"Annoying" Philosophical Questions
- Thread starter Left
- Start date
- Oct 28, 2006
- 21,291
- 10,016
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
I appreciate the video, but I'm not personally having a problem with the question itself. My irritation is that I get tired of hearing skeptics ask it.
Does this clear up why I answered the OP the way I did?
Yep, personally I would like to reply as well as Hovine did in the video, but that's out of my league.
Upvote
0
1) Why did God allow Satan to fool the whole world but then consign his unknowing children to Hell for following his misguidance?
2) If Jesus spent 3+ years preaching and teaching his original gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven to the Jews, why do we call rejecting that gospel and killing Jesus on the cross, the gospel?
Upvote
0
Because Buddhism is a religion without a God. They contemplate the effect without acknowledging the cause.
Upvote
0
- Mar 2, 2017
- 2,277
- 3,110
- 37
- Country
- Sweden
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Celibate
As do atheists. I used to do that as well, but today, I no longer understand how that even works in the mind of others.
Upvote
0
Philosophical Questions are moot points. Since, the answers are beyond science. They are all annoying and at the same time interesting.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Mar 27, 2017
- 126
- 35
- 34
- Country
- Israel
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
I actually wrote a theory that answered this question."Who made God?"
and started and started a tread about it named "theory of elements and change". a day or 2 ago.
in
theory of elements and change
the main part is:
The theory is that our reality or the part of reality we are aware of.
Is made of at list 2 eternal elements, and at list one eternal principal.
The first element is the one that is not changing.
its what gives the meaning to things. so I called it the meaning element.
Things that are of the meaning element need to be in a specific way to be them.
for example: Possibilities, concepts, definitions, rules/laws, and also ideas and emotions, but not what we fill; the meaning of them.
The theory presumes that everything always existed in the form of meaning element existence.
The second element is the one that experience changes. so I called it the changing element. it has no meaning by itself. but it becomes things according to the meaning of things of the meaning element.
the one principle is, that the changing element constantly experience changes according to the meaning of things that are of the meaning element. but only according to some things. at any given situation.
For example:
You can break a chair, right. But you can't break the idea of a chair, or the possibility of something that a human can seat on that is not very much bigger than a human. It’s just not something changeable in my opinion.
Ideas and other things, of the meaning element can effect the changing element. like the idea that you need to wake up tomorrow, can cause that you will put an alarm, to wake up.
And the law of gravity pulls objects together and all the other laws of physics also work all the time to make things happen. But they are of the second element, because they are laws, they don't have weight or size or shape or color or speed, and so on... only meaning.
But not all the things from the second element can affect everything or even anything from the first one, all the time or at all.
For example:
If I or you, take some papers, and start writing imaginary laws of physics, like for example that the weight of an object is determined by how green it is, And that once a week the universe turns into a huge hamburger.
The laws described on those papers will not actually be applied on everything that is of physical existence, as the laws of physics are, and will not cause that this things will happen.
But the laws of physics on the other hand, do actually determine what everything that is of physical existence (mater, energy, time, space, light, antimatter, and more), must do.
Another example: the possibility of using electricity is constantly affecting the reality these days. But the possibility of conquering the world, while using only cucumbers as a weapon is not.
Because the first one is relevant to the current reality and the other one is not.
so for those reasons I said that the one principle is, that things which are of the changing element constantly experience changes according to the meaning of meaning elements things.
but only according to some things. at any given situation.
The theory is that in the beginning of our reality. GOD, only existed in the meaning element, like everything else (the possibility of him existed).
Then, the one principle started to work.
Which means. That Different meaning element things, that were capable of causing change, upon changing element things, in that situation, did so.
But that resulted in a new situation!.
because they changed the situation.
So in the new situation, Different meaning element things, that were capable of causing change, upon changing element things, in that situation, did so.
But that resulted in a new situation!.
because they changed the situation.
So in the new situation, Different meaning element things, that were capable of causing change, upon changing element things, in that situation, did so.
And so on, and so on.
this process continued on and on, until at some point, something that had a will of his own, and was intelligent, got a chance to make a change, when he did, what he did, was to make the situation so, that only he can be a reason for further change, and so he became GOD.
I don't know have he did that, or what he did afterwards. But apparently it required some thought, because otherwise something non-intelligent would have done that earlier. And he is smart enough to create everything that we know, so he is smart.
One idea is that maybe what he did was to create a situation where each meaning element thing (Possibilities, concepts, definitions, rules/laws, and also ideas and emotions, but not what we fill; the meaning of them. And some other things that also need to be in a specific way to be themselves) has as much influence as the meaning element thing that is the opposite of it in meaning.
For example: yes and no, backwards forwards, growing shrinking, going from a to b and going from b to a, happy and sad, and so on.
But he didn't balance himself.
Why should you believe that this theory is true?
Because it solves this problems that result from the facts in the beginning:
1. How come the laws of physics exist, and are as if they are meant for us?
2. the prophesies and miracles that happened. also the fact yeshua Christ was not crazy.
3. If GOD(yehova) is the answer then how was he created?
The answer to this question must result in something that could actually create almost everything we know, and that might have some reason to do that. Also the answers must make sense, and fit with the facts we knew for surety.
Written by noam burde.
Upvote
0
Na Nach Oi!
Embracing paradoxical thinking
What if my parents don't marry (and then have sex), would "I" exist?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
