Christianity

[Alexis Jacobi]

I think I grasp the situation more firmly than you think. You are trying to influence, and I have no intention of being influenced. Why you think that your disapproval of what you perceive to be my attitude will motivate me to reassess it I cannot imagine.

By your own admission you are un-influenciable. You’ve made this plain time and again. Thinking that I am trying to influence you involves you unnecessarily in something like a defense. You’d best say nothing really. You are a prop. Relax!

[Alexis Jacobi]

I’ll just stick to focussing my own contempt on those who want to impose any kind of god onto me.

Righto. That would be our ever-persevering Immanuel if I am not mistaken. Working subtly and with restraint to keep you out of Hell’s ferocious fires .

[iambiguous]

It would seem that you leave a door open, at least. I do not presume to say to what.

How could it be any more obvious: the gap between what any particular one of us thinks we know about The Really Big Questions...

* Why something instead of nothing?

HOW is what you should be asking (if you were philosophically apt).

* Why this something and not something else?

WHY are you human and not something else is what you should be asking, especially in any consideration of God.

* Where does the human condition fit in the whole understanding of existence itself?

What is the attribute(s) of human condition that you are questioning?

* Do we have free will?

I believe we do, other_wise God would not have bothered with much at all in relation to us humans.

* Is there life after death?

I believe we do reincarnate (based on karma of previous life), and it makes more sense than ALL of us being born into extreme differences in circumstances where God is apparently going to judge us all EQUALLY.

* What of solipsism, sim worlds, dream worlds, Matrix worlds, etc.?

Considering everything you perceive about reality beyond your own mind is a convoluted apparition provided by a 3rd party intelligence (God) is a worthy philosophical consideration.
eg. If there is a God (there is) then why do we witness so much evil?

* Does God exist?

Yes.

....and all that one would need to know in order to answer them.

First point is to get to KNOW God - (faith in the life of Christ) then you may eventually be given answers to the above initial questions you raised...since I believe only God or a sage that has been informed by God could answer those first questions you raised.

No, seriously.

[attofishpi]

How could it be any more obvious: the gap between what any particular one of us thinks we know about The Really Big Questions...

* Why something instead of nothing?

HOW is what you should be asking (if you were philosophically apt).

* Why this something and not something else?

WHY are you human and not something else is what you should be asking, especially in any consideration of God.

* Where does the human condition fit in the whole understanding of existence itself?

What is the attribute(s) of human condition that you are questioning?

* Do we have free will?

I believe we do, other_wise God would not have bothered with much at all in relation to us humans.

* Is there life after death?

I believe we do reincarnate (based on karma of previous life), and it makes more sense than ALL of us being born into extreme differences in circumstances where God is apparently going to judge us all EQUALLY.

* What of solipsism, sim worlds, dream worlds, Matrix worlds, etc.?

Considering everything you perceive about reality beyond your own mind is a convoluted apparition provided by a 3rd party intelligence (God) is a worthy philosophical consideration.
eg. If there is a God (there is) then why do we witness so much evil?

* Does God exist?

Yes.

....and all that one would need to know in order to answer them.

First point is to get to KNOW God - (faith in the life of Christ) then you may eventually be given answers to the above initial questions you raised...since I believe only God or a sage that has been informed by God could answer those first questions you raised.

No, seriously.

Are you ever serious? How about addressing each point as I have made the effort with you, instead of continuously retorting with arrogant ad hominems.

[Harbal]

Harbal, dear one,

Alexis, dick head, why do you address me so when you obviously don't like me?

this is going to be really hard for you but you are totally irrelevant to every idea that is discussed in this thread.

which makes it all the more puzzling why you seem determined to include me in the discussion.

You might as well write about breakfast cereals or your preferred lightbulbs.

No, my Nutrition and Electrical Fittings Forum is the place for that.

You are interesting to me because of this vacuousness

I can't help being interesting.

And I am quite certain that you are part of a multitude

I hope to God that you aren't.

Though I tell you that you must not take it at all personally, and you affirm that you don't, you do not need to respond to anything I say. Essentially for the reasons I mention.

Your digging at me has given me permission to start enjoying myself at your expense, Alexis, and I think you'll find that I'm rather better at this game than you.

Now . . . what to do about Lacewing. Hmmmmm. Thinking thinking! . . .

Lacewing is more than capable of handling you, so just keep that in mind, Alexis, dear one.

[iambiguous]

Are you ever serious? How about addressing each point as I have made the effort with you, instead of continuously retorting with arrogant ad hominems.

So, I must strike you as a fool then. Because in my own entirely subjective, rooted existentially in dasein personal opinion, only a fool would take you seriously.

[attofishpi]

Are you ever serious? How about addressing each point as I have made the effort with you, instead of continuously retorting with arrogant ad hominems.

So, I must strike you as a fool then.

How could I possibly know you are a fool without knowing you personally? That statement alone renders you an idiot. (which I've known since you joined this forum)

[Alexis Jacobi]

Alexis, dick head, why do you address me so when you obviously don't like me?

Actually I do like you — insofar as one can like someone on ai Internet forum. Stop taking this personally. You’ll embarrass yourself.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Your digging at me has given me permission to start enjoying myself at your expense, Alexis, and I think you'll find that I'm rather better at this game than you.

Then there is really no problem. I’m relieved. Now bring it on as you’ve promised.

Finally! A worthy opponent!

[henry quirk]

What paragraph draws you — or repels you — as the case may be?

As he describes symptoms: he's mostly on top of things.

As to the cause: as I say, I done tackled that, over & over.

[Belinda]

It can be. It's not necessarily so.

But I'm curious: what evidence of "fertility" do you perceive to be coming out of "existential anxiety among free thinkers" now?

That was a quick idea on my part, Immanuel. I immediately thought of
The Handmaid's Tale and His Dark Materials that I enjoyed last night on television. Then I thought of the Sea of Faith movement , and The Jesus Seminar, and popular culture once you get past the moaning and groaning about sexual frustration.

Hmmm...

That's a bit like saying, "Y'know, since Herr Hitler took over, we've had the most wonderful cartoons showing big-nosed Jews stealing money and big-lipped people of colour saying foolish, semi-articulate things; it's been a real art renaissance."

I'm sure things looked different if you were a Jewish person or from a visible minority yourself.

Everybody has a different story and all are necessary to the whole, but some stories are truer than others.

[henry quirk]

Here, here is one idea we might toss into the mix. I wish to do no harm to any man . . . but eliminate whole swaths of them . . .

Sorry to trouble you but have you a transcript, in English ?

Here you go, Miss B...

I don't want to punish anybody, but there are an extraordinary number of people who I might want to kill…I think it would be a good thing to make everybody come before a properly appointed board just as he might come before the income tax commissioner and say every 5 years or every 7 years…just put them there and say, 'Sir or madam will you be kind enough to justify your existence…if you're not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little bit more then clearly we cannot use the big organization of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive. Because your life does not benefit us and it can't be of very much use to yourself.' George Bernard Shaw

[Belinda]

Here, here is one idea we might toss into the mix. I wish to do no harm to any man . . . but eliminate whole swaths of them . . .

Sorry to trouble you but have you a transcript, in English ?

Here you go, Miss B...

I don't want to punish anybody, but there are an extraordinary number of people who I might want to kill…I think it would be a good thing to make everybody come before a properly appointed board just as he might come before the income tax commissioner and say every 5 years or every 7 years…just put them there and say, 'Sir or madam will you be kind enough to justify your existence…if you're not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little bit more then clearly we cannot use the big organization of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive. Because your life does not benefit us and it can't be of very much use to yourself.' George Bernard Shaw

Thanks Henry. GBS is a rascal who says things like that to make us think. Obviously the great income tax commissioner in the sky knows that inflated pride in one's own value conceals from one the fact that in the great commissioner's eyes prideful man is no better than any other form of life.

[henry quirk]

Thanks Henry.

in the great commissioner's eyes prideful man is no better than any other form of life.

I love ya, B, but that there is horseshit (another symptom, AJ).

[Immanuel Can]

After all, lies can be told impulsively, and theft committed with as little forethought; but abduction and murder take planning, strategy and time. This implies that somebody who commits such a crime isn't really acting on "impulse," but by intention.

And intending, scheming, strategizing, planning and executing evil is quite another level than merely doing evil impulsively.

Those who do have the desire may or may not be able to resist acting upon it, but they don't have the free will not to experience it.

Yes, they can resist. If they can plan, rationalize, excuse, cover up, dissemble, conceal and so forth, they are voluntarily applying their intellection to the task. It would only be those who cannot premeditate, plan, conceal, rationalize, excuse, hide, and otherwise avoid punishment for their crime that we could even fairly imagine "couldn't help it."

We need not make extra excuses for people who should, and do, know better.

I find the term "natural evil" inexplicable. Why do we need to call, or think of, floods and earthquakes as anything other than natural disasters?

That's what some people say. But others ask, "How can you not see a flood that kills a hundred children as an 'evil'? And I grant them the point. Even if we don't use the word "evil," I think it still has to make up some part of our explanation of the order of things that such things happen, and are not good.

So I also would concede your point: there's an absence of malice that applies to "natural evils," so maybe they deserve their own classification.

No problem either way.

I'm not sure what you're getting at when you suggest that people need an explanation for such things, unless you mean they want a scientific explanation in order to satisfy their curiosity, but I don't think you do mean that.

Well, I'm pretty sure THEY don't mean that, and I'm just willing to recognize their concern; that's all.

So I'm not "getting at" anything, really.

You have given examples of what you call Human Evils, but not a definition. What is the difference between something that is bad, and something that is evil?

I don't know if I can parse that for you in a way that fits common usage. I would make, first, a distinction of degree, and I concede your point that I would be more likely to use the word "evil" if malice and premeditation were involved. And I might call something "bad" if it was merely "unhealthy" or "harmful," but not malevolent.

However, the distinction is not a clear one: there are things that might be actually evil that seem, from a mere human perspective, merely "unhealthy." And there are things that might seem blackly sinful, such as, say "adultery," but which are not more so than seemingly-respectable sins like "pride," "slander" or "hatefulness." One would have to look at something like the Sermon on the Mount to grasp just how much the human assessment of what is evil can fall short of the Divine standard.

But I'm not confident to say that my personal feelings about each matter much. What does matter to me is what God calls "evil" or "sin." And I'm prepared to agree with Him, since He knows much more about that question than my mere feelings can tell me.

Malice is central to my definition, and if we think of maliciousness as a scale, evil would simply be the point at the extreme end of it. I do not sense that is your conception of what evil is.

I would say that malice certainly is a "part" of my definition, but not the "sum" of it, and not the sine qua non of it.

So maybe we start talking about the part on which we agree, yes? You are thinking about human evils, and about malice. What are you thinking about them?