Archbishop of Canterbury says Paris attacks made him question the existence of God
79 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49164796]About half of the food produced isn't eaten and birth rates are plummeting in many countries.
Also I don't see why killing ourselves is a very good idea when things are doing very well for most humans compared to the past. This is a period in history with the lowest poverty, least disease, fewest wars, the greatest number of accountable democratic governments, the most social justice, highest wealth, greatest international cooperation, and the fact that in the space of a few decades the ozone hole crisis has been largely averted.[/QUOTE]
Yo Sobtonik, wheres my tea!?
You're still seeing it from a human centric point of view. An egotistical, self centered one at that.
How can you be sure this is what god wants?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49164796]About half of the food produced isn't eaten and birth rates are plummeting in many countries.
Also I don't see why killing ourselves is a very good idea when things are doing very well for most humans compared to the past. This is a period in history with the lowest poverty, least disease, fewest wars, the greatest number of accountable democratic governments, the most social justice, highest wealth, greatest international cooperation, and the fact that in the space of a few decades the ozone hole crisis has been largely averted.[/QUOTE]
That and if we would stop wasting money on developing ways to kill each other, and spend that money to develop technologies to solve the problems of increasing populations (more efficient recycling, GMOs, enhanced disease control, space travel, etc.) we'd be a lot better off, and have more to show for it.
For what it's worth I was more infuriated when I found out what ISIS had done to the Yazidi population (Effectively genocide) than when I heard about Paris.
[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49164820]Yo Sobtonik, wheres my tea!?[/quote]
what?
[quote]The point is what God may see as right and what he wants is going to clash with what we think we want and is best for us. What we think God wants and he thinks is right may be way off and is a delusion.[/QUOTE]
do you understand theology or
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49164912]what?
do you understand theology or[/QUOTE]
I read bits here and there. The point I am making is getting upset at an all knowing, an all wise and all powerful being for not catering to us humans (who are very limited) and our expectations is rather silly.
[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49164941]I read bits here and there.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't sound much like any proper theology I've seen that's for sure.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49164982]It doesn't sound much like any proper theology I've seen that's for sure.[/QUOTE]
What do you know and have read? Like I said, I know a few bits here and there. Its not through. Yours may be more complete.
This will get into the debate of evil and what not. The point is what we assume god does and for may not match up with what really goes on and is desired from God.
The ArchBishop is upset and faith shaken because what he assumed to what Gods purpose (which is prevent what he considers bad) happens and he is questioning why. This makes him question god existence.
The better question is what good will come out of this and for whom? The answer to that question should reaffirm his faith in God. Not make him question it.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49164912]what?
do you understand theology or[/QUOTE]
theology is a product of humanity and any and all ideas it may have about how an unknowable, all powerful being that created all would operate are to be taken with a grain of salt because we're humans, limited beings with limited abilities and limited intelligence and wild emotions, trying to understand something unlimited, unbound by any reason we may know. a being which percieves the past, present, and future and controls it all. a being which is infinitely intelligent, knows the way he wants his world to go and how every course of action would end up. we're arrogant if we think we can figure out what a god or gods truly wants.
[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49165010]What do you know and have read? Like I said, I know a few bits here and there. Its not through. Yours may be more complete.
This will get into the debate of evil and what not. The point is what we assume god does and for may not match up with what really goes on and is desired from God.[/QUOTE]
Since the church is constantly guided by god and is essentially infallible as a consequence they have a very good idea of what He wants for everyone.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49165032]Since the church is constantly guided by god and is essentially infallible as a consequence they have a very good idea of what He wants for everyone.[/QUOTE]
Was asking for more of sources and philosophers you adhere to concerning the subject.
As for infallible, well no there are some ideas which claim other wise.
[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49165063]Was asking for more of sources and philosophers you adhere to concerning the subject.
As for infallible, well no there are some ideas which claim other wise.[/QUOTE]
Thomas Aquinas is probably the most famous of them.
The infallibility of the church is pretty central to its doctrine as well, as the holy spirit prevents it from making errors easily.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49165079]Thomas Aquinas is probably the most famous of them.
The infallibility of the church is pretty central to its doctrine as well, as the holy spirit prevents it from making errors easily.[/QUOTE]
Havent read him yet. I take to the idea of either The Gnostic vision of the world or the idea that evil exists due to God making a mistake during creation. Which resulted in a shattering in both creation and him some what.
I will quote the poster who said this:
[QUOTE]a being which percieves the past, present, and future and controls it all. a being which is infinitely intelligent, knows the way he wants his world to go and how every course of action would end up. we're arrogant if we think we can figure out what a god or gods truly wants. [/QUOTE]
I just agree with this and find it odd someone who devoted himself to faith would be shaken when he truly does not know what god wants or his nature.
[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49165095]Havent read him yet. I take to the idea of either The Gnostic vision of the world or the idea that evil exists due to God making a mistake during creation. Which resulted in a shattering in both creation and him some what.[/QUOTE]
Evil exists because free will exists, since man is a rational creature he has the choice to deliberate over his acts and choose between good and evil. Getting rid of evil would mean getting rid of free will.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49165108]Evil exists because free will exists, since man is a rational creature he has the choice to deliberate over his acts and choose between good and evil. Getting rid of evil would mean getting rid of free will.[/QUOTE]
Not really.
Getting rid of ignorance would work. The problem with western ideas concerning spiritual is they are unaware of how much delusion and the irrational mind prevents gaining control of that free will.
So trying to explain why the Church communicates with God is a flawed system is very difficult unless this is under stood.
As for the Gnostic version of evil. Their stance is the god we know of or claim to talk about is flawed and that why evil exists.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49165032]Since the church is constantly guided by god and is essentially infallible as a consequence they have a very good idea of what He wants for everyone.[/QUOTE]
who says they are guided by god? the church itself? how are they any more reliable than literally every other religious institution that says they are guided directly by god and know what he wants? of course they are going to say they are guided by god, otherwise they would have no power. but just because they say something doesn't necessarily mean it is true. even if it were true that they receive transmissions from god, how can we be certain that he isn't using them for his own, unknowable ends? god could very easily not give a fuck about any of the tenants of Catholicism and only had them put in place as a means of control, which has worked pretty damn well. when discussing god, you're discussing an alien intelligence which by its very nature we cannot understand, and any words of his filtered through a human should be taken with trepidation. we can't know if god is telling that person the truth, or if that person is distorting it in some way. we can't truly know the motives of god no matter how hard we try purely from a comprehension point of view.
[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49165122]Not really.
Getting rid of ignorance would work. The problem with western ideas concerning spiritual is they are unaware of how much delusion and the irrational mind prevents gaining control of that free will.
So trying to explain why the Church communicates with God is a flawed system is very difficult unless this is under stood.[/QUOTE]
Then perhaps you should read Aquinas (you mentioned having not read him earlier), he goes into detail about this.
The problem is that getting rid of ignorance won't rid the world of evil. The point is that since humans are capable of free will and doing things out of their own decisions, they are capable of making decisions and actions that are evil.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49165144]Then perhaps you should read Aquinas (you mentioned having not read him earlier), he goes into detail about this.
The problem is that getting rid of ignorance won't rid the world of evil. The point is that since humans are capable of free will and doing things out of their own decisions, they are capable of making decisions and actions that are evil.[/QUOTE]
No I haven't. My personal view is however evil comes from emotional imbalances, and lack of self awareness.
However Ninja Gnome summed it up nicely. The better question is how do I express my view with more finesse like him and others on this board?
[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49165161]No I haven't. My personal view is however evil comes from emotional imbalances, and lack of self awareness.[/QUOTE]
So is it possible for somebody who is emotionally well-balanced and self-aware to commit evil acts?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49165192]So is it possible for somebody who is emotionally well-balanced and self-aware to commit evil acts?[/QUOTE]
I am talking from the mystical and subjective point of view. You are asking from a scientific, rational and objective point of view that wants answers that are well defined concerning something that is murky in nature. I do not know your faith, but if you wants answers to this, all I can say is work towards getting the more subjective experiences.
A person who is completely self aware, completely emotional healthy and well balanced is less likely to commit acts of evil.
However lets get what I think is evil and not evil out of the way.
If you believe God is the source of all that is good, then the best way to always to do good is to meet him. The simplest means to do this is be completely absorbed in the moment, be completely self aware, be without delusion, be completely and emotionally balanced (remove all psychological and emotional defects) and you will be align with him. When you reach this state, everything you do will be good, even if the act is commonly considered morally abhorrent.
A person who hasn't done this can abide to what is commonly morally correct and still end up creating monsters. Evil comes from the quality of the person, not the rules they abide by.
[QUOTE=JohhnyCarson;49165229]I am talking from the mystical and subjective point of view. You are asking from a scientific, rational and objective point of view that wants answers that are well defined concerning something that is murky in nature. I do not know your faith, but if you wants answers to this, all I can say is work towards getting the more subjective experiences.
However, a person who is completely self aware, completely emotional healthy and well balanced is less likely to commit acts of evil.[/QUOTE]
Less likely, yes, but not incapable of it. The point is that as long as people have the option to do something, it is something that can happen regardless.
Catholicism (given that it relies heavily on rationalist philosophy) is very much something that fits in nicely with science and philosophy given the long and fruitful relationship between them all for the past thousand years or so.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49165254]Less likely, yes, but not incapable of it. The point is that as long as people have the option to do something, it is something that can happen regardless.
Catholicism (given that it relies heavily on rationalist philosophy) is very much something that fits in nicely with science and philosophy given the long and fruitful relationship between them all for the past thousand years or so.[/QUOTE]
Religion however is still a matter of subjective experiences. In the old testament, how did some prophets meet God? In a dream. Dreams are not what I considered a hard basis for moral guidance or proof of a all powerful being. I edited what I said for a more through explanation.
I have mentioned before, I have pursued more mystical practices. Unless you are doing something of the bent, your not exactly going have a clear understanding of your faith. I had some of these experiences and the most I came away with is my current ideas. A lot of what I mention is from practice. Not reading. You re trying to apply reason to something that's immune to it. Not happening.
If Catholic, I heard spiritual practices of st Ignatius is a good start.
[QUOTE]Less likely, yes, but not incapable of it[/QUOTE]
That the best we can settle for. We are not perfect beings. The best we can do is try. This is the start of wisdom.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49165254]
Catholicism (given that it relies heavily on rationalist philosophy) is very much something that fits in nicely with science and philosophy given the long and fruitful relationship between them all for the past thousand years or so.[/QUOTE]
Ahaha.
The arm that created and sustained the inquisition and Indulgences is the most [i]rational[/i]?
Not even a Jesuit would argue that.
[QUOTE=27X;49165703]Ahaha.
The arm that created and sustained the inquisition and Indulgences is the most [i]rational[/i]?
Not even a Jesuit would argue that.[/QUOTE]
The entire point of catholic theology is that it's based upon reason. It heavily draws upon the traditions of classical philosophy.
[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;49165772]Oh yeah, religion and science have [I]really[/I] gone hand in hand in the past :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
There's nothing really saying that there should be a division between the two. After all, it was a catholic monk who created the modern discipline of genetics.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49166294]The entire point of catholic theology is that it's based upon reason. It heavily draws upon the traditions of classical philosophy.
[/QUOTE]Maybe it was based upon reason when it started out, but at this point there's little reason in it.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49166294]
There's nothing really saying that there should be a division between the two. After all, it was a catholic monk who created the modern discipline of genetics.[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah religion and science together is alright as long as science does not step in to disprove religion.
[quote]Oh yeah religion and science together is alright as long as science does not step in to disprove religion.[/QUOTE]
When it comes to the ultimate questions, science is little better equipped than religion pretty much.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49166556]When it comes to the ultimate questions, science is little better equipped than religion pretty much.[/QUOTE]
Religion got radicalism on their side though
Stephen fry, generally still has my favourite argument as to why he doesn't believe in god.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49166572]Religion got radicalism on their side though[/QUOTE]
Science can be pretty radical as well
It may be late but better than never. We may just get another independent thinker out of him yet.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;49167104]Science can be pretty radical as well[/QUOTE]
Science doesn't exactly say anything about morality. Its pretty much just a method and practice.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.