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 #941
mickiel wrote:Blastcat wrote:mickiel wrote:Blastcat wrote:mickiel wrote:
No , I am not Christian , nor do I accept their view of God. The Christian God is a trinity ; the God I see is alone God. One God. I am not a Mormon either, but I like this rendition ;
http://mit.irr.org/28-biblical-passages ... ly-one-god
You have to admit this is a little bit different. You offer a Mormon site that uses biblical quotes.
How confident are you that this god really exists?
I am at 100%, but I have blind spots; I think its really academic. Its logical and within reason. Its scientific and spiritual as well as historical. Its "Deliberate."
In example , if you walk down a street and see a dime on the ground , you think nothing. If you walk further and see 3 dimes on the ground , now you suspect someone may have dropped them by accident . But if you walk further and now find 100 dimes on the ground , in rows of ten , and perfectly balanced on their edges, now you can KNOW that this was deliberately done! I consider the universe and the earth and humanity as deliberately done.
I agree that works with dimes and humans.. But not God's and the universe.. What intentionality are you talking about? What are the dimes?
If you have blind spots how can you be at 100%?
Well basically I am talking about " The Anthropic Principles"
You call your god the anthropic principle?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle
The dimes can be symbolic of anything in matter.
We know about dimes and people. What exactly please do you have of intentionality in nature?
Well my physical sight is at 100 % , but I can't see around corners. I can't see through walls. Blind spots do not mean we are not at 100%
Can you be wrong about what you believe?
Post #943
mickiel wrote: Of course I could be wrong.
Thank you for the answer. I realize how it might appear a silly one, but I assure you, I have good reasons to ask it. You report a 100% confidence about which, you admit, you could be wrong about. I have to wonder how you get 100% with a doubt. I think it should be lower than 100, frankly.
Post #944
Blastcat wrote:mickiel wrote: Of course I could be wrong.
Thank you for the answer. I realize how it might appear a silly one, but I assure you, I have good reasons to ask it. You report a 100% confidence about which, you admit, you could be wrong about. I have to wonder how you get 100% with a doubt. I think it should be lower than 100, frankly.
I have had three marriages with two different women , I believe 100% that they were faithful tome , but I had a few doubts. I am 100% sure my son is my son, but I have a few doubts. I am, 100 % sure I am a black man, but I doubt its not mixed with anythingelse. I am 100% sure my cancer is in remission , but I have a few doubts.
Post #945
mickiel wrote:Blastcat wrote:mickiel wrote: Of course I could be wrong.
Thank you for the answer. I realize how it might appear a silly one, but I assure you, I have good reasons to ask it. You report a 100% confidence about which, you admit, you could be wrong about. I have to wonder how you get 100% with a doubt. I think it should be lower than 100, frankly.
I have had three marriages with two different women , I believe 100% that they were faithful tome , but I had a few doubts. I am 100% sure my son is my son, but I have a few doubts. I am, 100 % sure I am a black man, but I doubt its not mixed with anythingelse. I am 100% sure my cancer is in remission , but I have a few doubts.
That sounds like your 100 isn't 100.
I think it's mistake to say one thing and mean another. So right off the bat, you make it hard for ( at least for some) people to know what you are trying to say..
I prefer clarity, so right now, I'm at a loss.
Post #946
Blastcat wrote:mickiel wrote:Blastcat wrote:mickiel wrote: Of course I could be wrong.
Thank you for the answer. I realize how it might appear a silly one, but I assure you, I have good reasons to ask it. You report a 100% confidence about which, you admit, you could be wrong about. I have to wonder how you get 100% with a doubt. I think it should be lower than 100, frankly.
I have had three marriages with two different women , I believe 100% that they were faithful tome , but I had a few doubts. I am 100% sure my son is my son, but I have a few doubts. I am, 100 % sure I am a black man, but I doubt its not mixed with anythingelse. I am 100% sure my cancer is in remission , but I have a few doubts.
That sounds like your 100 isn't 100.
I think it's mistake to say one thing and mean another. So right off the bat, you make it hard for ( at least for some) people to know what you are trying to say..
I prefer clarity, so right now, I'm at a loss.
Well I understand your confusion. I am a black man , but my blood is not 100 % black blood. Interesting , the whites used to say if 1 percent of your blood was black , then your considered a black person.
Post #947
[Replying to post 937 by mickiel]
It seems that you are saying that 100 isn't 100 and IS 100 at the same time.
If so, that doesn't make ANY sense to me.
100 is 100 and not anything else.
You use numbers strangely.
Blastcat wrote: That sounds like your 100 isn't 100.
I think it's mistake to say one thing and mean another. So right off the bat, you make it hard for ( at least for some) people to know what you are trying to say..
I prefer clarity, so right now, I'm at a loss.
I still don't know what you mean by 100%.mickiel wrote:Well I understand your confusion. I am a black man , but my blood is not 100 % black blood. Interesting , the whites used to say if 1 percent of your blood was black , then your considered a black person.
It seems that you are saying that 100 isn't 100 and IS 100 at the same time.
If so, that doesn't make ANY sense to me.
100 is 100 and not anything else.
You use numbers strangely.
Post #948
[Replying to Blastcat]
I am 100% behind mankind using politics , but I am not in 100% agreement as to how they use it.
I am 100% behind mankind using politics , but I am not in 100% agreement as to how they use it.
Post #949
[Replying to post 939 by mickiel]
[Replying to Blastcat]
Those are two different subjects.
Subject 1, mankind using politics.
Subject 2, your opinion about how mankind uses politics.
I still have no idea how you use numbers as to your belief in God.
[Replying to Blastcat]
Yes and?mickiel wrote:I am 100% behind mankind using politics , but I am not in 100% agreement as to how they use it.
Those are two different subjects.
Subject 1, mankind using politics.
Subject 2, your opinion about how mankind uses politics.
I still have no idea how you use numbers as to your belief in God.
Post #950
Blastcat wrote: [Replying to post 939 by mickiel]
[Replying to Blastcat]
Yes and?mickiel wrote:I am 100% behind mankind using politics , but I am not in 100% agreement as to how they use it.
Those are two different subjects.
Subject 1, mankind using politics.
Subject 2, your opinion about how mankind uses politics.
I still have no idea how you use numbers as to your belief in God.
Well I am completely confident about God , its on my end that I am not 100% confident of. 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.
