So then your argument isn’t very good since we get multiple chances?
It’s all one continuous chance. You don’t start over, you continue your journey.
But fine, suppose you’re infront of your God but Jesus isn’t by his side and he wants to know why you were lead astray by a false prophet others tried to make divine.
So that would be Judaism or Islam right…?
Thought experiment. What if it was one day proven 200% there’s no God?
Good heavens. The mathematics of this proposition is almost as bad as the philosophy!
Thanks for the “What if …” qualification though. It brought back a funny memory.
Saturday Night Live’s skit “What if Eleanor Roosevelt Could Fly?”
Sorry couldn’t find it to post the link. But the proposition itself is ridiculous enough to serve its humorous purpose.
It’s any scenario where there is a God but you’re wrong about key details.
I find that so silly that an omnipetent God is extremely concerned if people believe he is real. Believing in an all powerful God who doesn’t physically reveal himself is litterally the most important thing in the universe. Now I wonder if there is no god, but humans wanted to create one, where they would place the most focus on? Hmmm it’s extremely convenient that God acts just like he would if he didn’t exist and he just really really needs to to believe he is there. You can see right through it.
Great you can’t choose what you believe so I should be fine then.
Bingo here is where you run into trouble. Let’s say someone misses a one hour mass and doesn’t repent, then dies and goes to hell for eternity. Now obviously the logic of that one thing which happened vs eternity of torture doesn’t make logical sense for justice. So you have to say oh well you see when you die that one choice is for eternity you can’t change it or nothing because it’s impossible. Why is it impossible? Oh because that’s how God made it. See God knew all this before any of it got started. He CHOSE to make your final choice eternal. It didn’t have to be. There is no rule book out there that God had to follow that says when a human dies after 80 years his fate is sealed. God wanted to do that so he did. Let’s all please stop pretending that humans choose these things. God created creatures with very limited understanding, and allowed them to be handicapped with original sin. I mean not only do we have very little understanding apparently, but we are actually oriented in the wrong direction through no fault of our own. He allows multiple confusing religions and then remains physically silent and judges people who don’t believe. It’s crazy. God chose all of this. We didn’t have to be born with original sin. He kept Mary from it, but chose not to let the rest of us in on that deal. God chose, God created, God is responsible. End of story.
Well the Abrahamic religions seem to fit that more than the other ones in the sense that there is more of a reason that they are true or it just seems that way to me.
One last thing before I stop looking at this thread for the night: It was written on one of Catholic Answers articles:
It wouldn’t be good for God to give heaven as a reward to his children that refuse to love him even until their death.
It’s true that no one likes the doctrine of hell. But the majesty of God demands it for those who refuse his divine right to be adored and worshiped. It’s ironic that those who deny the reality of hell do so in an attempt to uphold the reality of God who is omnibenevolent. But such theological opinions actually serve a contrary purpose: they undermine the reality of God who is sovereign, just, and all-wise.
If He is who we say He is, then what’s important to Him is that we freely choose to love Him. “Believing He’s real” is a pretty important first step in that process.
Umm… one word for you: Jesus.
If you believe that He hasn’t revealed Himself to us – in His son Jesus, and in His appearances throughout history (as recorded by eyewitnesses), then yeah… it would seem “convenient.” If, on the other hand, you accept the testimony of eyewitnesses, then there’s nothing “convenient” about it at all. Oh… except, maybe, that it’s awful convenient to ignore the evidence and then claim He doesn’t exist.
I can. Your case is pretty thin – I can see right through it!
@Sophia likes to make that claim, too. It’s a pretty weak one, I’d say. You can absolutely decide which evidence to accept and which to reject, and in doing so, you actually are choosing what you believe!
Bingo. Here’s where you run into trouble.
Are you really saying that a person who truly believes would intentionally miss a Mass (and thereby get into a state of mortal sin) but then keep on acting if he was golden? No… that’s nonsensical. On the other hand, if he did so unintentionally, and didn’t realize it, then he isn’t in a state of mortal sin, and does not incur the loss of heaven.
See how simple it is, when you take the time to understand the teaching, and not just caricature it?
Right. Because accepting the consequences of our actions would be a bad thing.
No, He doesn’t. That’s what the notion of “invincible ignorance” is all about. God doesn’t just say, “ah-ha! You were born a Muslim and followed that religion all your life! I’m gonna throw you in hell for all eternity! Bwah ha ha!”
If that’s what you think Catholicism teaches, you’re greatly mistaken.
Right. You bear no responsibility for your actions. Got it.
If somehow it was proven there is no god then I suspect the church would say this is how we should act as if there were a God and had been a Jesus. it would take the attitude that just because there was a
God doesnt mean those things taught had no meaning
Ah back to flogging that dead horse. I already offered you the test, and you declined to take it. You certainly can decline to LOOK at some purported evidence - that is true. But when you consider and contemplate what you saw, that is the time when your subconscious takes over, and it will compare the suggested evidence to the already acquired amount of information, and presents your conscious with the verdict: “convincing / believable” or not. (Of course you do not believe that there is such a thing as the subconscious.)
I also challenged you to engage your volition and start to believe something (anything) that you found preposterous before. You behave as if you never heard this challenge. So here is the time to put your money where your mouth is: “make a conscious decision to accept that the subconscious makes the decisions and it is outside your volitional control”. Go for it.
Also, here is another possibility. We all know from forensic investigations that the so-called eye-witness testimony is extremely unreliable. Ask ten eye-witnesses for a car crash, and they will bring forth eleven descriptions - and all of them are honest witnesses. We also know that the second- or third-hand hearsay testimonials are even less reliable, that is why they excluded from serious trials (murder trials especially). So, knowing that, make a conscious decision and “force” yourself to believe that the stories about Jesus are nothing more than just stories. If you succeeded, come back, and report: “I was able to CHOOSE to believe something that I did not believe before.”
I simply do not have the absolute, 100% blind faith that it takes to be an atheist. If we are all simply happy accidents of some unknown cosmic force, then the religion of atheism is therefore also accidental.
If I have doubts, it is that I doubt accident and coincidence.
Because there is abundant and glorious evidence of God, including (but explicitly not limited to) my own experience. There is no such evidence that dragons exist.
Were you to offer me convincing evidence that dragons exist then I might take seriously the assertion that you have a dragon in your garage. Without such evidence I don’t believe in your dragon because my default belief, based on general knowledge, is that there are no dragons.
You, Curious11, prove to me that you have never been a dolphin. You can’t prove it? Then you must have been a dolphin.
You don’t need to disprove that assertion. I have to prove it’s even possible before I can proceed to the attempt to prove it’s true in your case.
So no, I don’t have to disprove your claim that Christ was sent by dragons. You need to prove there are such things as dragons or else I can safely ignore your claim.
a) “Aquinas learned a lot from Aristotle, and it influenced his own work.”
b) “Christian theologians just slavishly copied Aristotle.”
Those two assertions are not the same.
I honestly believe that most extremely religious people don’t care whether or not their is a God. I think that religion has given them a feeling of purpose. Because when you think about it, God can exist, but God didn’t create religion, it is completely man made. If you truly believe in God than you would recognize that there is a complete separation of the two. For most of these people it wouldn’t make a difference if God existed or not, and if told that he didn’t exist with scientific fact, it wouldn’t make a difference because religion gives them a sense of routine and clear rules laid out before them, telling them how to live their lives. That’s not something that most would casually walk away from. God has nothing to do with it.
Though for me personally, though I do believe in God, if told there was no God, I would still hold on to hope that there would be an afterlife, and if not, well, I guess I wouldn’t know anyway.
Even scientists take their findings on faith. Then one day an Einstein comes along and blows old theories away.
How do you prove a negative to an absolute degree (200%)?
What kind of evidence would be presented to prove such a thing?
A thought experiment must have some basis in logic and reasoning…
It is not illogical as you may think. It is in our nature to desire to be right, sometimes above all else. People that desire riches desire to be the richest. Good literature is a reflection of the human soul. The character of Satan in paradise lost is not so different from us. In fact, he could stand as an ideal of human independence.
You are here, though this site is about the nature of God, I note. So when you say something is not logical, think on that, and ask whether your logic is really so sound. No, I would say you haven’t chose Hell, but the question remains, if confronted with the reality of a God you have denied, will you choose to serve him, if you have an option to be free from him forever, to be your own master in a place where all you have is that which is you?
Jumping in this is a good point regarding personal revelation. If Curious11 hasn’t received the same personal experiences that lead him to God that you have, could we agree he’s justified in ignoring claims of God’s existence?