An Interesting Conversation

[Gr3yF0x]

=empihsrow

i'll try my best to answer this question
cathecism of the catholic church 395 states: the power of satan is, nonetheless, not infinite. he is only a creature, powerful from the fact that he is a pure spirit, but still a creature. He cannot prevent the building up of God's reign. Although Satan may act in the world out of hatred for God and his kingdom in Jesus Christ, and although his action may cause grave injuries of a spiritual nature and indirectly, even of a physical nature to each man and to society, the action is permitted by deivine providence which with strength and gentleness guides human and cosmic history. it is a great mystery that providence shold permit diabolical activity, but "we know that in everything God works for good with those who love him."

i suppose GOD can, but he just won't? we won't ever know why cause it's just part of his divine plan.

to the third question: God could have created everything to work like robots or something. but there's just no sense in doing so.
in my opinion, its like, why screw a blow-up doll when you can get a real woman. you know, something along that line.

just my input, no offence to anyone.

 

[knnyeeee]

This so-called "conversation" has been going round in emails for quite some time now I think.
Flaming will start soon. Anytime now I 'm guessing.

 

[BleedsNoMore]

nahhh i tink it's a completely constructive conversation going on between them.. and in the end, to each his/her own.. dun be so aggravated laa, the ts is just sharing..

 

[refused]

who'd give you brains to conduct all those scientific experiments if God don't?

 

[ipul]

Constructive thread people...don't turn this into a flame war...keep this an intellectual one...food for thought =)

 

[daryl]

I take no sides. Both religion and science were invented by Man. And, the scientific method is not perfect. Bear that in mind.

 

[sycododo]

Imagine not studying at all for an exam and expecting to get A just by praying, obviously you know what's the end result.

ah, then that's not really praying anymore.

"why didn't God ensure that Lucifer could run like a machine to perfection when Lucifer was first created, forever obeying God's instructions since angels were created for that matter?"
I guess no one really knows. But for me, you know when we befriend someone and that someone is actually rather 2-faced or something like that? We always say these people are not worth being troubled over. And, Lucifer got cocky and said he could be better than God. Imagine one of your bandmates said he could be better than the whole band, you would so want to let him go his own way right? If one's not willing to do whatever one's told, might as well.

Let's see it the Sims 2 way. Keep playing Sims 2 everyday for a month or two with the free-will switched off, you'd get bored of it right? Controlling the sims and everything they do.

hee. just my 15turning16 yrs old brain thinking.

 

[tim098]

Science is a collection of evidence that is seemingly correct and accurate at that given point of time, and is therefore unreliable. Take that old analogy of how everyone used to think the earth was flat, or that the sun revolved around the earth. That was the "science" of back then but was proven wrong after someone discovered the truth. Also something about magnetic waves or something that had recently been proven wrong or something i cant remember exactly.. But this shows that science itself isnt completely reliable. Its a really useful thing though

 

[daryl]

I just read the conversation in the first post. It is the way it is worded which leads us to believe that both professor and student are right, and wrong. The fact that both professor and student are stumped does not mean that the questions cannot be answered.

Firstly, the questions asked by the professor to the student can be answered by The Church I'm sure. "Terrible things" exist in the world because of original sin right? I'm not a Christian but I'm sure someone can answer these questions.

As for the questions asked by the student, cold and darkness certainly exist. These words were made to describe the absence of heat and light. Then again, how do we know that light is not the absence of dark? And heat is not the absence of cold? The student also seems to be making a point that evil is the absence of good in response to the professor's earlier question. Then, his claim that evil, together with cold and darkness, does not exist is not right.

As for the last remark about the professor's brain, that is so stupid. Of course there are ways to find out whether the professor has a brain or not. And regardless of whether he even has a brain, if he can qualify as a professor in a school, his lectures can be trusted.

 

[Antarctic1]

it's all about the clash of ideas. just like communism and capitalism. some people will say this system works well and blah blah blah. and then poof, it leads to war ultimately. it's too bad that everyone has his own brain to construct his own opinions. well, it's life.

 

[gutturalpiss]

Here I am sitting in my throne and laughing my ass out. You are all hopeless.

 

[Tribalcast]

yes..

to the thread person

you're a trouble maker for posting such religion stuff

There was no intention to harm anyone nor any religion in particular. And yes it was from an e-mail. Posting it here is just to share. I have posted such things before in the past. So getting reactions such as these is nothing new to me. And sadly, things hasn't really changed either.

I find it refreshing to post something different once in awhile instead of the usual music related topics. And this is the Kopi-Tiam. Anything goes. If you're not willing to take a read and maybe give it a thought and then by all means you can always ignore it. But that doesn't mean everyone in here is gonna do the same.

Having mixed positive reactions do means something. And it has reached 3 pages already.

 

[billthegeek]

There exist great spiritual minds among the most prolific scientists in human history, like Einstein, who had great faith in God, and never pretended that fully understood the universe, or even dreamed of coming close.

Einstein never believed in a God. He did made a few misleading quotes like "god doesn't play dice" which helped create the perception that he is a Christian, and the American churches were eager to portray him as one of their fellow men. Einstein was neither a theist nor atheist... more of an agnostic.

Can a theist possibly make a statement below?


"I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance -- but for us, not for God."

- Albert Einstein, from Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas & Banesh Hoffman

 

[gutturalpiss]

It's tough for a scientist, let alone a PHYSICIST, to be a theist. But of course, there are Metaphysicists. And yes, there are many Christian, Hindu and Muslim scientists alike but most refrain from preaching during work and make no claim on either side. Theistic prominent figures are almost always Philosophers, not men of evidence and logic like Albert Einstein. He is the least likely person in history to be a theist.

Well, repeat after me:

"There ist no Gott butt Nietzsche."

"There ist no Gott butt Nietzsche."

"There ist no Gott butt Nietzsche."

 

[bboy2388]

To Billthegeek:

Good point. But i never said Einstein was a Christian.

He did not believe in God in the Christian sense. But he believed in a force, not necessarily in the form of a being, which most people seem to think when they say the word "God", that was responsible for the creation of the intricacies of the world he so admired.

When I say God, I don't mean a Christian God, a Jewish God, a Muslim God, or any other God from any other religion. I simply mean a power whose form, function, and purpose we cannot discern or comprehend in its enormity and complexity.

And finally, Einstein being an agnostic is certainly a refreshing cup of humility from a scientist, when many scientists claim to understand enough not to believe that there is a God, and when many religious people claim that there is only one truth in the whole of the Universe.

 

[empihsrow]

Wait. Einstein was born Jewish! That was why he relocated to USA when Hitler came to power in Germany.

Even though Einstein was born Jewish, he never really believed in God.

"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." - Albert Einstein in a letter to M. Berkowitz, October 25, 1950

 

[shinobi]

this is not a thread about god, it is a thread about logic and reasoning

whether or not god exists is beyond our capability of proving

 

[bboy2388]

well said Shinobi

I guess we'll just have to take it on faith.

There's been an awfully small amount of flaming too, which is good.

 

[bboy2388]

Actually I don't think this means he didn't believe in God. I think it just means he didn't believe in a God in the traditional, organized-religion sense.

But really, to say whether or not one believes in God really just needs a kind of elaboration into what one deems to be God-like.

The early Church and certainly most early religious governmental seemed to equate themselves with God. Disobedience of them was considered blasphemy, heresy, what have you. But we've got to recognize that the Church (or any religious group for that matter), and God, are two very separate entities.

Therefore, Einstein's quote about a God who "works on the basis of reward and punishment" and his referral to Him as a "Law-giver", is a clear indication that, it seems, he also had trouble coming to terms with the common overlapping of the Church, and of God.

So his point in the full quote, I believe, and correct me if you believe you have a better interpretation, is that he believes that the old fashioned Christian or Jewish views of God and goodness were too dogmatic (law-giver), and that he was skeptical that a pursuit of the "ennoblement of life" required a system of punishment and reward.

Therefore, his criticism and skepticism should not be confused with skepticism of the existence of God, but rather, skepticism at the arrogance of religious people he may have encountered or studied when it came to issues of right or wrong, and their attempt to restrict freedom in the name of God. If there's one thing that we have on earth, it is choice, no matter how difficult the choices may be, and Einstein probably believed that the freedom to choose should never be quashed.

I think organized religion has made great headway of late though, and it's not so bad anymore. Sure it has its flaws, but everyone's got to try.

"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment." - Albert Einstein in a letter to M. Berkowitz, October 25, 1950

 

[yy_fuctup]

There is something called agnostic theist. I believe Einstein was one of though.

Untaught, love, untaught.

Atheist can branch out and defy over-generalization.