villain, or a Greek god, or a really super powerful dude.

God is literally beyond existence. None of the rules we know apply to Him. So yes, if god were bound by logic, he would know everything about a person, and is predestining him to his fate. But if God were no longer bound, he could truly give free will to man. In many ways, from a philosophical standpoint, that's not only the only supernatural act he'd need to perform (as everything else could happen without him), there's no really good way to explain free will apart from god.

How sad for eastern Germany.

 Seaward wrote:
Poland's always been religious, though, and it's always been Catholic.

When I was in Poland my mate said he was going to count every nun he saw. He stopped at about 40... on the first morning we were there. Seriously there are just nuns everywhere. We knew it was the most Catholic country in the world, but damn that was a lot of nuns.

 sebster wrote:

 Seaward wrote:
Poland's always been religious, though, and it's always been Catholic.

When I was in Poland my mate said he was going to count every nun he saw. He stopped at about 40... on the first morning we were there. Seriously there are just nuns everywhere. We knew it was the most Catholic country in the world, but damn that was a lot of nuns.

Technically the Vatican State is the most Catholic country in the world

I've never heard that stat about Poland though, I would have assumed one of the South American nations myself, they take their Jesus seriously down there.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
First, attributing an attribute onto another being isn't arrogance. It might be flattery or exaggeration, but it's not arrogant for me to say "my friend is super smart."

Yeah, but saying your friend is smart (presumably with good reason) is very different from declaring, with no good reason, that your god is everywhere, even in places where your religion is a trivial minority. It's arrogant because it dismisses all other equally valid (that is, not valid at all) beliefs and assumes that yours is the universal and correct one.

While I disagree with Peregrine on most points, this one (apart from the parenthetical aside) resonates, for me. There are a lot of different faiths in the world, and some of them have no relation to and/or pre-date the Christian and even the Hebrew God. But the modern Christian cosmology dismisses them entirely as nonentities, or as manifestations of their evil deity, Satan. I actually prefer the god of the Hebrews, in this regard. At least the early Jews didn't deny the existence of other gods and other faiths. They just said theirs was the best, and that he said they shouldn't worship any other gods before him.

 Mannahnin wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
First, attributing an attribute onto another being isn't arrogance. It might be flattery or exaggeration, but it's not arrogant for me to say "my friend is super smart."

Yeah, but saying your friend is smart (presumably with good reason) is very different from declaring, with no good reason, that your god is everywhere, even in places where your religion is a trivial minority. It's arrogant because it dismisses all other equally valid (that is, not valid at all) beliefs and assumes that yours is the universal and correct one.

While I disagree with Peregrine on most points, this one (apart from the parenthetical aside) resonates, for me. There are a lot of different faiths in the world, and some of them have no relation to and/or pre-date the Christian and even the Hebrew God. But the modern Christian cosmology dismisses them entirely as nonentities, or as manifestations of their evil deity, Satan. I actually prefer the god of the Hebrews, in this regard. At least the early Jews didn't deny the existence of other gods and other faiths. They just said theirs was the best, and that he said they shouldn't worship any other gods before him.

True, although as I stated earlier, our concept of the omnipotent and omnipresent god has far more to do with Aristotle than scripture.

The modern Christian cosmology derives from the Hebrew one that you seem to be okay with, Mannahnin.

 Frazzled wrote:
Yea Poland's has a strong history of that, which was oppressed during the godless commie pinko years, hence the resurgence.

?!

In the 1950s the church was oppressed, but after that religious practice was open. From then on the friction between the state and the church was driven entirely by the church's involvement in ant-bolshevik movements like Solidarity.

I'm not in anyway justifying the repression of Poland or any other Warsaw Pact government, but after the 50s that repression was a long way from stopping someone simply following their religion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Seaward wrote:
Everyone thinks the Soviets tried to utterly get rid of religion within their domain, which isn't all that accurate. I'd say the most recognizable Russian landmark isn't the Kremlin - which most people wouldn't recognize - but St. Basil's Cathedral in Red Square, and that was true even during the USSR era.

Like a lot of things, the interaction between the church and various communist governments is complex. In most cases you see an initial crackdown on the church, motivated in part by the atheist doctrines of communism, but motivated mostly by the desire to remove the power of a potentially political rival, so you get lots of land seizures and the imprisonment of some of the more prominent religious leaders. But I can't think of a case where that initial repression lasted more than about five years.

From then on you generally saw some level of reconciliation, as communist leaders saw the potential in aligning themselves with the church just like the old aristocracy had. From there, depending on the country, you either had a cozy relationship (Russia) or a troubled one (Poland), depending on how much the church was willing to buck the status quo for the sake of the welfare of the people.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lynata wrote:
Yup, religion wasn't forbidden. It just wasn't promoted either. I suppose it may be that it was frowned upon and there were cases where individual people who were particularly adamant about abstaining from various government events due to their religious beliefs experienced repression in the form of not being admitted into a particular job or education,

I think a lot of it is that informal approval, where nothing says you have to be atheist, but it sure makes it hard to get certain posting when you aren't.

A bit like having to love Jesus to win political office in the US. It isn't strictly needed, and there's always the odd person who bucks the odds and wins office despite not holding to the majority line, but they're very rare.

 Monster Rain wrote:
The modern Christian cosmology derives from the Hebrew one that you seem to be okay with, Mannahnin.

You're not reading closely, friend. Let me try to explain better.

I'm not really okay with the Hebrew cosmology. I do appreciate that the early Hebrews, at least, would not claim that my gods did not exist. There is a feeling I get from the way some Christians talk that my faith does not exist, and in some regards, that's as if I do not exist. It's related to that sense of semi-disenfrachisement I get from that political reality Sebster mentioned- that you mostly have to profess Christianity (or occasional Judaism, or rarely Islam) to be a viable political candidate here, too.

 Peregrine wrote:
One interesting theory I've heard is how state churches may be responsible for declining religious belief.

In countries where there's a state church, people tend to be apathetic about it. It's always there, but it's kind of in the background. You might go to it occasionally and do the "normal" things, but there isn't much reason to feel strongly about it so you end up with the kind of Christians who go to church for Christmas and maybe pray for something occasionally. And since they don't have much of a stake in religion it's easy to go from that minimal default belief to atheism, or at least to stop caring about religion entirely.

In the US, on the other hand, we never had a state church, so churches had to compete for members and religion became a marketing exercise. If you don't have a church (or don't care much about your church) there's a huge amount of effort spent on marketing various brands of Jesus to you. Do you like old traditional stuff? Great, we've got a Jesus for you! Are you a teenager in your rebellious phase? Great, let me tell you all about how you can rebel against society by going to church every sunday. Feeling overwhelmed by bills? Great, here's my book about how buying my brand of Jesus will increase your income 20000%! And of course once you buy one of these products it's like you're following your favorite sports team, you and your fellow fans are all unified against all your rivals and you have a high emotional stake in your choice. So it's much harder to abandon religion, you care about it more, and even if you stop caring so much there's always someone ready to lure you back in.

Competition in the free market adapting religion to suit the consumer and flourishing, compared to a floundering state based system? I love it!

I'm not sure it's a complete answer, as there's a few countries out there with no state religion, Australia for one, that is more on the apathetic end of the religious scale. So there's plenty of other factors as well, but as part of the answer it's a pretty good one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Technically the Vatican State is the most Catholic country in the world

I've never heard that stat about Poland though, I would have assumed one of the South American nations myself, they take their Jesus seriously down there.

You got me to question my claim, and I just looked this up. I was wrong on it being the most Catholic country, there's a bunch in South America that have it beat, and even in Europe Spain has it just pipped. What I was thinking of is that Poland has the most nuns per capita of any country.

 Mannahnin wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
The modern Christian cosmology derives from the Hebrew one that you seem to be okay with, Mannahnin.

You're not reading closely, friend. Let me try to explain better.

I'm not really okay with the Hebrew cosmology. I do appreciate that the early Hebrews, at least, would not claim that my gods did not exist. There is a feeling I get from the way some Christians talk that my faith does not exist, and in some regards, that's as if I do not exist.

While I agree that many Christians feel that way, it's more the result of sloppy thinking than anything.

Christians believe in one god. i don't believe that no other gods exist (although I'd be lying if I didn't think they were manifestations of one root divine).

Many Christians take the idea that Christ is the only path to salvation as the idea that there are no other belief structures out there. Even the catholic church recognizes the covenant between god and the Jews, for instance.

OTOH, I'm a catholic. I mentioned to my girlfriend that I'll pray to St. Francis for help finding homes for her dogs, and realized that she found that ridiculous. I believe that long dead, and often non-existent, people can help me reach god because my matter is of special interest to them.

Perhaps "okay with" might have been the wrong choice of words.

The real point, I suppose, is that given my experience as a "modern Christian" I don't quite understand where your assessment of the cosmology comes from.

Polonius wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:I've always had a hard time getting my mind around that. If God creates a man as a murderer when he could've chosen to make the man a pacifist, I don't really think its fair to the man. He's just a puppet; he can't be blamed for his actions. It's God, the guy who controls everything there ever was and will be, that's pulling the strings and making the murderer kill people. And it's also God that killed the murderer, it's God that created hell and created Satan to rule over hell, and its God that condemned the murderer he killed to go to hell for killing, which God made him do.

It's because you're thinking small. God isn't a star trek villain, or a Greek god, or a really super powerful dude.

God is literally beyond existence. None of the rules we know apply to Him. So yes, if god were bound by logic, he would know everything about a person, and is predestining him to his fate. But if God were no longer bound, he could truly give free will to man. In many ways, from a philosophical standpoint, that's not only the only supernatural act he'd need to perform (as everything else could happen without him), there's no really good way to explain free will apart from god.

Alright, I get that. God doesn't follow the rules of logic, he's supernatural, so applying logic to him only results in confusion. Trying to apply natural rules to God doesn't exactly work; it's like complaining about the impossibility of an Angel dancing on the head of a pin.

 Monster Rain wrote:
Perhaps "okay with" might have been the wrong choice of words.

The real point, I suppose, is that given my experience as a "modern Christian" I don't quite understand where your assessment of the cosmology comes from.

Okay, sorry, if you acknowledge or allow for the existence of other gods, then you would be exceptional in my experience. Based on the studies I've made of comparative religion both in college and in my clergy training, and had reinforced by nearly all of the Christians I've spoken to or corresponded with, it is my understanding that the modern Christian cosmology does not allow for the existence of any other deities.

Huh. Considering the Bible names at least two Gods other than YHWH that I can think of off the top of my head, I'm once again saddened by the fact that people claim to live their lives based on a book that they haven't read.

 Polonius wrote:

 LoneLictor wrote:

God is literally beyond existence. None of the rules we know apply to Him.

Which is why it would be unfair to judge humanity by God's point of view.

there's no really good way to explain free will apart from god.

First, you're assuming that belief in free will is universal (it's not).

Second, you're jumping to conclusions. I'm sure that there's an atheist out there who can explain why the believe in free will, and that it has nothing to do with God. I personally cannot, what with not believing in free will in the first place.

 Fafnir wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

 LoneLictor wrote:

God is literally beyond existence. None of the rules we know apply to Him.

Which is why it would be unfair to judge humanity by God's point of view.

there's no really good way to explain free will apart from god.

First, you're assuming that belief in free will is universal (it's not).

Second, you're jumping to conclusions. I'm sure that there's an atheist out there who can explain why the believe in free will, and that it has nothing to do with God. I personally cannot, what with not believing in free will in the first place.

I find that fascinating, so our lives are predetermined by some factor or another Fafnir?

 Mannahnin wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
Perhaps "okay with" might have been the wrong choice of words.

The real point, I suppose, is that given my experience as a "modern Christian" I don't quite understand where your assessment of the cosmology comes from.

Okay, sorry, if you acknowledge or allow for the existence of other gods, then you would be exceptional in my experience. Based on the studies I've made of comparative religion both in college and in my clergy training, and had reinforced by nearly all of the Christians I've spoken to or corresponded with, it is my understanding that the modern Christian cosmology does not allow for the existence of any other deities.

Catholic catechism teaches that there is only one true god, so it's not just your experience. Though Catholic catechism teaches a lot of stuff that I don't follow too closely.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:

First, you're assuming that belief in free will is universal (it's not).

Second, you're jumping to conclusions. I'm sure that there's an atheist out there who can explain why the believe in free will, and that it has nothing to do with God. I personally cannot, what with not believing in free will in the first place.

I find that fascinating, so our lives are predetermined by some factor or another Fafnir?

Given what we know about genetics, environmental factors, psychology, and simple physics, I've never heard a rationalist argument for free will that makes sense.

Though to crib from Dogma: we might not all rationally believe in free will, but we sure assume everybody has it!

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

I find that fascinating, so our lives are predetermined by some factor or another Fafnir?

If everything happens on the impetus of something that came before it, then ultimately, with the digestion of enough variables, it's possible to predict all the possible outcomes for any action. If such were the case, it would be impossible for free will to exist. There's no guiding force, simply what happened previously, and what happened before that, and so on.

Of course, the existence of free will is irrelevant. Whether we have it or not, we'll still continue to do what we do as we do it.

 Fafnir wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

I find that fascinating, so our lives are predetermined by some factor or another Fafnir?

If everything happens on the impetus of something that came before it, then ultimately, with the digestion of enough variables, it's possible to predict all the possible outcomes for any action. If such were the case, it would be impossible for free will to exist. There's no guiding force, simply what happened previously, and what happened before that, and so on.

Even if you can predict all my potential decisions I'm still free to MAKE that choice. Or so I think any way, I admit I could be deluding myself.