![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Battleground God...
Wow, this is really interesting! Unfortunately, I think I took more damage than I should have. Here are my points of contention-- and the logic that supports my decision!
[LJ-CUT text="Ouch..."]
You're under fire!
You don't think that it is justifiable to base one's beliefs about the external world on a firm, inner conviction, paying no regard to the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity of this conviction. But in the previous question you rejected evolutionary theory when the vast majority of scientists think both that the evidence points to its truth and that there is no evidence which falsifies it. Of course, many creationists claim that the evidential case for evolution is by no means conclusive. But in doing so, they go against scientific orthodoxy. So you've got to make a choice:
Bite the bullet and say there is evidence that evolution is not true, despite what the scientists say.
Take a direct hit and say that this is an area where your beliefs are just in contradiction.
Needless to say, I bit the bullet on that one. Didn't affect my health any-- which it shouldn't, darn it!
Question 11
People who die of horrible, painful diseases need to die in such a way for some higher purpose.
My answer: True. I really don't like the way they word this question, as it has the potentiallity to really skew someones answer-- as we soon see.
You've just bitten a bullet!
Many people cannot accept what you have just accepted; namely, that a loving God - a God who possesses great power and insight - has created the world in such a way that people need to suffer horribly for some higher purpose.
Well, just because people cannot accept what I have just accepted doesn't mean I'm in the logistical wrong, so to speak. And, correction-- He didn't create the world in a way where pain, suffering, and death, is required. That's Evolution's tale. God created a perfect world, and we screwed it up. And continue to screw it up. So, hardly fair to claim that it's okay under one auspice (evolution) but not under another (Creation)-- but that's probably because it would be our fault in the latter.
There is no logical contradiction in your position, but some would argue that it is obscene. Could you really look someone dying of a horrible flesh-eating disease in the eye, and tell them that their suffering is for the greater good of themselves or the world?
Oh, and telling them that their suffering is completely for naught, and it doesn't matter anyway because their genetic/lucky lottery just happened to fail them? I mean, that's what Evolution would say. Sorry, you're a genetic dead-end. No consolation prize, either. Aaaand, God doesn't want His creation to suffer. Aaaaaaaand, He gives us the ultimate way out-- through Him, into Heaven. So, whatever suffering we happen to go through in this world will be nothing compared to an eternity of joy. I could go on in more detail, but it would take more theological and philosophical work than I have the mental capacity for at the moment.
No fair, since I took slight damage on that one.
Question 12
If God exists she could make it so that everything now considered sinful becomes morally acceptable and everything that is now considered morally good becomes sinful.
My answer: False-- however, only if we're talking about my God, the God of the Bible.
You've just taken a direct hit!
You claimed earlier that there is no basis for morality if God does not exist.
And I stand by that claim!
But now you say that if God does exist, she cannot make what is sinful good and vice-versa. But if this is true, it means that God cannot be the basis of morality. If God were the basis of morality, then she could decide what is good and what is bad. The fact that you think that God cannot do this shows that things must be right or wrong independently of what God decides. In other words, God chooses what is right because it is right; things are not right just because God chooses them.
I would argue that this goes against the very nature of God, and all He stands for. If the Bible says that God is perfect, just, loving, and a God of Order-- not chaos-- (among other things) then He would not make murdering good and worshipping bad. That would go against His nature, and therefore be a contradiction-- something that could not happen if He was perfect.
Question 13
It is foolish to believe in God without certain, irrevocable proof that God exists.
Oh, that is such a loaded question. It depends on what proof one is willing to accept.
Question 16
If God exists she would have the freedom and power to create square circles and make 1 + 1 = 72.
Another tricky one. I really don't like the question-- there's really no logical answer when you consider reality. It's just a big 'What If' question meant to trip you up.
You've just taken a direct hit!
You say that God does not have the freedom and power to do impossible things such as create square circles, but in an earlier answer you said that any being which it is right to call God must be free and have the power to do anything. So, on your view, God is not free and does not have the power to do what is impossible. This requires that you accept - in common with most theologians, but contrary to your earlier answer - that God's freedom and power are not unbounded. He does not have the freedom and power to do literally anything.
Again, I stand by the observation that God is a God of order and logic-- not chaos. While He certainly would be able to create a universe and have it function under those principles-- that is not how He chose to do it. Entertaining the idea of God creating illogical circumstances--as far as we can see it--goes against logic itself. This quiz is full of anti-Christian umbrella statements. ;p
In short, I survived with the TPM service medal.
"You have been awarded the TPM service medal! This is our third highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.
The fact that you have progressed through this activity without suffering many hits suggests that whilst there are inconsistencies in your beliefs about God, on the whole they are well thought-out.
The direct hits you suffered occurred where your answers implied logical contradictions. You did bite a number of bullets. These occurred because you responded in ways that required that you held views that most people would have found strange, incredible or unpalatable. At the bottom of this page, we have reproduced the analyses of your direct hits and bitten bullets.
The fact that you did not suffer many hits means that you qualify for our third highest award. Well done!"
So, yeah. While it's a very interesting quiz, it's too heavily biased against those who actually believe in the God of the Bible for my liking. One of the stats was that "46.71% of the people who have completed this activity took very little damage and were awarded the TPM Medal of Distinction." I'd be willing to bet money that most of those people are atheist.
[LJ-CUT text="Ouch..."]
You're under fire!
You don't think that it is justifiable to base one's beliefs about the external world on a firm, inner conviction, paying no regard to the external evidence, or lack of it, for the truth or falsity of this conviction. But in the previous question you rejected evolutionary theory when the vast majority of scientists think both that the evidence points to its truth and that there is no evidence which falsifies it. Of course, many creationists claim that the evidential case for evolution is by no means conclusive. But in doing so, they go against scientific orthodoxy. So you've got to make a choice:
Bite the bullet and say there is evidence that evolution is not true, despite what the scientists say.
Take a direct hit and say that this is an area where your beliefs are just in contradiction.
Needless to say, I bit the bullet on that one. Didn't affect my health any-- which it shouldn't, darn it!
Question 11
People who die of horrible, painful diseases need to die in such a way for some higher purpose.
My answer: True. I really don't like the way they word this question, as it has the potentiallity to really skew someones answer-- as we soon see.
You've just bitten a bullet!
Many people cannot accept what you have just accepted; namely, that a loving God - a God who possesses great power and insight - has created the world in such a way that people need to suffer horribly for some higher purpose.
Well, just because people cannot accept what I have just accepted doesn't mean I'm in the logistical wrong, so to speak. And, correction-- He didn't create the world in a way where pain, suffering, and death, is required. That's Evolution's tale. God created a perfect world, and we screwed it up. And continue to screw it up. So, hardly fair to claim that it's okay under one auspice (evolution) but not under another (Creation)-- but that's probably because it would be our fault in the latter.
There is no logical contradiction in your position, but some would argue that it is obscene. Could you really look someone dying of a horrible flesh-eating disease in the eye, and tell them that their suffering is for the greater good of themselves or the world?
Oh, and telling them that their suffering is completely for naught, and it doesn't matter anyway because their genetic/lucky lottery just happened to fail them? I mean, that's what Evolution would say. Sorry, you're a genetic dead-end. No consolation prize, either. Aaaand, God doesn't want His creation to suffer. Aaaaaaaand, He gives us the ultimate way out-- through Him, into Heaven. So, whatever suffering we happen to go through in this world will be nothing compared to an eternity of joy. I could go on in more detail, but it would take more theological and philosophical work than I have the mental capacity for at the moment.
No fair, since I took slight damage on that one.
Question 12
If God exists she could make it so that everything now considered sinful becomes morally acceptable and everything that is now considered morally good becomes sinful.
My answer: False-- however, only if we're talking about my God, the God of the Bible.
You've just taken a direct hit!
You claimed earlier that there is no basis for morality if God does not exist.
And I stand by that claim!
But now you say that if God does exist, she cannot make what is sinful good and vice-versa. But if this is true, it means that God cannot be the basis of morality. If God were the basis of morality, then she could decide what is good and what is bad. The fact that you think that God cannot do this shows that things must be right or wrong independently of what God decides. In other words, God chooses what is right because it is right; things are not right just because God chooses them.
I would argue that this goes against the very nature of God, and all He stands for. If the Bible says that God is perfect, just, loving, and a God of Order-- not chaos-- (among other things) then He would not make murdering good and worshipping bad. That would go against His nature, and therefore be a contradiction-- something that could not happen if He was perfect.
Question 13
It is foolish to believe in God without certain, irrevocable proof that God exists.
Oh, that is such a loaded question. It depends on what proof one is willing to accept.
Question 16
If God exists she would have the freedom and power to create square circles and make 1 + 1 = 72.
Another tricky one. I really don't like the question-- there's really no logical answer when you consider reality. It's just a big 'What If' question meant to trip you up.
You've just taken a direct hit!
You say that God does not have the freedom and power to do impossible things such as create square circles, but in an earlier answer you said that any being which it is right to call God must be free and have the power to do anything. So, on your view, God is not free and does not have the power to do what is impossible. This requires that you accept - in common with most theologians, but contrary to your earlier answer - that God's freedom and power are not unbounded. He does not have the freedom and power to do literally anything.
Again, I stand by the observation that God is a God of order and logic-- not chaos. While He certainly would be able to create a universe and have it function under those principles-- that is not how He chose to do it. Entertaining the idea of God creating illogical circumstances--as far as we can see it--goes against logic itself. This quiz is full of anti-Christian umbrella statements. ;p
In short, I survived with the TPM service medal.
"You have been awarded the TPM service medal! This is our third highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.
The fact that you have progressed through this activity without suffering many hits suggests that whilst there are inconsistencies in your beliefs about God, on the whole they are well thought-out.
The direct hits you suffered occurred where your answers implied logical contradictions. You did bite a number of bullets. These occurred because you responded in ways that required that you held views that most people would have found strange, incredible or unpalatable. At the bottom of this page, we have reproduced the analyses of your direct hits and bitten bullets.
The fact that you did not suffer many hits means that you qualify for our third highest award. Well done!"
So, yeah. While it's a very interesting quiz, it's too heavily biased against those who actually believe in the God of the Bible for my liking. One of the stats was that "46.71% of the people who have completed this activity took very little damage and were awarded the TPM Medal of Distinction." I'd be willing to bet money that most of those people are atheist.
... time to sleep now?
...Which is an excellent way to approach this! I'd just like to suggest a few points for you to mull over, if you're ever pondering about this... Religions are man-made, yes. They're man trying to reach out to god(s). I would propose that Christianity is a) more of a 'relationship,' and b) is God reaching out to man. And, yes-- man is very fallible. That's where you get the 'women have no souls,' 'not all races are equal,' 'Day-Age theory,' 'Gap-theory,' the Crusades, etc. It's when men stray from the Word of God-- which was not only inspired, but edited by God-- that Christianity goes haywire. It's when it's people using Christianity as an umbrella, a banner to wave, instead of actually following it, that things go bad.
There are people in this world, that I know personally, that I would recommend as saints over the most holy of priests or preachers.
Heh, and God sees and acknowledges that, too. Those who serve heap up treasures in Heaven-- but, you have to get to Heaven first! That's where Jesus comes in... 'Cuz since everyone's sinned, we've all fallen short of God. Since God's perfect, He can't be near sin. So, we've got to make propitiation. Jesus was the only man born of a woman who lived a perfect life-- and so, He was the only one perfect enough to pay for all our sins. Therefore, He died, and put His blood in our bank-account, so to speak. So, you can either take that blood and use it to pay off your loans-- or, you can't. 'Cuz nothing you can do can even come close-- not even being so wonderfully kind, to people or animals, as any of the people you mentioned. You can't get into Heaven by good works-- you can't earn your way. And it's a good thing, too! 'Cuz if it was a system of credits and demerits, everyone's demerits would outnumber the credits soooo bad! Everyone, not the preachers nor pastors nor Humane-Society workers nor bridge-builders, not you nor I nor my family I love so much, would be able to earn our way into Heaven. That's why Jesus is so cool. :)
And if you say these people do not exist, even in LA, then you're not looking in the right places.
Well, you're right. I was being dramatic. The people do exist-- it's just there's so many people who fall in the 'other' category, the 'good' people make up a tiny percentage of the populace.
If I remember correctly, you're working in a public museum on that backbone? Take a break, walk through the museum. I bet you just might find a teacher taking children through a guided tour. That's humanity at a high point.
Not all teachers are saints-- however, the ones that are there and truly care for the welfare of the kids-- those are my kind of heroes.
Volunteer at a soup kitchen and look at the people who are working there with you. Are those the type of people you're looking for? If so, look at where you just found them.
n_____________n
you make fun of your home town sometimes, but I bet socially, it is vastly different from LA. You cannot judge LA by what you grew up with.
I do make fun of my town-- but in the same way I make fun of my sister. Sometimes I'm exasperated, sometimes I'm angry-- but I always love her. n__n And it is a lot different than L.A.... A lot less selfish, although you can still see it there.
I got windy and wordy there, sorry. ::hugs::
Yay for hugs! And I like you windy and wordy-- that's the best part of being friends with writers! ;D
now I gotta use my free choice in hitting "comment" or closing the window. hmm... guess you figured out what my choice was, huh?
And I'm so glad you chose 'comment'! I never want you to, out of fear of my response, at least, censor yourself or be afraid to say something. What good does that do anyone? Especially not you or me! n__n Thanks so much for sharing, Bren!