Reasons for Joy; In Gentleness, and Respect.

Profile of Cletus Nze

Show Posts

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Cletus Nze

Craig vs Kagan / Craig Lost
« on: August 13, 2010, 07:01:18 am »
bm359 wrote:
I really don't know what Early Church philosophers would have made of Craig. I lean towards the idea that they would have treated him with suspicion.

Even if this were so, why is this relevant? Isn't consonance with the Truth all that counts here?

Apologetics and Theology / Please Dr Craig tell us how it is!
« on: August 13, 2010, 06:53:36 am »
tcampen wrote:

The reason why those commandments need to make sense is because people will actually follow what is said to be God's commandments no matter how silly or destructive they might be. So in order to test the veracity of those commandments, we must have a methodology that goes beyond "that's just how it's always been," or "my holy book says so according to our interpretation, so everyone needs to follow us," or "because of my personal revelation, I will enforce everyone else to conform to it - even if they don't share it."

In other words, rules not based in human reason are the more fertile ground for oppression at the hands of the those in power.  This is a fact of human history, and those who don't learn from that history are indeed doomed to repeat it.

If you want to condemn homosexuality within your church based on your particular religious belief system, then fine. That's what great about free societies.  But if you want to convince someone outside of your own cabal that your views are in fact correct, you will necessarily have to rely on reason and rationale independent of your personal religious views. And if you don't think this is a good idea, just wait until you and your bretheren are in the minority and the very ones subject to the oppression of those with different beliefs than you.  I can assure you, a theocracy is the very last thing you, or any other reasonable person wants.

So if you have a reasoned argument based on logic and evidence against committed same-sex relationships, I'm all ears. But if you are going to just rely on your particular interpretation of writings you find holy and inspired, and if you want to use that as a basis for any public policy, please forgive me if I don't find that relevant to a free society, if not downright dangerous for all of us.

Actually, people only ever follow what makes sense to them - otherwise they'd just be machines; programmed robots.

We're all free to follow whatever paths we wish - and be fully responsible for the consequences that follow automatically and unavoidably therefrom. It is up to us all - individually - to make sure that these paths not only make "sense" to us, subjectively - but make sense, objectively! Otherwise the consequences are bound to be dire - even fatal!

Apologetics and Theology / Please Dr Craig tell us how it is!
« on: August 13, 2010, 06:45:11 am »
tcampen wrote:

I think I found the prior post that you are referring to.  I re-read it, and there were some typos leaving out a few words, so I see your confusion.

But I believe I was commenting on the lack of a rational basis to be so incredibly condemning of committed, same-sex relationships.  Let me be clear, I don't think God does, because I adhere to the idea of a logical God who makes decisions that make sense - and I believe those reasons are independently accessable to us beyond some other person's personal religious views attributed to the divine.

So, if God is as condeming of committed same-sex relationships in the same emotional reactionary way I see in far too many people, then that God has issues - just like those people have issues.  Just my opinion.

Homosexuality is a psychic deformity. Whilst one should not be condemned for being deformed, it is a different matter when one extols deformity - or equates it to good health. It cannot be - and is not - the Will of God that His creatures should be deformed or unhealthy. It is for this reason that homosexuality is censured in ALL Divine Messages.

Apologetics and Theology / Omnipotence revisited
« on: August 13, 2010, 06:31:46 am »
A created thing is, by that very fact, limited - finite! The idea of an "infinite created thing" is therefore absurd - and can have no existence outside of an undisciplined illogical mind! Using the ability to create infinite things as a criterion for determining what is Omnipotent is therefore also absurd!

Apologetics and Theology / Michael Behe Lecture
« on: August 13, 2010, 06:25:13 am »
The most significant thing about Behe's lecture was that he was not presenting hypothetical arguments but repeatable observations - proving beyond a shadow of doubt that Darwin's theory of evolution is simply incapable of providing a consistent and comprehensive explanation for how organisms develop into higher forms, much less of how they came into being in the first place.

Apologetics and Theology / Omnipotence revisited
« on: August 13, 2010, 04:50:41 am »
The ability to do absurd things is NOT a requirement for Omnipotence! Absurd things CANNOT exist - save in undisciplined minds, as self-delusion! To use this as a test for ANYTHING is unsound logic!

Apologetics and Theology / Molinism...
« on: August 13, 2010, 03:17:42 am »
"Omniscience" implies knowledge of things that actually exist - ALREADY! Deeds that have not yet been done (as distinct from deeds already done but not yet manifest) DO NOT yet exist and so CANNOT be known! They are not there to be known - There is NOTHING of them to be known! They DO NOT EXIST!

Therefore there is no contradiction in saying Omniscience and complete free will BOTH exist.

From Webster's:

Main Entry: free will
Function:  noun
Date: 13th century

1 : voluntary choice or decision
2 : freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention

Only a committed materialist who, dogmatically, rejects the existence ANYTHING outside of what is possible for matter can have a fundamental - even implacable - objection to the above!

Apologetics and Theology / Please Dr Craig tell us how it is!
« on: August 12, 2010, 04:59:45 pm »
jbiemans wrote:

My point was that there are many things out there that are worse then sex between consenting adults, in a committed loving relationship.  Things like slavery, child abuse, equal rights between the sexes, rape, etc.  I cannot fathom a God who is so foccused on homosexuality, yet ignores, or endorses those things that I listed.

If that God exists, they are not worth of worship.

What makes you think that God "ignores" anything that happens within Creation? Every action automatically and unavoidably brings forth its consequences - with apodictic certainty!

Worship has to do with reverence of that which is worshipped. Being the Supreme or Ultimate Reality (as defined by Merriam-Webster's dictionary) what can be more worthy of worship than God? Moreover, such worship offered to God is really in the interest of the worshipper, fundamentally, as God is NOT in need of worship! But what creature can survive without recognition and reverence of Reality? Which one could ever attain to full development of its potential without recognition and reverence of Supreme or Ultimate Reality?

Apologetics and Theology / Molinism...
« on: August 12, 2010, 10:10:41 am »
It is quite IMPOSSIBLE to know in advance what a being with free will will do before it has done it! Once done, however, the consequences of a deed can be predicted with greater or lesser precision - depending on how sensitively and comprehensively its ramifications and manifestations can be observed by the predictor.

It is important to note that the deed must not be confused with its manifestation. The manifestation is merely an effect of the actual deed and not the deed itself! Errors of judgement arise here because many equate the deed itself - which is non-material - with its material manifestation.

God is capable of observing ALL things - including ALL deeds once they have come into existence - in their FULL ramifications! This is not the case for any other Being in Existence! It is for this reason that to some it may appear that things are known to God before they are done. But this is NOT the case! Were it be so, free will would be a sham!

But God has given free will to His creatures - and, in so doing, has endowed them with the ability to act as they will, without having to reveal to Him first how they intend to act - so that He may know this in advance ! But with this also comes the absolute inevitability of the consequences of such free action. NO ONE, including God can prevent them. They can only be countered by further free actions. In this lies the possibility to atone for wrong deeds which alone is the way to Divine Forgiveness! On the other hand, this can also lead to the apparent failure of fulfilment of Divine Promises - where recipients make the manifestation of a fulfilment impossible by their wrong deeds.

Apologetics and Theology / Most evolutionists are theists?
« on: August 12, 2010, 09:27:41 am »
There is no incompatibility whatsoever between Theism and Evolution per se. Where incompatibility exists is between Theism and Darwinism.

Pages : 1 ... 31 32 [33]