As I consider God, its hard for me to consider him needing a place like hell? The Christian concept of eternal hell punishing is a barbaric thing to consider. Why would God need to punish a human for all of eternity. Lets just say a human does not believe in God, and they live that way for 80 years; they die and according to many interpretations of hell , they will be brought back to life; judged, then banished to an eternity of living suffering in this hell.
I mean that punishment does not even fit the crime; 80 years of living, now they must live forever in suffering? Why?
Why would a God even need to do that?
Why would God need a hell?
Moderator: Moderators
Post #951
[Replying to post 941 by mickiel]
We are getting NOWHERE with this.
This is how I see your predicament:
You are saying two things that are completely contradictory.
1. You have 100% confidence in the proposition that a god exists.
2. You don't have 100% confidence in your 100% confidence.
Your 100% confidence isn't 100% confidence.
OK.... and that makes sense to you?
It's 100 or its NOT, mickiel.
You seem to not want or be ABLE to make up your mind.
Sorry, but that makes NO sense to me whatsoever.mickiel wrote: Well I am completely confident about God , its on my end that I am not 100% confident of.
We are getting NOWHERE with this.
Yup. I agree that you are having extreme difficulty with these numbers.mickiel wrote:In example, I know I have been wrong about MY view of things before ; I had to learn I was wrong. I just can't show you this; I mean I have tried, but I am not able to explain it to you in a manner which you can see. That is obvious.
This is how I see your predicament:
You are saying two things that are completely contradictory.
1. You have 100% confidence in the proposition that a god exists.
2. You don't have 100% confidence in your 100% confidence.
Your 100% confidence isn't 100% confidence.
OK.... and that makes sense to you?
It's 100 or its NOT, mickiel.
You seem to not want or be ABLE to make up your mind.
Post #952
Its not that I cannot make up my mind , I just can't make up your understanding of my mind. I am very confident that God exist , but I know how finite I am, my understanding of an infinite God can only go so far. I am 100% that he exist , but I am not 100% able to explain it. If we believe something , we should be able to explain it ; but God is difficult to explain , in my view.Blastcat wrote: [Replying to post 941 by mickiel]
Sorry, but that makes NO sense to me whatsoever.mickiel wrote: Well I am completely confident about God , its on my end that I am not 100% confident of.
We are getting NOWHERE with this.
Yup. I agree that you are having extreme difficulty with these numbers.mickiel wrote:In example, I know I have been wrong about MY view of things before ; I had to learn I was wrong. I just can't show you this; I mean I have tried, but I am not able to explain it to you in a manner which you can see. That is obvious.
This is how I see your predicament:
You are saying two things that are completely contradictory.
1. You have 100% confidence in the proposition that a god exists.
2. You don't have 100% confidence in your 100% confidence.
Your 100% confidence isn't 100% confidence.
OK.... and that makes sense to you?
It's 100 or its NOT, mickiel.
You seem to not want or be ABLE to make up your mind.
Post #953
[Replying to post 943 by mickiel]
WHAT IS IT that you have so much confidence in?... You can't even seem to EXPLAIN what it is you believe in.
How much do you have confidence that it's real?
Seems that that is also hard for you to explain.
I can't say you make a very convincing CASE for your belief.
I have to wonder why you hold on to it, frankly.
Difficult to explain.. for sure.mickiel wrote:Its not that I cannot make up my mind , I just can't make up your understanding of my mind. I am very confident that God exist , but I know how finite I am, my understanding of an infinite God can only go so far. I am 100% that he exist , but I am not 100% able to explain it. If we believe something , we should be able to explain it ; but God is difficult to explain , in my view.Blastcat wrote: [Replying to post 941 by mickiel]
Sorry, but that makes NO sense to me whatsoever.mickiel wrote: Well I am completely confident about God , its on my end that I am not 100% confident of.
We are getting NOWHERE with this.
Yup. I agree that you are having extreme difficulty with these numbers.mickiel wrote:In example, I know I have been wrong about MY view of things before ; I had to learn I was wrong. I just can't show you this; I mean I have tried, but I am not able to explain it to you in a manner which you can see. That is obvious.
This is how I see your predicament:
You are saying two things that are completely contradictory.
1. You have 100% confidence in the proposition that a god exists.
2. You don't have 100% confidence in your 100% confidence.
Your 100% confidence isn't 100% confidence.
OK.... and that makes sense to you?
It's 100 or its NOT, mickiel.
You seem to not want or be ABLE to make up your mind.
WHAT IS IT that you have so much confidence in?... You can't even seem to EXPLAIN what it is you believe in.
How much do you have confidence that it's real?
Seems that that is also hard for you to explain.
I can't say you make a very convincing CASE for your belief.
I have to wonder why you hold on to it, frankly.
Post #954
Blastcat wrote: [Replying to post 943 by mickiel]
Difficult to explain.. for sure.mickiel wrote:Its not that I cannot make up my mind , I just can't make up your understanding of my mind. I am very confident that God exist , but I know how finite I am, my understanding of an infinite God can only go so far. I am 100% that he exist , but I am not 100% able to explain it. If we believe something , we should be able to explain it ; but God is difficult to explain , in my view.Blastcat wrote: [Replying to post 941 by mickiel]
Sorry, but that makes NO sense to me whatsoever.mickiel wrote: Well I am completely confident about God , its on my end that I am not 100% confident of.
We are getting NOWHERE with this.
Yup. I agree that you are having extreme difficulty with these numbers.mickiel wrote:In example, I know I have been wrong about MY view of things before ; I had to learn I was wrong. I just can't show you this; I mean I have tried, but I am not able to explain it to you in a manner which you can see. That is obvious.
This is how I see your predicament:
You are saying two things that are completely contradictory.
1. You have 100% confidence in the proposition that a god exists.
2. You don't have 100% confidence in your 100% confidence.
Your 100% confidence isn't 100% confidence.
OK.... and that makes sense to you?
It's 100 or its NOT, mickiel.
You seem to not want or be ABLE to make up your mind.
WHAT IS IT that you have so much confidence in?... You can't even seem to EXPLAIN what it is you believe in.
How much do you have confidence that it's real?
Seems that that is also hard for you to explain.
I can't say you make a very convincing CASE for your belief.
I have to wonder why you hold on to it, frankly.
I am not trying to convince others , but I once tried when I was younger; this was my explanation;
http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/gener ... l-113.html
Ahhhh but I was much younger , I just don't try it as much any more. In my view , the if and when of understanding God , comes from him ,not another human.
Post #955
[Replying to post 945 by mickiel]
Let GOD do the work you say only he can do.
After all, it's not as if you are explaining very much here..... You don't seem to be able to discuss numbers very well. And you don't even believe that you can get us to understand you anyway.
SO MUCH FOR MAKING YOURSELF UNDERSTANDABLE.
adios
So, why are you BOTHERING people with getting them to understand your beliefs? You ARE a human, aren't you?mickiel wrote:
I am not trying to convince others , but I once tried when I was younger; this was my explanation;
http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/gener ... l-113.html
Ahhhh but I was much younger , I just don't try it as much any more. In my view , the if and when of understanding God , comes from him ,not another human.
Let GOD do the work you say only he can do.
After all, it's not as if you are explaining very much here..... You don't seem to be able to discuss numbers very well. And you don't even believe that you can get us to understand you anyway.
SO MUCH FOR MAKING YOURSELF UNDERSTANDABLE.
adios
Post #958
[Replying to post 948 by mickiel]
But what does popularity have to do with the truth of a proposition?
And I've read a lot of "side-stream" theories that were made up.. nothing easier to do than that. And again, difficulty has nothing to do with the truth of a proposition.
Some atheists have crack-pot ideas...
I don't care how unpopular or difficult they may seem to the person.
Well, by definition what isn't MAIN stream would be SIDE stream.. and not as popular.
But what does popularity have to do with the truth of a proposition?
And I've read a lot of "side-stream" theories that were made up.. nothing easier to do than that. And again, difficulty has nothing to do with the truth of a proposition.
Some atheists have crack-pot ideas...
I don't care how unpopular or difficult they may seem to the person.
Post #959
Blastcat wrote: [Replying to post 948 by mickiel]
Well, by definition what isn't MAIN stream would be SIDE stream.. and not as popular.
But what does popularity have to do with the truth of a proposition?
And I've read a lot of "side-stream" theories that were made up.. nothing easier to do than that. And again, difficulty has nothing to do with the truth of a proposition.
Some atheists have crack-pot ideas...
I don't care how unpopular or difficult they may seem to the person.
Spoken like a true Agnostic , you just don't know what to believe; which is confusion in the dictionary. So when someone has taken a side , you disagree because you have taken none.
Post #960
[Replying to post 950 by mickiel]
[center]
Being an agnostic does not imply using a bad epistemology.[/center]
Disagreeing that there is sufficient evidence to TAKE a side IS a side.
I don't pretend to know what I don't.
The argument ad populum certainly is NOT a good method to know if something is true or not. Any "side" that is justified by using that fallacious method is more likely to be WRONG. My "side" is trying to be more likely RIGHT.
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/popular.html
[center]
Being an agnostic does not imply using a bad epistemology.[/center]
I know exactly what I should and should not believe. I have a method, I use it, and it works. You may want to talk to an actual agnostic and see what that method just might be.
The dictionary might be confused.. but I'm not.
Not at all so.
Disagreeing that there is sufficient evidence to TAKE a side IS a side.
I don't pretend to know what I don't.
The argument ad populum certainly is NOT a good method to know if something is true or not. Any "side" that is justified by using that fallacious method is more likely to be WRONG. My "side" is trying to be more likely RIGHT.
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/popular.html
