Does God have the right to take away one's life?

 
  • What?

    I've changed my opinion about everything. This post is old and my new views are way cooler. Can't wait to change them again.
  • Learning how to read

    VampyreAngel said:
    Forever. But then someone ate an apple.
    I don't think God promised any length specifically, but the punishment for eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil was death (although people lived for several hundred years after that, still), so it is safe to assume they would have lived forever had they not eaten the apple.

    Meshuggah: "A combination of the powerful and the avant-garde, the band is as visceral and imposing an act as you’ll ever see and hear, guitarists Fredrik Thordendal, Mårten Hagström, and bassist Dick Lövgren hammering out lurching, monolithic riffs as they headbang in robotic unison, vocalist Jens Kidman barking out surreal verses like a twisted drill sergeant while gesticulating like a puppet on strings. - Adrien Begrand (PopMatters)
    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 28 Jul 2009, 21:36
    Idk that tree of knowledge thing is kinda weird. im a little skeptical about it, why would God create a tree with apples that he knows would just be tempting to adam and eve, kinda dumb. Also why doesnt he just say, "eh its ok you can just eat the apple, not a big deal" when they ate it. Sort of like with the sins thing, instead of sending Jesus for some symbolic thing, why didnt He just say, oh i forgive your sins. When my girlfriends cheat on me, id say its ok. I wouldnt take my child and throw him into a pit of lions to forgive her when i can just say, oh its ok.

  • SOMEONE MAKES ANY SENSE IN HERE!

  • Zman27 said:
    Idk that tree of knowledge thing is kinda weird. im a little skeptical about it, why would God create a tree with apples that he knows would just be tempting to adam and eve, kinda dumb. Also why doesnt he just say, "eh its ok you can just eat the apple, not a big deal" when they ate it. Sort of like with the sins thing, instead of sending Jesus for some symbolic thing, why didnt He just say, oh i forgive your sins. When my girlfriends cheat on me, id say its ok. I wouldnt take my child and throw him into a pit of lions to forgive her when i can just say, oh its ok.


    haha, nice example

    Do not go gentle into that good night.
    Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
  • Waldheri said:
    (although people lived for several hundred years after that, still), so it is safe to assume they would have lived forever had they not eaten the apple.
    Troubling as it may sound, it doesn't end here. Don't try to interpret Genesis 1 without looking at the books all the way to Revelation. What I mean is that life is a word that bears two meaning in the Scriptures. It can either be a reference to spiritual or biological life.

    I've changed my opinion about everything. This post is old and my new views are way cooler. Can't wait to change them again.
  • Zman27 said:
    Idk that tree of knowledge thing is kinda weird. im a little skeptical about it, why would God create a tree with apples that he knows would just be tempting to adam and eve, kinda dumb. Also why doesnt he just say, "eh its ok you can just eat the apple, not a big deal" when they ate it. Sort of like with the sins thing, instead of sending Jesus for some symbolic thing, why didnt He just say, oh i forgive your sins. When my girlfriends cheat on me, id say its ok. I wouldnt take my child and throw him into a pit of lions to forgive her when i can just say, oh its ok.
    Oh, the belief that God was angry and killed Jesus so that He would save us from a burning place where He would send us later? Yeah. Well, WESTERN ALERT!
    -CALVINISM ALERT! What would have happened if there was no choice at all, but you would be doomed to live with God, even though not willing to? Although I personally consider the fruit's consumption a bad move, I do consider its existence better than not having free will at all and be a lifeless puppet. There is a choice, we are free.
    -CATHOLICISM ALERT! Yeah, He already forgave Adam (I hope) for eating the fruit. The problem is that our connection (Grace and communion) is temporary out of services (sin in general). He (Jesus Christ) is right in front of your doorstep to fix that problem. Are you willing to open the door, so that the repairman can come in? His sacrifice was not made in order to take away our sins (God could forgive people even BC).
    -SAINT ALERT! Good job for forgiving your girlfriends! :-)

    I've changed my opinion about everything. This post is old and my new views are way cooler. Can't wait to change them again.
  • Cool story bro

    I'm the operator, with my pocket calculator
  • Vanilla-villa said:
    Cool story bro
    Which story? And which bro?

    I've changed my opinion about everything. This post is old and my new views are way cooler. Can't wait to change them again.
    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 10 Aug 2009, 01:37
    Haha thanks for replying. Its cool to hear other people's opinions on the matter. But i dont really get what you were saying, gray fox. so what was jesus' purpose if it wasnt to forgive our sins? I have my own opinions but what is yours?

  • Why don't you ask Jesus?

    John 3:16
    For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

    Personally, I see Christ's Incarnation as a way to develop a better relationship with God, it's easier when He's so close to mankind. Also, Jesus' ways are a true example, He's a true archetype.

    I seriously don't know why Catholics and Protestants chose to change those fundamental doctrines of the Early Church and pose God as an angry boogie man who killed his Son in order to forgive people.

    I've changed my opinion about everything. This post is old and my new views are way cooler. Can't wait to change them again.
  • The answer to the question at the start of thread is really a very simple one. If the Bible is wrong then hey it doesn't matter, He doesn't exist anyway. You can go your sweet, merry, sinful way.

    But if the Bible is truth then God is the sole, eternal, infinite, immortal, unchanging, all powerful and all knowing being who is outside of space and time and created the cosmos. As He created you, he has every right to decide when you are born and when you die. He also has every right to judge you and send you to Heaven or Hell. He isn't immoral in doing any of this - without him there are no morals. To claim that God is immoral is use Christian logic to say that Christianity is nonsense.

    Death in the first place was a result of man's rebellion against God - you know, that attitude where you, a mere mortal, shake your fist at God for daring to tell you what to do, ultimately hiding your head in the sand, pretending that he doesn't exist. That rebellion is called sin and it is what sends people to Hell.

    So it depends on whichever one you believe. I KNOW that the latter is true.

  • No, you don't "know". You believe.

    and
    without him there are no morals
    Wrong. There may be no absolute, objective morals, but that does not mean there are NO morals. False dichotomy.

    Please read the morality thread before continuing.

    There's no problem a few frag grenades can't fix.

    Cookies for Godlessness
    My Twin in life, love, mind, and music: ISoS
    The snake that cannot shed its skin perishes. So do the spirits who are prevented from changing their opinions; they cease to be spirit. -Nietzsche
  • Actually, I really do know - I'm not trying to convince you, you'll find out soon enough.

    And I'm glad to see that you're honest enough to admit that without God there are no absolute morals - just various opinions on what is right and wrong.

    Whose opinions are right? Yours? The guy down the street who thinks it's fine to kill kids? Hitler's? Ultimately, without absolutes you get into the "if you believe it, then it's truth for you," which is illogical on so many levels.

    "The statement that "there are no absolutes" is a self-contradictory statement, because it itself expresses an absolute. It is therefore an internal contradiction and thus it cannot be true. "

  • No, you don't know.

    Go read the Morality thread.

    There's no problem a few frag grenades can't fix.

    Cookies for Godlessness
    My Twin in life, love, mind, and music: ISoS
    The snake that cannot shed its skin perishes. So do the spirits who are prevented from changing their opinions; they cease to be spirit. -Nietzsche
  • Actually, I really do know - I'm not trying to convince you, you'll find out soon enough.
    You really, really don't. Saying that you do only proves so.



    Oh, and no I won't.

    The statement that "there are no absolutes" is a self-contradictory statement, because it itself expresses an absolute. It is therefore an internal contradiction and thus it cannot be true
    There is one absolute: There are no absolutes except this one.
    There, paradox solved.

    Ultimately, without absolutes you get into the "if you believe it, then it's truth for you," which is illogical on so many levels.
    So masking your belief by saying "I know" gets you out of this problem?
    No, not really. You only think it does.

    Do not go gentle into that good night.
    Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
  • There is one absolute: There are no absolutes except this one. There, paradox solved.

    So, the only absolute is that there aren't any absolutes? Errrr....oh yeah, sure, that makes sense!

    Ultimately, without absolutes you get into the "if you believe it, then it's truth for you," which is illogical on so many levels.
    So masking your belief by saying "I know" gets you out of this problem? No, not really. You only think it does.


    My point here was that truth isn't relative, it's true whether you believe it or not, whether you like it or not, or whether you'd much prefer to believe something else

    Actually, you're the one who is believing - I merely apply the laws of mathamatics and say that everything can't come from nothing, that life always comes from life.

    A further reason why I know that God is real (apart from common sense that is) is because I know him. This is a concept which you, judging by what you have said, have no understanding of.

    You're the one who is walking round with blinkers on, ears covered, denying that God exists and religiously believing in a mathamatical impossiblity. I have faith, yes and so do you - except you have a blind faith.

  • Special pleading. Fallacy of single cause. False dichotomy. Lack of reading comprehension. etc.

    Also I did not say there were "no absolutes", but that there is not an "absolute morality"--totally different meaning and implication. Go read the morality thread.



    It is a good idea to use your blinkers, so as not to cause an accident while merging.

    There's no problem a few frag grenades can't fix.

    Cookies for Godlessness
    My Twin in life, love, mind, and music: ISoS
    The snake that cannot shed its skin perishes. So do the spirits who are prevented from changing their opinions; they cease to be spirit. -Nietzsche
  • My point here was that truth isn't relative, it's true whether you believe it or not, whether you like it or not, or whether you'd much prefer to believe something else
    Truth is extremely relative, depending on what you are talking about. Two people moving away of each other at a speed of 0.9c and 0.1c accordingly, have two very different truths concerning time .

    Actually, you're the one who is believing - I merely apply the laws of mathamatics and say that everything can't come from nothing, that life always comes from life.
    1. Mathematics have 0 (zero), nothing whatsoever, absolutely that is, to do with biology, at least at the level you're referring to it.
    1.1. You are the one stating that everything came from nothing. Read your creation myth.
    2. Everything I know about the universe has been proved by science. Everything I believe or consider likely about the universe is withing the boundaries of a scientific theory and there is evidence to support it.
    Everything you think you know is unprovable.
    Bottomline: Learn the meaning of the word "Believe". It's not necessarily a bad thing to believe/have faith, but at least have the courage to admit it isn't knowledge.

    A further reason why I know that God is real (apart from common sense that is) is because I know him
    I'll ignore the common sense defying mentioning of common sense, and make a try to see things your way.
    A further reason why I know that AGHFAADUGH'RAZZSTI, the Alien Overlord who created the warships of BFFFFFSGH'NARNERS is real (apart from common sense that is) is because I know him.
    No, I really do. What, you don't believe me? Why not?
    I'm not being sarcastic. My statement is just as trustworthy as yours. Nor am I saying you're lying. But I may just as well believe in AGHFAADUGH'RAZZSTI (BFFFFFSGH'NARNERS' alphabet only has capital letters)

    You're the one who is walking round with blinkers on, ears covered, denying that God exists and religiously believing in a mathamatical impossiblity. I have faith, yes and so do you - except you have a blind faith.
    *sigh*
    Let me guess. You have absolutely no idea about math, do you? Or maybe you can provide me with an actual mathematical proof of god's existence, instead of just throwing in the words "mathematical impossibility" to make it seem sophisticated.


    PS

    So, the only absolute is that there aren't any absolutes? Errrr....oh yeah, sure, that makes sense!

    That's not even what I said. Read again.
    ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα

    Do not go gentle into that good night.
    Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
  • Ah! Perfect opportunity for me to practice the Platonian definition of truth I learnt today!

    KaP --> P = bscotton knows that god exists --> god exists, fulfilling the critera of:

    a) bscotton believes god exists
    b) god does exist
    c) bscotton got good reasons to believe that god exists (scripture, personal experiences)

    But does this mean that it is TRUE?

    It is true FOR bscotton, but is it true for me?

    KaKaP --> P = I know that bscotton knows (believes) that god exists ---> god exists

    See, this is where it gets tricky. I brought up this example to my teacher and he said that it doesn't hold up because the faith in god is not strong enough just being that, faith, a belief. It is not an absolute truth in such a sense that we can in an absolute manner say the earth is round.

    What Ka does is that it questions the validity for KaP's reasons, or c) which is the final or fulfilling critera for something being true. If I have reason to doubt the final critera, then the logical assumption that P is true fails, using the Platonian definition.

    Since VampyreAngel got good reasons not to believe in c), then c) isn't true and thus, P cannot be true.

    That is using pure logic, that you so gladly cited previously. I did not use relativism, just epistemic logic. And although that both Anath and Vampy are much more well-read on morals and maths than I am, as well as the Christian scripture, even I can tell that you know nothing of what you speak of although you try to make it seem like you do.

    The bottomline being, no, you don't know, you believe. Because the final critera isn't fulfilled. Whether you like it or not. Additionally, if we are in disagreement, one can question the trueness of the statement of knowing god itself, then even just making it simple using the two variables believer vs non-believer.

    Because if the truth was such an objective and absolute truth, even common sense, as you so bluntly put it, then why don't more people believe in YOUR god? Why do some people believe in SOMETHING ELSE than you? Just in the very truth that there are people in disagreement, (if you are going to argue this, well, I can just make another chart to back up my statement) you can simply NOT BE TRUE. But it DOES NOT mean that there is NO truth.

    If you get the difference in what I said in my final sentence, you get a cookie.

  • No absolutes exist, yet an absolute does. It's like a trap card that negates the effects of all other trap cards. That's why Royal Decree says "except for this card's effect".[/yugioh]

    Why would there be an absolute that "there are no absolutes except for this one"?

    VampyreAngel said:
    ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα
    Hey, I can read that thing! Yay!

    I've changed my opinion about everything. This post is old and my new views are way cooler. Can't wait to change them again.
  • Why would there be an absolute that "there are no absolutes except for this one"?
    I never said there is, I just found a way around the paradox mentioned

    Do not go gentle into that good night.
    Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
    • ISoS said...
    • User
    • 4 Sep 2009, 03:46

    Actually, you're the one who is believing - I merely apply the laws of mathamatics and say that everything can't come from nothing, that life always comes from life.


    Ooooh, I'm studying to be a mathematician, can you tell me what theorems, postulates, or corrollaries you've used to prove this concept?

    I used the mathematical application of Infinity to prove your God can't exist, I'd like to see a potential counter proof!

    My other half: Anath
    Read Black/Death Metal reviews here!: Subjected to Metal
  • ISoS said:
    I used the mathematical application of Infinity to prove your God can't exist
    Did you use a science of the material plane to describe the timeless immaterial one?

    I've changed my opinion about everything. This post is old and my new views are way cooler. Can't wait to change them again.
  • Math is abstract and therefore can easily refer to the immaterial and the non-existent, hence the imaginary numbers.

    Do not go gentle into that good night.
    Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Anonymous users may not post messages. Please log in or create an account to post in the forums.