Thomas Aquinas's Proofs of God's Existence - Page 3 - Keira Knightley.com Forums
Keira Knightley.com Forums  

Go Back   Keira Knightley.com Forums > Wavefront Community > General Discussion

General Discussion Talk about pretty much anything.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-08-2004, 08:06 PM   Officer #41
DragonRat
Officer
 
DragonRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: California
Posts: 507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moe
On a sidenote, I find it hard to believe that only a person who believes in God may go to heaven, whereas a non-believer, no matter how "good" he has been during his life time, is automatically sent to hell. That doesn't sound very christian to me.
For one, it's not just a Christian idea; almost every religion believes in the same capacity, more or less. Every religion is very exclusive, except for the occasional Buddhism, Bahaism, or Unitarianism. The point to consider though, is whether or not one believes in an afterlife. If an atheist does not believe in an afterlife, then whatever he does, it doesn't matter if he's going anywhere at the end. So, if the standard Christian condemns an atheist to hell, the atheist can simply reply, "Well, I don't believe in hell. What does that to do with me?"

Of course, condemnation and judgment is a peculiar trait among many who look at Christianity on the outside. Yes, many Christians are judgmental, but so are many other traditional and orthodox believers of other religions. And the majority of believers do not have such an arrogance about them; you simply choose to see the bad seeds, simply because they are the most outspoken.

As for differing religions and their claims to authority, it all really depends. I say that, if you want to learn more about them, then read more about them. The common person will see several religions and base his atheism, because they all believe in different things. Well, if you choose to investigate further, perhaps you can learn that there is one religion above them all, that can answer all your questions. If that would be Christianity, then go for it; if not, then go for the other one.

The main point that many theologians and atheists dictate is this: if you believe in something, believe in it whole-heartedly. Don't go half-way, and don't wade in the shallow waters, when the truth is over across the deep end. If you consistently question or doubt your beliefs, or your lack thereof, then do some investigation. It wouldn't hurt to learn more, and in the end, you'll find yourself satisfied at the prospect of finding something worthwhile.

And sorry to KRev: he didn't want this thread to end up on a debate of religion (only on theism). Still, he asked for it, and most of the representative theistic philosophers here on this board are Christians, while the rest are either atheists or agnostics.
__________________
"I like refried beans. That's why I want to try fried beans, because maybe they're just as good, and we're just wasting time." - Mitch Hedberg (1968-2005)

"Football is about if you want to run and fight for each other, if you really want to play that killer ball." - Robin van Persie, Arsenal FC
DragonRat is offline  
Old 02-08-2004, 10:17 PM   #42
Moe
Member
 
Moe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 78
I think you missed my point. To clarify, consider this hypothetical situation:
Let's say the bible is correct, there really is a god, and he is exactly as described by Christianity.
Now, we have a person, let's call him John. John is an atheist. He is also a very caring man, and after studying, oh, let's say medicine, he devotes his life to fight diseases in a third-world country. The pay sucks, the hours suck, every few years a neighboring country invades, he has to deal with disease, death, and hatred. Yet he still stays, and his work really improves the life of many people.
When John dies, would he go to Heaven? Most religions seem to have a firm belief in their god as a prerequisite for getting into their version of a paradise after your death. It seems to me that an almighty god wouldn't really have to give a fuck whether or not somebody prays to him or even believes to him, as long as his work is being done?
Moe is offline  
Old 03-08-2004, 12:57 AM   Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! KKWiki Contributer Senior Registered Member #43
Hazzle
Sponsored Cunt
 
Hazzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,168
I find myself in entire agreement with Moe...how rare.

And to reiterate KRev, it was entirely your posting style that pissed me off, hence my insults
Hazzle is offline  
Old 03-08-2004, 02:10 AM   Officer #44
DragonRat
Officer
 
DragonRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: California
Posts: 507
Heh, then you come into the territory of why he's a good person in the first place.
__________________
"I like refried beans. That's why I want to try fried beans, because maybe they're just as good, and we're just wasting time." - Mitch Hedberg (1968-2005)

"Football is about if you want to run and fight for each other, if you really want to play that killer ball." - Robin van Persie, Arsenal FC
DragonRat is offline  
Old 14-04-2008, 01:33 AM   #45
natedawg1486
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Ok first i will reply to the orginal message about Aquinas's proofs:
first about the cause and effect i find a huge problem in this, Aquinas says that God is the "original cause" but where did God come from, and which God are we talking about??? are we talking about El-Shadai (the name that the hebrew God gave to Abraham [A history of God, Karen Armstrong, p. 14]) or Yhwh (the name God gave to Moses on Mt. Sainai). In ancient Sumer they believed that the Gods emerged two by two out of a watery marsh which was cinsidered to be divine. In this belief system God was an affect rather than a cause. But Thomas would claim that God is the original cause.

Secondly: throughout these posts there has been discussion about comparing the evolutionist to the creationist. I don't think that this is a comparison that someone can make. They are two completely different subjects, evolution is a science where as creation is a belief. Evolution has been subjected to the rigours of the scientific method and was tested many times before. Creationism can't be tested by the scientific method. Therefore to compare the two is doing an injustice to all of the hard work of all scientists around the world who do use the scientific method on a regular basis to create such medecines as the poleo vaccine and the measles vaccine wich have saved many lifes.

Thirdly: there has been a discussion concerning the fact of an afterlife and how it effects the existance of God. But (as i do expect most of the posters are of the 3 main monotheistic faiths or atheist of agnostic) Jews do not believe in an afterlife, rather they believe that the kingdom of God will reign down on earth, and the descendants of the 12 tribes of judaism will inherit the kingdom. So i don't think that we should use the existance of an afterlife as a reasonable argument for the existance of a God, whichever it may be (especially concerning the fact that judaism was the first monotheistic religion ever, and birthed christianity and Islam)
 
Old 22-04-2008, 07:35 AM   First Class Member Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! KKWiki Contributer Administrator #46
Digital_Ice
 
Digital_Ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 127.0.0.1
Posts: 3,741
was it really necessary to bump a thread that's 4 years old?
__________________
Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man.
-- Friedrich Nietzsche
Digital_Ice is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
By appointment to HM Keira Knightley.