this is quite a long post, i hope you don't mind bisqwit. otherwise you can move it to the religion thread.
Baxter wrote:
He could speak to every person directly... that would probably clear up a lot of things.
does god not speak to all of us directly through prayer? or are people just talking to themselves? or does it even matter, because the bible says: 'ye are gods'. i think... to follow god just means to follow our heart. moses said that god had written the law in our hearts.
if you study all religions, many things will clear up.
AQwertyZ wrote:
in golden sun: lost age, the earth is flat. that was one of the coolest things in the game, but i don't believe that the earth is flat. what i meant with the statement is just that we shouldn't believe everything we hear. just because we read that we use 100% of our brain doesn't mean it's true (whatever it even means..)
you also shouldn't take everything i say seriously... for example, i posted the videos about ben stein and venomfangx because i think they're funny. i'm still half-serious about the venomfangx and i think he has some good points. materialism can be a depressive philosophy.
Sorry for the rant but I get so annoyed when someone simultaneously denies science and uses a computer that owes its very existence to science.
science is a great thing, but that doesn't mean everything the mainstream science accepts is true (ie. materialism) and everything they reject is false (ie. spiritualism). if you know a lot about science i find it a little strange that you wouldn't accept the possibility that gravity and electro-magnetism are the same since scientists have been trying to unify those forces for quite some time. it'll be interesting to see what the LHC can do about it.
theories don't have to be philosophically correct for us to be able to use them for predicting and inventing things. if gravity is electromagnetism, it changes nothing about the way computers work. and if 'gravity' is ether instead of space curvature, einstein's model of gravity can still make accurate predictions.
evidence is not the same as fact. there is no direct evidence for macroevolution for example, there is just indirect evidence and theories based on assumptions about observations and experiments. same with cosmic evolution (big bang), except that's even more far-fetched.
science constantly evolves and changes. today's theories might be 'fairytales' after 10,000 years. people sometimes say: "science comes closer and closer to the 'truth'. so even if the scientific theories constantly change we still have reason to believe them because they're the best we have so far."
but there is another source of information: the so called 'fairytales'. myths and religions. religion is the 'opposite' of science. while science constantly changes, religion doesn't change so much. and i think the reason they don't change is because they have already reached the goal of science... they have reached absolute truth. well... not exactly, but it sounded cool xD
it's funny because i used to believe in scientific theories when i was an atheist, and i used to laugh at ancient myths as if they were fairytales. but 'through his wounds' i was awakened.
if you're so interested about me and my beliefs and reasoning, check out this page because it reflects my beliefs quite accurately: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/Bisqwit wrote:
I know deep in my heart, that God exists -- this is called circular reasoning,
sometimes, to understand the world we have to use circular reasoning because the world is circular. "God is a circle whose center is everywhere and circumference nowhere." -- Voltaire
I don't think mainstream science accepts materialism as "truth". It is just that the point of science is to explain things that can be explained without the supernatural. Also, I think you are wrong about how compelling the evidence for (macro)evolution and the big bang actually is. That being said, I'd like to apologize for being rude. It is definitely a good idea to consider the philosophical implications of scientific theories. Scientists still don't agree on how to interpret quantum mechanics, for example. I also agree that it is not a good idea to just believe what scientists say. Instead, one should follow their reasoning as best as possible and see how exactly they came to their conclusion. But, it is important to keep in mind that scientists are in competition and would love to disprove each other's theories if they could. Science is very rigorous.
Also, I'd like to apologize to Bisqwit for posting things completely off-topic from the purpose of this thread.
Joined: 11/11/2006
Posts: 1235
Location: United Kingdom
Hi Bisqwit.
What Operating System do you use on your server? I assume it is Linux, in which case; what distro? Did you install anything extra to aid in your configuring/interfacing with it such as X? What would you suggest as a Linux distro for someone such as me to host an internal server for the house?
<adelikat> I am annoyed at my irc statements ending up in forums & sigs
I had such a server running once and installed Gentoo Linux on it. Clearly I can't recommend it for something that should be set up in a matter of hours (not days (it was a 1.2GHz Celeron)). Maybe Debian Linux or openSuSE might be something for you. I did not install anything graphical. The only way to work with on machine was to connect to it via SSH (PuTTy is an excellent client for Windows, in case you're looking for one).
Hi Bisqwit.
What Operating System do you use on your server? I assume it is Linux, in which case; what distro? Did you install anything extra to aid in your configuring/interfacing with it such as X? What would you suggest as a Linux distro for someone such as me to host an internal server for the house?
Bisqwit uses Debian to my knowledge. I don't think Bisqwit has X installed on his server. Though I'm sure he does on his personal machines.
Build a man a fire, warm him for a day,
Set a man on fire, warm him for the rest of his life.
Joined: 4/20/2005
Posts: 2161
Location: Norrköping, Sweden
Dear Bisqwit,
What countries have you been to, besides Finland? (I can only think of USA at the moment) Which one did you like the most? Is there any country that you would like to visit one day that you haven't already?
Well, it's... kind of discriminating, isn't it?
I mean, books have to be written in a language. Big old God himself made us speak (and thus, probably, read and write) different languages. I don't fancy the thought of a benevolent God saying "you can't read THE BIG BOOK ON TRUTH AND JUSTICE because I made you that way."
The whole different language thing was meant to be a punishment, right? Tower of Babel and all that. Still, the fact that he would render some (most) people unable to read the book 'naturally' is a little odd, yes.
Dear Bisqwit,
What countries have you been to, besides Finland? (I can only think of USA at the moment) Which one did you like the most? Is there any country that you would like to visit one day that you haven't already?
Aside from Finland, Sweden(Skellefteå), Russia(St. Petersburg), Estonia(Tallinn), Austria(Wien, Mürzzugschlag, Semmering) and USA(New York).
I think I liked Austria best. But each visit has been such short and localized that it's really hard to tell.
I'm not a very travelly person, but I suppose there are two countries I'd like to visit, those being Japan and Israel.
I am bored, therefore:
Do you have any particular (NES) game you would like to see a Lua script for? And if so, what kind?
I've been wanting to do requests for a while but I only know of a limited subset of games; taking a request like this may help out somewhat. :|
As for books, God really gave only two stone tablets :)
The books comprising Bible, are written by humans who have been inspired by God in various ways.
In many cases, such as Peter's letters, the four gospels, or the book of Ezra, those are the disciple's own words with which they are telling about the great things God has done. In other words, they are witness accounts. Some people believe that even the writing of those witness accounts have been influenced by God, who has given them the power to remember long speeches and who has given the wordings that convey most of the meaning, but this is debatable.
Some books are also the disciple's own words, but they're not witness accounts. Such books include the Proverbs, and the Psalms. It is generally believed that the information in these books is inspired by God, not because they want to tell what they've seen, but because they have a message on their heart that they really want to tell to people. In the case of Proverbs, the message is about wisdom that lets one live a live that is full of love and devoid of sin. In the case of the Psalms, it is about worshipping God; poetic recollections of the writers' feelings towards God.
In a few other cases, such as the books of Isaiah or Micah, it is not the writer's own thoughts, but more like a dictation of what the prophet believes they received straight from God. Sometimes, the prophet describes the vision in their own words, and sometimes, the text just quotes the prophetic message verbatim, as clearly as the prophet can hear it.
The books of Moses, i.e. the first 5 books of the Torah, are special. Nobody knows for certain who wrote them, but they describe events of very long spans of time, surpassing any human's lifetime, so naturally they cannot be witness accounts of a single person. Most of the information, especially the primeval history (creation and all that), probably originates from oral tradition and/or words received by prophets. At some point, the words were written down, and those writings started to comprise the Torah. As they were written down, their Hebrew language form became locked, and has been copied precisely to this day.
Hmm, I kind of lost the 'red line' in this post. I guess my point is that too much focus is put on the precise letter, and the language, of the Bible. Though it is true that the closer you get to the original representation, the more meaning you will be able to extract from it, what really matters is the message that is represented.
The whole Bible revolves around God. Whether it is prophetic message that is there to guide us, or whether it is words of wisdom that are there to guide us, or whether it is witness accounts that are there to guide us, it all tells us about what kind of God our creator is, and what he is to us and what are we to him.
Every devout follower of the Messiah of Israel is a part of the Bible, even when their words are not written in that book. The God that was then, is now, and will always be, and what he means for us and what we hopefully feel in return, is always the same. The Bible is a guide towards living with God, and a source of spiritual strength for those who do. Not the words in a particular language, but the overall witness statement and wisdom it represents ― whether it is spoken out loud, read, gestured, or transmitted in bits.
See, this is what's so unfair.
Everything can be bent to say "it's God's will", so nothing will ever work against him. The bible is translated? The translator recieved help from God to translate it accurately. To give a quote from Ender's Shadow:
"So God ses wicked people as his tools."
"God gives us the freedom to do great evil, if we choose. Then he uses his own freedom to create goodness out of that evil, for that is what he chooses."
"So in the long run, God always wins."
"Yes."
Everything can be bent to say "it's God's will", so nothing will ever work against him.
Would you expect an omnipotent being be vulnerable to something? :)
Not everything in the world is God's will, but as you quoted, in the long run, God always wins.
But when you can be on the winner's side and you realize that hey, that's actually real, that's something.
Thereby I strongly disagree with your calling God a "Mary Sue". It's not an ideological collection of people's dreams, but something quite real. The praises in the Psalms are not wishful thinking; they're the genuine feelings of people who have experienced God's actions. And that same theme goes throughout the Bible. Whether it's in words of praise, or simply telling what happened.
And for the record, not all Bible translations are that accurate. It is even a common opinion among Finnish believers that the 1992 Finnish translation of the Bible does not even come close to being accurate, and it has been rejected in favor of the older, 1933/1938 translation ― though the church organization, which led the translation project, still favors it. Some denominations even favor the yet older version from the 1700s.
In my opinion, the 1933/1938 translation also has its lacks, but at least it doesn't conflict with its own word.
Do some final fantasy scripts. Drops, randomization, prediction. That should keep you busy :)
The problem with this is that those would likely change every frame and wouldn't be easily figured out within moments unless I had somebody else inform me of where the addresses were. :P
Add to this that Lua is lagged by one frame and you have a problem. :|
I just want to be sure I understand what you're saying here. Things can happen that are contrary to the will of God?
What do you think sin is then?
But even though sin happens in the small scale, sin does not pervail. God's will still wins in the grand scale :)
Things happening that God does not like, does not mean that the world is slipping out of his control and that he's watching helplessly. God has always been clear to guide the human by telling what he thinks is best, but the choice is with the human. But unlike today's parents, he keeps guiding people -- rewarding those who follow his will, and punishing those who don't. Eventually, all of those who chose to follow him, will be able to join his place and fully enjoy everything he can offer for all eternity, in a new, non-degrading body that is not subject to the same laws of physics as we are here, and all of those who chose to reject him, will be eternally separated from him together with the rest of those who chose to live in sin, including the spiritual beings that were cast out before the creation of humans, in the place that was prepared for punishing those spiritual beings (demons) for all eternity.
I just want to be sure I understand what you're saying here. Things can happen that are contrary to the will of God?
What do you think sin is then?
But even though sin happens in the small scale, sin does not pervail. God's will still wins in the grand scale :)
Things happening that God does not like, does not mean that the world is slipping out of his control and that he's watching helplessly. God has always been clear to guide the human by telling what he thinks is best, but the choice is with the human. But unlike today's parents, he keeps guiding people -- rewarding those who follow his will, and punishing those who don't. Eventually, all of those who chose to follow him, will be able to join his place and fully enjoy everything he can offer for all eternity, in a new, non-degrading body that is not subject to the same laws of physics as we are here, and all of those who chose to reject him, will be eternally separated from him together with the rest of those who chose to live in sin, including the spiritual beings that were cast out before the creation of humans, in the place that was prepared for punishing those spiritual beings (demons) for all eternity.
This post made remembered me a lot of this youtube movie http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=urlTBBKTO68
It depicts God as a cloud, and is being outreasoned... so it might be offensive to you. This is not my intention at all, so if you are, then feel free to ignore or delete this post.
I do think it makes some valid points, and I was wondering what you think about the points that are being made (In particular the question "What would happen if all good persons would go to heaven?").
I was also wondering what assumptions about God were made in this movie that you disagree with (besides obvious things like how he is being depicted).
A question I've been meaning to ask my religious friend is: Does God invite sin, and if so, why?
Eating pork, for example. Jewish believe that God will punish them for eating an unclean animal. If God didn't want this, wouldn't He have made it completely impossible for humanity to eat pork, rather than giving a choice?
After all, God created man because he wanted to, implying that He likes us.
Since heaven is good for us, and since He likes us, He must also want us to go to heaven. Then why does He make it possible for us to go to hell?
And why are we responsible for ourselves to Him if He created us? If I were to build a (somewhat faulty) robot, I wouldn't punish the robot every time something didn't work; I'd fix it myself.
More like, the faulty robot has a freedom of choice to break itself (by losing balance and falling, for instance) here, and you'll be fixing it.
Feel free to add metaphors.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
Baxter> I'll watch that video later today when I have time (i.e. when I can playback sound without bothering people around me).
Swedishmartin wrote:
A question I've been meaning to ask my religious friend is: Does God invite sin, and if so, why?
Eating pork, for example. Jewish believe that God will punish them for eating an unclean animal. If God didn't want this, wouldn't He have made it completely impossible for humanity to eat pork, rather than giving a choice?
After all, God created man because he wanted to, implying that He likes us.
Since heaven is good for us, and since He likes us, He must also want us to go to heaven. Then why does He make it possible for us to go to hell?
The thing about "freedom of choice", I suppose, is that it's not really a freedom of choice if you remove all the choices :)
We cannot be creative and feel having accomplished something, if we don't have a choice any other way.
Even in the Heaven, where according to the Revelations, no sad things exist, people still have a choice, and they have differences. But the people who go there, have already learned to trust and follow God, and furthermore, they will be taught there and the godly joy that we have here in bits, will be full there, so sin is not likely to be reintroduced there.
In this world, there are many things that can be abused. For example, alcohol. God created the wine fruit, and intended it to be used as nourishment and as an ingredient for refreshing drinks. Wine is a very important part of the Jewish culture, appearing in many celebrations set in the Bible. It is not an abomination per se. However, humans should exercise moderation in its use: some wine makes people happy and more open, but too much wine makes people foul and likely to do stupid things they'll regret later, i.e. sin.
Similarly, various other things were created for various other purposes. The stinging nettle, for example, has medical uses.
God gave the human a lot of responsibility and the wisdom to use it, and the ability to do our own choices. So yes, we are responsible for ourselves to Him.
That was honestly a much better answer than I expected! :) (But don't get me wrong, I don't think you're an idiot or something)
Bisqwit wrote:
In this world, there are many things that can be abused. For example, alcohol. God created the wine fruit, and intended it to be used as nourishment and as an ingredient for refreshing drinks. Wine is a very important part of the Jewish culture, appearing in many celebrations set in the Bible. It is not an abomination per se. However, humans should exercise moderation in its use: some wine makes people happy and more open, but too much wine makes people foul and likely to do stupid things they'll regret later, i.e. sin.
Yes, but what about the things that are all bad? Such as heroin?
