Ask a Theist!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 9 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-11-2012, 02:45 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(16-11-2012 02:33 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(16-11-2012 02:28 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  When you're in heaven, will you gloat at the plight of the damned?
No.

I'm pretty sure I won't be aware at the plight of the damned.
You're aware of it now, at least in a theoretical way. Will you forget?

E 2 = (mc 2)2 + (pc )2
614C → 714N + e + ̅νe
2 K(s) + 2 H2O(l) → 2 KOH(aq) + H2 (g) + 196 kJ/mol
It works, bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2012, 03:23 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(16-11-2012 02:45 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  
(16-11-2012 02:33 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  No.

I'm pretty sure I won't be aware at the plight of the damned.
You're aware of it now, at least in a theoretical way. Will you forget?
Don't really know.

The Bible states that there will be no more suffering of any kind. Knowing that others are hurting can be a type of suffering.

Whether or not we have earthly memories in our glorified bodies is still unclear, but it is clear that we will not have any pain or suffering and we will be praising God for eternity.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2012, 03:28 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(16-11-2012 10:22 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(15-11-2012 10:25 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  There is no "need" for Christ, seeing as he is an all powerful being, such as there is no need for sin. He could make the would perfect and still have Christ sacrifice himself. Such as the will of the being.

Thus, the simple truth is, God WANTED sin, not NEEDED sin. He wanted suffering, and death, and pitiless extermination of people's that we can not judge, nor condemn for they are unknown to us.

Christ is not bound by sin, and he doesn't NEED sin, for he is all powerful.

Thus, I dare say that you have to admit that Christ could still have the same purpose and endgame even if the world IS PERFECT because God can make it so.

KC, scripture can't be relative to the person because it is not the persons perspective, but the perspective God instilled in him/her, and planned for it. A human has no responsibility for anything, and that include views on the bible.

When talking about an allpowerful God, there is no such thing as NEED.
No, there is no "need". I used these words for simplicity's sake. You like to argue semantics a lot.

The plan was always there. Just like God. The plan wasn't "created". It always was - because God is infinite and infinite in knowledge - so His plan had to be as well. There was no "need" because it just "was". When dealing with infinity, the perspective of events has to change.

Does that make sense?
You haven't addressed my point as to why the plan includes suffering when it easily could exclude it and remain intact.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2012, 03:33 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(16-11-2012 03:23 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(16-11-2012 02:45 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  You're aware of it now, at least in a theoretical way. Will you forget?
Don't really know.

The Bible states that there will be no more suffering of any kind. Knowing that others are hurting can be a type of suffering.

Whether or not we have earthly memories in our glorified bodies is still unclear, but it is clear that we will not have any pain or suffering and we will be praising God for eternity.
So god can edit your memories to make you forget unpleasant things? And you're cool with that?

E 2 = (mc 2)2 + (pc )2
614C → 714N + e + ̅νe
2 K(s) + 2 H2O(l) → 2 KOH(aq) + H2 (g) + 196 kJ/mol
It works, bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2012, 03:34 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(16-11-2012 03:28 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(16-11-2012 10:22 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  No, there is no "need". I used these words for simplicity's sake. You like to argue semantics a lot.

The plan was always there. Just like God. The plan wasn't "created". It always was - because God is infinite and infinite in knowledge - so His plan had to be as well. There was no "need" because it just "was". When dealing with infinity, the perspective of events has to change.

Does that make sense?
You haven't addressed my point as to why the plan includes suffering when it easily could exclude it and remain intact.
It includes suffering because of sin.

As to why He planned it like that, I don't know. I don't know the full intent of His plan.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2012, 03:34 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(16-11-2012 10:22 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(15-11-2012 10:25 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  There is no "need" for Christ, seeing as he is an all powerful being, such as there is no need for sin. He could make the would perfect and still have Christ sacrifice himself. Such as the will of the being.

Thus, the simple truth is, God WANTED sin, not NEEDED sin. He wanted suffering, and death, and pitiless extermination of people's that we can not judge, nor condemn for they are unknown to us.

Christ is not bound by sin, and he doesn't NEED sin, for he is all powerful.

Thus, I dare say that you have to admit that Christ could still have the same purpose and endgame even if the world IS PERFECT because God can make it so.

KC, scripture can't be relative to the person because it is not the persons perspective, but the perspective God instilled in him/her, and planned for it. A human has no responsibility for anything, and that include views on the bible.

When talking about an allpowerful God, there is no such thing as NEED.
No, there is no "need". I used these words for simplicity's sake. You like to argue semantics a lot.

The plan was always there. Just like God. The plan wasn't "created". It always was - because God is infinite and infinite in knowledge - so His plan had to be as well. There was no "need" because it just "was". When dealing with infinity, the perspective of events has to change.

Does that make sense?
I like words to be used properly, and if you feel comfortable using need, you need to explain what you are using it. As need is different from what you are implying.

It is not my job to clarify your message KC, you need to make it so that people understand that you know God can't NEED.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2012, 03:35 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(16-11-2012 03:33 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  
(16-11-2012 03:23 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Don't really know.

The Bible states that there will be no more suffering of any kind. Knowing that others are hurting can be a type of suffering.

Whether or not we have earthly memories in our glorified bodies is still unclear, but it is clear that we will not have any pain or suffering and we will be praising God for eternity.
So god can edit your memories to make you forget unpleasant things? And you're cool with that?
When dealing with eternity? Absolutely.

I don't want to know, feel, or experience anything unpleasant for all eternity.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2012, 03:37 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(16-11-2012 03:34 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(16-11-2012 03:28 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  You haven't addressed my point as to why the plan includes suffering when it easily could exclude it and remain intact.
It includes suffering because of sin.

As to why He planned it like that, I don't know. I don't know the full intent of His plan.
But God could simply make all sin not affect anybody BUT yourself, or nobody at all.

There is no need for suffering, even if there is sin.

Sounds like your God is a Sadist, and yes, of the most extreme kind because he is responsible for everything bad, and I mean everything. He is the worst kind of monster, and he should be shunned, and abandoned because his plan is filled with hardships that need not to be there in the first place.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Atothetheist's post
16-11-2012, 03:39 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(16-11-2012 03:34 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(16-11-2012 10:22 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  No, there is no "need". I used these words for simplicity's sake. You like to argue semantics a lot.

The plan was always there. Just like God. The plan wasn't "created". It always was - because God is infinite and infinite in knowledge - so His plan had to be as well. There was no "need" because it just "was". When dealing with infinity, the perspective of events has to change.

Does that make sense?
I like words to be used properly, and if you feel comfortable using need, you need to explain what you are using it. As need is different from what you are implying.

It is not my job to clarify your message KC, you need to make it so that people understand that you know God can't NEED.
Fair enough.

But basing an argument on word usage isn't very desirable.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2012, 03:45 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(16-11-2012 03:39 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(16-11-2012 03:34 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  I like words to be used properly, and if you feel comfortable using need, you need to explain what you are using it. As need is different from what you are implying.

It is not my job to clarify your message KC, you need to make it so that people understand that you know God can't NEED.
Fair enough.

But basing an argument on word usage isn't very desirable.
I was merely making a point, not an argument. I know that if I did make an argument out of it it would be useless because you do not pin the highly laughable title of Omnibelevolence on the Deity you worship.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: