"The Greatest Conceivable Being"

[DogmaHunter]

"Non sequitur" does not mean that there is a missing link in an argument, it means that the conclusion does not follow from the premises and syllogisms.

In other words, there is something missing to link the conclusion to the premises?

 

[DogmaHunter]

They are better parents than those people who continually attempt to shift the burden and blame away from their children onto someone else.

You mean, like punishing a scapegoat and offering the actual guilty eternal bliss?

Oeps....

God is love. God is Holy. God is just.

You keep saying this, but the mythology says otherwise.
A "just" god wouldn't base "consequences" on what individuals believe rather then on how they behave.

These three, among others, necessitate that certain things happen in His world when men reject Him

Only if he is petty.
I unconditionally love my son. There certainly ARE things he could do to make me stop loving him. There certainly ARE things he could do to make me turn my back on him entirely.

However, I cannot imagine ANYTHING he could do, which would make me imprison him in my basement and torture him - not even for a little while - and even feel justified in doing so.

So no, God is greater than a being who would not hold people accountable for what they do.

But your god does NOT hold people accountable for what they DO. He holds people accountable for what they BELIEVE (on very bad evidence).

In your mind, a being who does not hold people accountable and kind of just sits back and has this whole do what you will attitude is one who can "control his own nature". I see no control in that concept of yours. I see apathy.

I see actual love in that.

If I truelly love someone, I'm not going to blackmail that person by threat of untold suffering and torture in order to "force them" to love me back.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Men's pride and "moral and intellectual integrity" keeps them out of heaven my friend. It was what caused Lucifer to lose his place.

So, moral and intellectual integrity are a bad thing. Got it.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Right.

Don't you agree that God would allow people the freedom to choose?

Mafia boss holding a gun: "I want you to pay us for protection. If you refuse, that's fine - you are free to do so... but the consequences thereof will be that I will shoot you in the knee caps and my soldiers will come to your store and set it on fire. Because really, I love you and want you to be safe, which is why I want you to pay us for protection. But you are a free person, you can freely choose not to pay us for protection."

 

[anonymous person]

So, moral and intellectual integrity are a bad thing. Got it.

Not necessarily. Surely you noticed I put the terms in quotation marks. Surely you read the post where I said that the proper use of the intellect is not something I have a problem with. Surely you read the post where I said that the pride that keeps one from admitting their need for a saviour is the pride that goes before a fall. I am very proud of my children when it is appropriate for me to be so, for example.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Reminds me of the Mafia´s protection money policy - with some additional emotionalisms thrown in, for good measure.

That's hilarious....

I swear I didn't read that post before I wrote my previous post in this thread.....

 

[anonymous person]

Mafia boss holding a gun: "I want you to pay us for protection. If you refuse, that's fine - you are free to do so... but the consequences thereof will be that I will shoot you in the knee caps and my soldiers will come to your store and set it on fire. Because really, I love you and want you to be safe, which is why I want you to pay us for protection. But you are a free person, you can freely choose not to pay us for protection."

And that is how you view God. As such, you would not want to spend eternity with Him. For you heaven would be undesirable.

 

[The Cadet]

And that is how you view God. As such, you would not want to spend eternity with Him. For you heaven would be undesirable.

Hardly as undesireable as eternal torture.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Not necessarily. Surely you noticed I put the terms in quotation marks. Surely you read the post where I said that the proper use of the intellect is not something I have a problem with. Surely you read the post where I said that the pride that keeps one from admitting their need for a saviour is the pride that goes before a fall. I am very proud of my children when it is appropriate for me to be so, for example.

I read your religious preaching, yes.
However, I only focused on the things that can actually be related to reality.

 

[DogmaHunter]

And that is how you view God.

No. That's how you presented god in this thread.
I didn't come up with it myself.

Isn't it uncanny that several of us drew that analogy independently of one another in response to your apologetics?

As such, you would not want to spend eternity with Him. For you heaven would be undesirable.

No. To me, eternity in a paradise would be much more desirable then eternal torture.

Just like giving the mafia boss a few hundred bucks would be much more desirable to me then getting my knee caps and business destroyed if that were my only two options.

 

[anonymous person]

Hardly as undesireable as eternal torture.

Heaven would be torturous for such a one.

 

[anonymous person]

I read your religious preaching, yes.
However, I only focused on the things that can actually be related to reality.

The devastating effects of inordinate pride are real. You don't have to be religious to recognize this.

 

[anonymous person]

All of this is beside the point of the OP I think and as much as I would like to discuss this, I will refrain. I want to try and respect quatona and not derail this thread anymore than it had been already. This is more of an apologetics issue anyway.

 

[DogmaHunter]

The devastating effects of inordinate pride are real. You don't have to be religious to recognize this.

Sure, but as I stated, I only consider effects that actually manifest in the real world.

 

[DogmaHunter]

All of this is beside the point of the OP I think and as much as I would like to discuss this, I will refrain. I want to try and respect quatona and not derail this thread anymore than it had been already. This is more of an apologetics issue anyway.

True.

Perhaps you can create a new thread so you can continue to evade responding to questions there

I like the challenge of such discussions.

 

[KCfromNC]

Lol, I asked you to tell him how you determine a being to be superior to another.

I used my subjective judgement and imagination. I think that's pretty consistent with his understanding of the concept. Doesn't do much to help the case for that approach somehow creating a god out of thin air, though.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Not necessarily. Surely you noticed I put the terms in quotation marks. Surely you read the post where I said that the proper use of the intellect is not something I have a problem with. Surely you read the post where I said that the pride that keeps one from admitting their need for a saviour is the pride that goes before a fall. I am very proud of my children when it is appropriate for me to be so, for example.

The problem is that, for you, the only "proper use of the intellect" is to agree with your position. So DogmaHunter hits the nail on the head.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

All of this is beside the point of the OP I think and as much as I would like to discuss this, I will refrain. I want to try and respect quatona and not derail this thread anymore than it had been already. This is more of an apologetics issue anyway.

Good on you. Besides, there are countless other threads in which you could discuss this, such the "Ask a Christian philosopher" thread, which you abandoned. Or any of the other threads you started and abandoned. Take your pick.

 

[anonymous person]

Good on you. Besides, there are countless other threads in which you could discuss this, such the "Ask a Christian philosopher" thread, which you abandoned. Or any of the other threads you started and abandoned. Take your pick.

Actually I couldn't. The thread you referenced is not in the apologetics forum, but the philosophy forum.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Actually I couldn't. The thread you referenced is not in the apologetics forum, but the philosophy forum.

The thread I referenced is an apologetics thread.