Eternal Damnation

[Borachio]

Tell you what, there are pver 1.8 billion people who believe in Jesus. Some of them insist upon Christian service through altruism. Rather than determine what I am, for I am unimportant, how about intentionally visiting around to meet some that are sincerely working in the fields of the Lord, and then decide for yourself if it's Truth.

Wut? You speak as if Christianity is some kind of undiscovered hinterland for me.

What is this meaning of yours, Mr Box?

 

[Crackerbox]

Wut? You speak as if Christianity is some kind of undiscovered hinterland for me.

What is this meaning of yours, Mr Box?

You've stated that you've read the New Testament but haven't demonstrated any command of the words within. You don't claim a belief in it. I wonder if you know Christianity at all?

The same is true of many Christians about atheism. They listen to an atheist say, "Atheism is just an absence of belief in God." Well then they don't bother reading the innumerable writings of atheists over time, nor muse upon what it really means to be an atheist.

Or the same is true about Christians and Islam. They reject it without reading a single word, nor considering their beliefs, nor talking to them. How could one possibly reject that which one doesn't know, and know fully well?

I know, some belief systems like atheism are self-evident and yet we know they are not logically at all!

 

[Borachio]

You've stated that you've read the New Testament but haven't demonstrated any command of the words within. You don't claim a belief in it. I wonder if you know Christianity at all?

And that is that, I guess. I've no reason to disabuse you of any view you may form.

Your judgements are quick. And final. It seems.

 

[Arakhor]

Try explaining the evolution of the eye without God. It strains all credibility.

You're a creationist as well? If so, here's news for you - creationism is not a mainstream Christian belief, except in the United States, and American Christians make up perhaps just 10% of all Christians worldwide, 1 billion of whom are Catholics.

 

[Crackerbox]

And that is that, I guess. I've no reason to disabuse you of any view you may form.

Your judgements are quick. And final. It seems.

I have no reason to disabuse you of any view you may form either. I don't know you from Adam. I can only read your posts and make a big whopping guess.

You see? It's impossible to honestly have a discussion/debate online. It's impossible to determine Truth by reading another's words. It's impossible to convince another, for they determine what is Truth themselves. It's impossible to prosthelize on the Internet, especially for a Christian, as it's counter to everything that evangelism says in the Bible.

Which is pretty much my first post, either here, or in the fine tuning topic.

 

[Borachio]

You come across as very much the proselytizer (sic), Mr Box.

 

[Crackerbox]

You're a creationist as well? If so, here's news for you - creationism is not a mainstream Christian belief, except in the United States, and American Christians make up perhaps just 10% of all Christians worldwide, 1 billion of whom are Catholics.

Nope, I'm not a creationist. I've had just as many, if not more, conversations than I bet you have with proponents of them. I say that because I'm old.

I have no idea how Ultimate Reality created the world. The Bible isn't a scientific document, but a spiritual one. There are no formulas in there, and only two scant models for creation with slight differences.

To focus on pigeonholing God into tiny boxes where God either used evolution to create the world, or God applied a creationist model to create the world, limits God vastly.

What I'm saying is the human eye didn't arise in any random way. It just couldn't have. It's illogical.

That's a very mainstream Christian attitude about that particular topic. Jesus is about Forgiveness and Redemption, and applying a litmus test of creationism is as bad as applying a litmus test of eternal damnation and endless condemnation about Hell.

 

[El_Machinae]

You run into a problem if you insist that evidence of God is apparent by looking at Nature. It then becomes obvious that the Universe is finely tuned to show us that the Bible is sufficiently false that it's not worth trusting.

 

[Borachio]

I can't see what's wrong with the Evolution of the Eye.

 

[reddishrecue]

You're a creationist as well? If so, here's news for you - creationism is not a mainstream Christian belief, except in the United States, and American Christians make up perhaps just 10% of all Christians worldwide, 1 billion of whom are Catholics.

Are catholics and christians the same? They both believe in the bible. Are all catholics romans?

 

[Crackerbox]

You come across as very much the proselytizer (sic), Mr Box.

I disagree. In person, I would discuss Christianity and tell you what Jesus has done in my life, and sincerely attempt to meet you where you are in your beliefs. If you chose to inquire more, then I'd be happy to invite you to church and to go help tutor some kids or do a clothing drive for the local homeless.

No, I know from experience you can't persuade people through their minds. It's not possible, and the nature of a forum discussion/debate is about reasoning. Honestly it's often about flat out arguing and demonizing of the Other which I find grotesque.

The redeeming aspect of forum debates is to "understand" the Other. You read something, have an epiphany, and so, "Ah, that's ultimately why he/she says that. They've had bad/good experiences. They've traveled and encountered that new cultural idea. They are opinionated because of X.

So forums allow us to communicate in an immediate way and hopefully help us then have relationships with people of similar ethos that we meet in real life. It makes us more tolerant.

 

[Borachio]

Fine. So you're not trying to persuade anyone here of the truth of your version of Christianity.

I'm not convinced. And if you're not trying, why does it appear as if you are?

 

[Crackerbox]

Fine. So you're not trying to persuade anyone here of the truth of your version of Christianity.

I'm not convinced. And if you're not trying, why does it appear as if you are?

Why? Are you trying to persuade the readers of the forum posts the veracity of your beliefs? If I write more, or include sacred texts, or include commentary, then is that persuasive?

By no means! It's not possible. Our anoymous words are not magical. The Muslim, the Buddhist, the Atheist, the Agnostic, the Christian...none of them have a magical power to persuade in an internet forum post. It's nutty to think it's remotely possible.

We are persuaded in person by ideas proposed by mentors, by friends, by our romantic partners, etc. Everything else is detached from us. We can't hear the timbre of their voices. We have no real sense of the person's history. Some might be mentally ill and pretending to be other people just to incite controversy.

It is largely irrelevant to our human experience. They're just words.

Real meaning can only exist by personal experience and through shared experiences with human beings and with God. That's all that Life is about.

Some people believe that there's no way God can exist, so God becomes only a god. OK, great. That's your choice.

Others believe God must exist. OK, you can't prove it especially in this manner.

If some lurker reads these words, and desires to prosthelize, I encourage them to actually take classes and to learn how to sincerely do this. Otherwise it's as pointless as beating your head against a wall.

No atheist convinced a believer to become a nonbeliever on an Internet forum. The believer decided for themselves that they didn't believe and found resonnance when they heard the words of another, but ultimately it arose from their own disbelief. The reverse is likewise true.

 

[Borachio]

Once again, fine.

But your previous posting isn't consistent with not wanting to persuade anyone, imo.

 

[Crackerbox]

You run into a problem if you insist that evidence of God is apparent by looking at Nature. It then becomes obvious that the Universe is finely tuned to show us that the Bible is sufficiently false that it's not worth trusting.

For me, it's apparent by looking at Nature (I've practically lived outside much of my life during my free time). That's arguably the very beginning conversation I have with young adults i.e. "It seems to me, ____ that when I consider Nature, I must believe in God." To which I smile in agreement.

I can't see what's wrong with the Evolution of the Eye.

How about we come back, try as we might to the Islamic idea of eternal damnation, even if the original post is hopelessly flawed. If you elect to discuss it more, I'll be happy to do so if you actually attempt to prove the eye came about randomly by doing the hard intellectual work of making posts that explain how you think it happened. Otherwise pointing to a link is rather weak. Develop it yourself. It might be interesting.

Are catholics and christians the same? They both believe in the bible. Are all catholics romans?

Most people when they use the word "catholic" they mean Roman Catholics i.e. the ones who seek out and give value to the Pope and to the temporal authority figures within it. But not all Catholics are Roman Catholics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Catholic_churches

In addition, the word "catholic" is used to denote universal in something like the Nicene Creed or the Apostle's Creed.

Various Lutherans, Anglicans, Orthodox Christians, etc use the Nicene Creed and say things like:
I believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, And of all things visible and invisible: And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, Begotten of his Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of very God, Begotten, not made, Being of one substance with the Father, By whom all things were made; Who for us men, and for our salvation came down from heaven, And was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, And was made man, And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried, And the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, And ascended into heaven, And sitteth on the right hand of the Father. And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead: Whose kingdom shall have no end. And I believe in the Holy Ghost, The Lord and giver of life, Who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spake by the Prophets. And I believe one Catholick and Apostolick Church. I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins. And I look for the Resurrection of the dead, And the life of the world to come. Amen.[14] The Anglican Nicene Creed (1662 AD)

And yet that use of Catholic is not Roman Catholic.

 

[Crackerbox]

Once again, fine.

But your previous posting isn't consistent with not wanting to persuade anyone, imo.

I challenge you to attempt to persuade a person online who is of an ardent belief to alter it to believe what you believe. Then actually get evidence that they did change by your words. It's so remote as to be nearly impossible.

Let's take a book from a library. I choose to read it. Maybe I have questions and longings and I've heard that it might persuade me. Even then, I surely began the process by assuming that the book had some authority.

Do people read the Bible and on their own come to believe? I doubt this. The typical path of conversion comes about by the catalyst of shared human experience coupled with reading the Bible and dwelling within the community of believers, and serious study of the Bible with commentaries, and with altruism.

Just reading words isn't an effective way to spread an idea. Some seed was there and reading words within affirm or deny what we believe. We either say, "Oh this book is ridiculous. What a waste of time." or we say, "Well I knew it all along...." but then by reading the Bible even the next day have doubts as to its veracity.

It's not enough to persuade, and anonymous Internet post are especially unconvincing because there are really strange people on the Internet. The prevalence of people with antisocial personality disorder (sociopaths is the old word) is rather high on the Internet. As such, anyone can be anybody on the Internet and so roleplay whatever, and intentionally just waste time trolling to catch a bite. Think most people don't comment at all, but think of the very high number of posts that are intentionally used to cause a reaction, and then continue to read those folks posts and discern whether it then becomes increasingly sadistic.

 

[reddishrecue]

I challenge you to attempt to persuade a person online who is of an ardent belief to alter it to believe what you believe. Then actually get evidence that they did change by your words. It's so remote as to be nearly impossible.

Let's take a book from a library. I chose to read it. Maybe I have questions and longings and I've heard that it might persuade me. Even then, I surely began the process by assuming that the book had some authority.

Do people read the Bible and on their own come to believe? I doubt this. The typical path of conversion comes about by the catalyst of shared human experience coupled with reading the Bible and dwelling within the community of believers, and serious study of the Bible with commentaries, and with altruism.

Just reading words isn't an effective way to spread an idea. Some seed was there that and reading words within affirm or deny what we believe. We either say, "Oh this book is ridiculous. What a waste of time." or we say, "Well I knew it all along...." but then by reading the Bible even the next day have doubts as to it's veracity.

It's not enough to persuade, and anonymous Internet post are especially unconvincing because there are really strange people on the Internet. The prevalence of people with antisocial personality disorder (sociopaths is the old word) is rather high on the Internet. As such, anyone can be anybody on the Internet and so roleplay whatever, and intentionally just waste time trolling to catch a bite.

Trolling and people that come in without caring about what they're not saying is sort of like the awakening of the conscience. High ranking officials seem that they hide their faults and errors and show off their badges that they earned. In the bible, the 10 comandments says thou shall not kill, that many officers nowadays don't get to follow. When does their conscience finally awakens and they agree to stop killing? Never, you can't expect people to change. People often continue with what they're doing no matter what you do to try to get them to change.

 

[Crackerbox]

Trolling and people that come in without caring about what they're not saying is sort of like the awakening of the conscience. High ranking officials seem that they hide their faults and errors and show off their badges that they earned. In the bible, the 10 comandments says thou shall not kill, that many officers nowadays don't get to follow. When does their conscience finally awakens and they agree to stop killing? Never, you can't expect people to change. People often continue with what they're doing no matter what you do to try to get them to change.

I believe that God loves us despite the fact that we're terribly flawed. Look at King David who God loved especially based upon Scripture. He stole another man's wife when immensely powerful and could have had almost any unavailable woman. And on top of that then tries to have him killed by intentionally sending into the thick of battle.

And to be sure, with mental illness, there are many who suffer from antisocial personality disorder, and so if they're in a position of power: a pastor, a physician, a lawyer, a politician, a law enforcement officer, a soldier...then they can commit horrors with some impunity.

We can't change our essential nature. Try as we might, regardless of reading about some noble person or attempting to emulate them, then we return to the desire to be like our old self. It's a constant struggle. At least from mainstream Christianity, then we're supposed to be constantly dying to self. That act of humility especially in altruism and coupled with emulating Christ, then hopefully makes us be better people.

A Christian and a nonbeliever are probably indistinguishable based upon behavior. Many Christians because of work and their own selfish concerns can't or won't change but rather return to trying to be who they were before conversion. That goes for myself.

Thankfully grace and the ability to ask forgiveness and maturity hopefully results in refraining from natural and childish behavior.

Here's an interesting passage in Christianity:
18A certain ruler asked him, “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

19“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone.20You know the commandments: ‘You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.’a ”

21“All these I have kept since I was a boy,” he said.

22When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

23When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was very wealthy. 24Jesus looked at him and said, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!25Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

26Those who heard this asked, “Who then can be saved?”

27Jesus replied, “What is impossible with man is possible with God.”

28Peter said to him, “We have left all we had to follow you!”

29“Truly I tell you,” Jesus said to them, “no one who has left home or wife or brothers or sisters or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God30will fail to receive many times as much in this age, and in the age to come eternal life.” Luke 18:18-29

We neither know what is good, or really choose to do good. Jesus tells us that only Yahweh is GOOD. It's impossible to be good enough based upon our natural response. Our works are not enough unless we die to self. In this case, his disciples needed to give up everything. Elsewhere we know that not all must do that. It's extremely difficult. For a time, I did make that sacrifice, and let me tell you, it's scary to do so.

I was not good or more moral for doing so, but walking in faith and in humility.

Regarding law enforcement, the changes in American poltics post-911 and the Patriot Acts and the increasing militarization of law enforcement have created a nightmarish situation. There are ride along programs. You might want to witness just how difficult their job is as well as befriend them, for they know incredibly high rates of divorce and alcoholism too.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The evolution of the eye without the a divine creator has been thoroughly done before by people infinitely more qualified to answer the question than you or I crackerbox.

Just because you turn a blind eye to the explanation doesn't mean the explanation isn't satisfactory or inferior to the 'god must've done it' argument. (bad pun intended)

You are ready to rail against everyone else for failing to listen to the word of god but methinks you are just as guilty as failing to listen to us. Or anyone else that goes against the fundamentalist worldview.

 

[Borachio]

I challenge you to attempt to persuade a person online who is of an ardent belief to alter it to believe what you believe. Then actually get evidence that they did change by your words. It's so remote as to be nearly impossible.

Let's take a book from a library. I choose to read it. Maybe I have questions and longings and I've heard that it might persuade me. Even then, I surely began the process by assuming that the book had some authority.

Do people read the Bible and on their own come to believe? I doubt this. The typical path of conversion comes about by the catalyst of shared human experience coupled with reading the Bible and dwelling within the community of believers, and serious study of the Bible with commentaries, and with altruism.

Just reading words isn't an effective way to spread an idea. Some seed was there and reading words within affirm or deny what we believe. We either say, "Oh this book is ridiculous. What a waste of time." or we say, "Well I knew it all along...." but then by reading the Bible even the next day have doubts as to its veracity.

It's not enough to persuade, and anonymous Internet post are especially unconvincing because there are really strange people on the Internet. The prevalence of people with antisocial personality disorder (sociopaths is the old word) is rather high on the Internet. As such, anyone can be anybody on the Internet and so roleplay whatever, and intentionally just waste time trolling to catch a bite. Think most people don't comment at all, but think of the very high number of posts that are intentionally used to cause a reaction, and then continue to read those folks posts and discern whether it then becomes increasingly sadistic.

Do you think I'm new to internet forums, then?

Anyway, I was going to ask you how old you are. You've said you're very old. But I wonder what that means.

For me, someone who's 90 is old. So "very old" is what? Late 90s? Older?

You don't give the impression of someone of that age though.

So what is it? Some people consider themselves old at 70. So perhaps you're in your late 70s?

I don't know. It could be anything.

From the way you write I'd say you're late forties. But that's only a rough guess. You could be very much younger.

I really don't think you're any great age (though who knows?). You don't seem to have acquired any of the calm of old age.

Are you a really rather jittery old man, then?