Have you ever longed to “trade-up”?
A worse car for a better car.
An older drill for a newer drill.
A heavier bike for a lighter bike.
A smaller house for a bigger house.
Your Creator has something similar in mind when He shows you how to live.
Yet people respond:
“What do you mean I can’t work on Sunday? That’s terrible! How could God be so cruel as to tell me to rest; to tell me that money is not the most important thing in life. I want to work, and work, and work seven days a week.”
“What do you mean I can’t destroy my family by committing adultery? That’s terrible! Like atheists say, “People should be allowed to do whatever they want, where ever and whenever they want.” How dare God restrict my fun like that. Marital fidelity is a horrible idea.”
And on and on it goes with sceptics disagreeing with God on every level.
My walk with God has proven the polar opposite. Every decision to obey Him has only moved my life in the direction of improvement. To see God for who He really is, Someone who loves me and cares for me and who wants the best for me changes all of my responses to God. Obeying Him is always, always, always better than ignoring Him or rebelling against Him.
Obeying God in any and every circumstance is always a trade-up.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Like atheists say, “People should be allowed to do whatever they want, where ever and whenever they want.” How dare God restrict my fun like that. Marital fidelity is a horrible idea.”
ReplyDeleteWhy do you lie?
...and did you forget about forgetting my question, again? Seriously?
Take care and get some rest Rod; I think you need it...
Sorry, it was supposed to read, "If people want to sleep left and right they should be allowed to."
ReplyDeleteSorry, it was supposed to read, "If people want to sleep left and right they should be allowed to."
ReplyDeleteWhat the... that's a completely different thing. We are not even talking about a moral judgement anymore! I could explain but obviously you don't care at all...
And you still ignore the other thing I said.
You are a bit weird these days... I don't want to ask questions that are too personal since this is still a public blog, but... is everything ok?
Hugo, I'm not going to go looking for some question that you asked or I asked. If you want to bring it up again, feel free and I'll take a look at it.
ReplyDeleteHow can you be that lazy? I even told you it was on Thursday. Here, it took me 10 seconds...
ReplyDeletebut could I ask, If hell exists, and if what Jesus taught about hell is true - IF - only IF, would you be damned for eternity?
Yes!!!!
Here, just to make sure : I deny the Holy Spirit.
(I hope that does not offend you that I commit the worst Biblical sin on purpose...)
Can I ask you what was the point of this question? You still doubt that I am being honest with you? I am glad you want to verify though.
THAT's what you say I'm ignoring?
ReplyDeleteWhat am I supposed to say? You're staking your whole eternity on "the mathematics breaks down at that point."
The Bible says you're a fool and I agree.
'Nuff said.
WHY did YOU ask ME:
ReplyDeleteIf hell exists, and if what Jesus taught about hell is true - IF - only IF, would you be damned for eternity?
???
Is it really that hard to answer?
Plus, what's up with that:
You're staking your whole eternity on "the mathematics breaks down at that point."
That does not even make any sense. I know EXACTLY what you are referring to though, i.e. that we don't see the Big Bang Theory the same way, but it has NOTHING to do with staking my whole eternity on it. Your claim is ridiculous and void of any meaning. You put it as if accepting that God started the Big Bang is all there is to know to be a good Christian saved from eternal punishment in Hell. Pathetic.
Why are you suddenly so insulting and not able to process a simple question, or even remember what you asked 1-2 days ago?
What's wrong with you!?
"WHY did YOU ask ME:"
ReplyDeleteJust wondering. Not everyone get the consequences of their beliefs.
=====
"You put it as if accepting that God started the Big Bang is all there is to know to be a good Christian saved from eternal punishment in Hell. Pathetic."
Well, a person can hardly become a Chritian without first believing that God exists.
======
"Why are you suddenly so insulting and not able to process a simple question, or even remember what you asked 1-2 days ago?"
Hugo, this blog is not my life. Something occurs to me and I write it down. I have five small active kids. I'm writing a book. I'm reading other books. I have a wife to talk to. Stuff to repair etc. etc. I have other things to think about. This is not the Hugo fan club central office.
"WHY did YOU ask ME:"
ReplyDeleteJust wondering. Not everyone get the consequences of their beliefs.
Interesting, so you really think that I am stupid enough to not understand that if Hell exists I would go there? You needed to actually confirm that?
But again, you did not really care since 2 days after asking you had no clue what I was talking about... This is fascinatingly strange. I really feel like you might be losing a bit of memory; that's sad, I hope you will be fine...
=====
"You put it as if accepting that God started the Big Bang is all there is to know to be a good Christian saved from eternal punishment in Hell. Pathetic."
Well, a person can hardly become a Chritian without first believing that God exists.
Agreed, but the Big Bang is far from being a proof that God exists... that's the point.
You believe God exists because you have faith he does exists. You cannot prove it. When I ask you to, you say there is no starting point, no way to build a logical argument because you need to first accept Jesus, or that the Holy Spirit needs to choose me, and so on, in circles, without anything but faith to support the whole thing.
But, as I often mention, I don't have any problem with that, there is no bad consequences of believing in God/Jesus in the first place.
What I have problems with is when you mock scientific facts by labeling them as fantasies, and when you mock people who accept them.
You, on the other hand, think I am stupid, slow of thought, a fool, to not accept what you accept. That's the only reason why I write here, to correct your (unintentional) lies towards people of other faiths, or non-faith, that you don't understand.
Obviously though, you don't really care since you keep being a liar, so it might be futile... but I care too much about what's true. That's my problem. I can't let go...
======
"Why are you suddenly so insulting and not able to process a simple question, or even remember what you asked 1-2 days ago?"
Hugo, this blog is not my life. Something occurs to me and I write it down. I have five small active kids. I'm writing a book. I'm reading other books. I have a wife to talk to. Stuff to repair etc. etc. I have other things to think about. This is not the Hugo fan club central office.
I work full time, I am actively applying to jobs, I am studying at least 3 hours a day for the GMAT, I need to take care of my property and find someone who will eventually rent it, I still find time to read, do sport and see friends... so what? That does not alter my '2-days-ago' memory...
======
Now I am going to speculate a bit here. I have the impression that you don't like me being nice with you and agreeing with you most of the time. You reply much more quickly when someone contradicts you or insult you.
Someone like me does not fit in your worldview; I am not supposed to exist. That's why you never understand my opinions and beliefs; they don't make sense to you, not in the sense that you disagree with them, in the sense that you don't understand where they come from.
So it's not really because you think that my position is foolish, but because you don't understand how I can arrive to it in the first place, without having the same basis as you.
You often say that some people might not need God to be good, but you'll never admit that people could be good without God. There is a big but subtle difference... I doubt you'll get it.
“So you really think that I am stupid enough to not understand that if Hell exists I would go there?”
ReplyDeleteYa, pretty much. You wouldn’t be the first atheist to think, “If I’m wrong, I’m sure that I’m good enough that God would make an exception.” Pretty stupid but not rare.
=====
“But again, you did not really care since 2 days after asking you had no clue what I was talking about.”
You answered and I moved on. What did you want? A deep discussion on why what you think will happen is correct?
I was actually more interested in hearing from Bret as to why he thought the Christian divorce rate is higher than the secular folks.
=====
“Agreed, but the Big Bang is far from being a proof that God exists... that's the point.”
I disagree. If everything came from nothing, then Creator God exists - THAT’s the point!
=====
“You believe God exists because you have faith he does exists.”
You have faith that He doesn’t exist. You have faith that matter is all that exists. You can't prove it but you believe it.
Carl Sagan’s statement, “The universe is all that exists and all that has ever existed,” or something like that is as clear a statement of faith as has ever existed.
=====
"You, on the other hand, think I am stupid, slow of thought, a fool, to not accept what you accept."
No, I think you’re stupid, slow of thought, a fool, to not accept the obvious - Creator God exists.
======
“That does not alter my '2-days-ago' memory...”
Hmph - Wait till your 60-years-old. Living with chronic pain and raising five little kids. Then try to manage more than two things at once.
The point is, Hugo, your answer was just not that important to me. It was a point of interest. And apparently very little interest. Nothing more.
======
"Someone like me does not fit in your worldview; I am not supposed to exist."
You’ve been in transition since we first met. You’re now an atheist who thinks that a supernatural creator could exist. What am I supposed to make of that?
Ya, pretty much. You wouldn’t be the first atheist to think, “If I’m wrong, I’m sure that I’m good enough that God would make an exception.” Pretty stupid but not rare.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, that's pretty stupid, but I have never heard the 'God would make an exception' version. Perhaps you distort some statements a little bit?
You answered and I moved on. What did you want? A deep discussion on why what you think will happen is correct?
In a way yes, if you are so sure, it should be easy, but perhaps long of course, to demonstrate why I have an eternal soul that will suffer pain for eternity.
But the original question was really to understand why you would even ask that in the first place. You finally answered with your 'Ya, pretty much' above, which is very surprising because it's as if you don't believe me when I say what I believe or not. You seem to still think that someone like me does believe in God deep down in him but just refuses to admit it.
I was actually more interested in hearing from Bret as to why he thought the Christian divorce rate is higher than the secular folks.
Ya I wonder if there are explanations for that... but it has nothing to do with the validity of Christianity obviously. It does not make Christianity false.
I disagree. If everything came from nothing, then Creator God exists - THAT’s the point!
First, the Big Bang Theory does not state that everything came from nothing. I wonder if one day you'll understand that.
Second, it would not prove that Creator God exists at all. If we can prove that the universe came from literally nothing, then it was literally nothing! But I don't even see how we could prove that... any idea?
Next, if we say that it's literally nothing 'except', then it's not literally nothing! Logically speaking, we cannot say something is 100% black except for that small part over there. Yes we use it in everyday language, but you'll surely agree that it means the object is NOT 100% black in that case.
So, if the universe comes from nothing, from our point of view, but not necessarily from literally nothing, then it only means that there is something else, that there is an 'except' after 'nothing'. However, by definition, we cannot know what it is since to come to that conclusion we start by saying that it looks like nothing.
I know that you would then claim that this 'except' is immaterial, infinite, supernatural and all these buzzwords you like to associate with God, but that's highly dishonest, logically incoherent and philosophically invalid. You only replace 'nothing' with 'something' without being able to distinguish that 'nothing' from 'something'. In a strict sense, you equate God with 'nothing' but then give him a bunch of attribute that you cannot distinguish from nothing.
Here's the real difference between us though. I completely understand that for you it makes more sense to say that God is there in that hole instead of 'nothing'. You, on the other hand, don't get the fact that I don't claim that it's literally nothing, I just believe that from our point of view it looks like nothing... for now at least!
You have faith that He doesn’t exist.
ReplyDeleteNo, I was not convinced that he exists. Nice try to shift the burden of proof.
You have faith that matter is all that exists. You can't prove it but you believe it.
No, I have faith that all that exists i material, in a strict sense, but that is no the same as matter.
Yes, I can prove it. If you want to know, just ask.
Carl Sagan’s statement, “The universe is all that exists and all that has ever existed,” or something like that is as clear a statement of faith as has ever existed.
No, it's not based on faith at all. From our point of view, time started at the Big Bang, so it appears to us as being infinitely far in the past, that's all that scientific observations can tell us. We can even put an approximate number but up to a certain point only, because it does not even make sense at some point to talk about time.
Only men of faith take it literally because an actual infinite cannot exist. You like to say it yourself ironically, oh no wait, you like to say that an actual material infinite cannot exist, or in other words, nothing can be infinite except God. Logically broken! That's why you need faith...
No, I think you’re stupid, slow of thought, a fool, to not accept the obvious - Creator God exists.
Obvious eh? Of course, except that no matter what argument you make for God's existence, at some point you will say: oh, well, you need faith to believe that part, I cannot give you evidence. None of my beliefs are like that, I challenge you to find even one. Note what I wrote in this post for example, there is nothing that I believe based on faith. I tell you about observations, their limits and their meaning, and especially about where I get to 'I don't know'.
I know that it's hard sometimes to say 'I don't know' but I prefer that to 'I don't know but I believe God did it because nothing else can explain it'.
Hmph - Wait till your 60-years-old. Living with chronic pain and raising five little kids. Then try to manage more than two things at once.
I am very sad that you suffer, and I think it's part of the reason why you are a Christian, but that's another story...
Plus, I was not even trying to say I have more things to do than you, you're the one who mentionned that he had lots to do and I simply mean that I have a lot to do to. It's not a competition but I don't understand why you would pretend that all I have to do is care about this blog... I am no different than you in that respect.
That's why actually I am not going to go into an explanation of why I believe that the material is all that exists. It takes some time and effort and I can't right now. If you are interested, let me know and we could discuss that later on...
The point is, Hugo, your answer was just not that important to me. It was a point of interest. And apparently very little interest. Nothing more.
No problem, perhaps I did put too much importance into it after all!
You’ve been in transition since we first met. You’re now an atheist who thinks that a supernatural creator could exist. What am I supposed to make of that?
I don't think I have been in a transition as much as you think. With respect to my atheism, only one thing changed over the past 2 years, and it has zero impact on any other beliefs, opinion or values I hold, because atheism is a consequence of them anyway. The only thing that changed is that I now consider that I am what we call a strong atheist. I believe there is no god, I believe the material is all that exists and I am happy to discuss why I adhere to these principles. It interests almost no one obviously though since, as I just said, it has no influence on anything else. It's simply a philosophical stance I explored and decided to adopt because I like to use logic and reason.
Take care.
“It does not make Christianity false.”
ReplyDeleteI don't know what YOU mean by "Christianity" but from my perspective it makes it suspect. I’ve spend 30,000 hours of counselling and I have never met a couple who, if they’d done what is necessary couldn’t have made their relationship work. This is x 100 for “Christians.” It doesn’t make sense to say, “I’m a follower of Jesus but I refuse to do what He says.” It makes it suspect.
=====
When, regarding the universe / big bang etc, I say, "Everything came from nothing," I mean, Everything “material” came from nothing “material.” I mean that everything “natural” came from nothing “natural” or rather it came from something supernatural.
Do you believe that the only "truth" is scientific truth i.e. something that can be tested / proven?
If not, why is it dishonest, incoherent and invalid to say that something immaterial, infinite and supernatural exists?
If everything material / natural came from nothing material / natural what are the alternatives?
Matter created itself?
Matter has always existed?
We know that neither of those are true - so what then? Saying "I don't know" doesn't do away with the need for an explanation.
=====
"No, I have faith that all that exists i material, in a strict sense, but that is no the same as matter. Yes, I can prove it. If you want to know, just ask.
I’m asking.
When I say that something is believed on faith, I don't mean that there isn't any evidence for it. I mean that it can't be proven. Sagan's statement is a statement of faith. "All that exists is material" is a statement of faith. It cannot be proven. "The material is all that exists," is a statement of faith. It cannot be proven.
My faith that Creator God exists is a conclusion that I have drawn based upon available evidence. Your faith that Creator God does not exist is a conclusion that you have drawn based upon available evidence.
As I've said before, agnostics are the ones who could call themselves the most scientifically minded. For they are the ones who only go as far as the evidence will take them. Christians and atheists, on the other hand, use inductive reasoning to take them part way, and then bring about a deductive conclusion based upon that evidence in combination with their pre-set world-view.
I don't know what YOU mean by "Christianity" but from my perspective it makes it suspect. I’ve spend 30,000 hours of counselling and I have never met a couple who, if they’d done what is necessary couldn’t have made their relationship work. This is x 100 for “Christians.” It doesn’t make sense to say, “I’m a follower of Jesus but I refuse to do what He says.” It makes it suspect.
ReplyDeleteI meant 'Christianity' in the sense of 'what claims Christianity is based on'. Regardless of what people who believe in Christianity do, it does not make Christianity true or not, i.e. it does not make Jesus' resurection real or not, it does not make God real or not, etc...
If we talk about 'Christianity's principles&values', then I am with you, it does not make sense to have people who follow them, then fail, and keep pretending that the principles are correct. What we see is Christians who don't follow the principles and fail, and people who do follow the principles and succeed. So I agree with you completely in that respect! Actually, I would go even farther than that and say that I think that concerning marriage, which is what we are focusing on here, then I agree 100% with Christianity's principles&values!
When, regarding the universe / big bang etc, I say, "Everything came from nothing," I mean, Everything “material” came from nothing “material.” I mean that everything “natural” came from nothing “natural” or rather it came from something supernatural.
That's void of meaning, because we cannot even define what something immaterial/supernatural is. You can only say that it is non-natural. To prove that something exists, you must first declare some positive attributes and then only can you start to prove it exists.
Do you believe that the only "truth" is scientific truth i.e. something that can be tested / proven?
Absolutely not, science does not prove any truth actually. Only math and philosophical logical arguments can do that.
If not, why is it dishonest, incoherent and invalid to say that something immaterial, infinite and supernatural exists?
See above...
If everything material / natural came from nothing material / natural what are the alternatives?
Why would everything material/natural come from nothing material/natural?
Matter created itself?
From our point of view, matter cannot be created/destroyed, only transformed to energy and vice/versa.
Quantum physics present an alternative but it still does not fit completely so I don't know more than that personally...
Matter has always existed?
From our point of view, yes, matter AND/OR energy has always existed. Note that this is a concept though, this is how we imagine reality, not how reality actually is, since always existed implies infinity which is itself a concept as well.
That's why I consider God to be a concept as well by the way, it's very similar...
We know that neither of those are true - so what then? Saying "I don't know" doesn't do away with the need for an explanation.
ReplyDeleteNot true does not mean false, and not false does not mean true. True/False is not a valid dichotomy in philosophy.
So, yes, I say 'I don't know' at some point and I am perfectly comfortable with that. The need for explanation remains, I agree, but positing a god without any positive attribute does not explain anything anyway since you cannot prove it exists. For you it's more satisfying than 'I don't know', and you are not alone obviously, but for me it requires a leap of faith because I really don't know what it means to have an infinite amount of energy in an infinitely small point...
Sagan's statement is a statement of faith. "All that exists is material" is a statement of faith. It cannot be proven. "The material is all that exists," is a statement of faith. It cannot be proven.
It depends on definitions, and I will argue that yes, both of these can be proven. Actually, both of them are axioms in my worldview. The important difference here is that you used the word 'material' when earlier you use the word 'matter', two very different things. I believe that being material is existing, and existing is being material. Think about that, I'll come back later...
My faith that Creator God exists is a conclusion that I have drawn based upon available evidence. Your faith that Creator God does not exist is a conclusion that you have drawn based upon available evidence.
No, you have faith, I don't.
What's funny actually here is that even if I were to concede I have faith that 'All that exists is material', which does not even makes sense, then that would be the only thing I have faith in. You would not be able to find one single example other than that.
While you, on the other hand, still believe in all sort of magic things based on faith. You believe most, if not everything, that was written in the Bible in the form of supernatural events taking place in a natural reality. None of these were proven; they are all parts of stories told by people, who really really believed them, granted, but still nothing more than stories.
As I've said before, agnostics are the ones who could call themselves the most scientifically minded. For they are the ones who only go as far as the evidence will take them. Christians and atheists, on the other hand, use inductive reasoning to take them part way, and then bring about a deductive conclusion based upon that evidence in combination with their pre-set world-view.
Agnostics are people who don't have the balls to answer the question 'Do you believe God exists?', or who claim that God cannot be shown to exist. In both cases, they are technically Atheists since they don't believe God exists. You cannot believe something exists when you don't know if it exists, it's absurd. The difference in my case is that I am interested in philosophy and decided to take a firm stance on the god question after careful evaluation of the arguments. But, when you think about it, the difference between those who labelles themselves agnostic and myself is minuscule. We both don't believe God exists. Some are actually Agnostic Theists and pretend they don't know, but actually, when pressed, will say that yes they believe some god exists, but they don't know what it could be.
I’m asking.
Sounds good. See you over the weekend then!
Take care!