Assisted suicide

[attofishpi]

True. Jebus Krist is the most famous suicide in history

Y do U spell his name as "Jebus Krist"?

IC - I'll get to your post lata - some stuff to think about there..

[Walker]

Well, that's a strange claim. How can something contingent and temporary be the "measure" of anything?

Without life there is no value or measure of anything.

So you're ruling out the existence of God, then, since ordinarily He's identified as the locus of value. Right?

Uh, no. Not ruling out God. Not everyone believes in God so God cannot be the measure of all things for everyone. That measure isn’t in everyone’s toolbox. However, everyone is alive, and no belief is required for that.

[Immanuel Can]

Without life there is no value or measure of anything.

So you're ruling out the existence of God, then, since ordinarily He's identified as the locus of value. Right?

Uh, no. Not ruling out God. Not everyone believes in God so God cannot be the measure of all things for everyone.

He's still the measure of all things. After all, He's the Supreme Being. What they know or don't know doesn't change that. It just means they're out of touch with real values.

[Walker]

So you're ruling out the existence of God, then, since ordinarily He's identified as the locus of value. Right?

Uh, no. Not ruling out God. Not everyone believes in God so God cannot be the measure of all things for everyone.

He's still the measure of all things. After all, He's the Supreme Being. What they know or don't know doesn't change that. It just means they're out of touch with real values.

Maybe they live in crooked lives because of inaccurate measurements.

[Immanuel Can]

Uh, no. Not ruling out God. Not everyone believes in God so God cannot be the measure of all things for everyone.

He's still the measure of all things. After all, He's the Supreme Being. What they know or don't know doesn't change that. It just means they're out of touch with real values.

Maybe they live in crooked lives because of inaccurate measurements.

Right. But they also tend to suspect, in their most self-aware, private moments, that they've been using the wrong metric anyway. And it troubles their sleep.

[Walker]

Some folks have troubles that nothing seems to cure, until they find the thing that does cure. Evangelism ideally says hey, take a look at this. It may help, it has helped many. It's not a struggle of wills, just a helpful suggestion.

I think that what Christianity offers in the practical, daily life, is that it makes the perpetual background, low-grade anxiety, vanish. The thing you mentioned that troubles their sleep. This results in true peace of mind. That allows the energy that was consumed by the needless noise to naturally turn towards goodness ... towards God.

[Age]

Are these two, here, trying to CLAIM that the crucifixion of "jesus christ" is just another form of 'assisted suicide'?

Obviously that is what we are doing. The point we are both making is that the Romans assisted Christ to accomplish what he set out to do since he was a nipper.

It's the only thing the Romans ever did for them, poor sods.

Do you have some irrefutable problem with that?

I WAS JUST CURIOS as to WHY you two would talk ABOUT "jesus christ" IN A 'assisted suicide' thread.

Also, TO me, the words 'irrefutable problem' together like 'that' IS NONSENSICAL.

[Age]

Now I'm going to take you back to our earlier conversation:

I think we can. Science tells us the system we're living in is entropic, so it's not going to last forever. And we do not see any unambiguous evidence of people having more than one life, so we have no reason at all to suppose it.

Do you see a problem here with you answer? Christ just proved the power of GOD in ability to resurrect - thus, can certainly reincarnate we mere humans.

Is that what He promises to do, though? Has he promised in His Word to reincarnate people, and to give them multiple cycles in which to prove themselves?

LOL There is NO 'he', here. So, the REST IS MOOT.

In fact, does He say that proving themselves -- in the sense of doing works to show they're 'good enough people' -- is what He wants them to do? Decidedly not: we are told instead that without His salvation, there isn't one of us that's getting to God. And I believe that.

AGAIN, you are FREE TO BELIEVE you WANT. But, throughout human history some, or most, of what you people BELIEVED TURNED OUT TO ABSOLUTELY IRREFUTABLY False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect.

So, no, I don't see a problem with the answer I gave, since it's the one Christ gave.

LOL 'We' have, here, ANOTHER who BELIEVES that it HAS DIRECT PERSONAL INTERACTIONS WITH these two - God AND "jesus christ".

Do people like 'these ones' WONDER WHY they are SO OFTEN LAUGH AT?

I see a problem with contradicting what Christ says is going to happen, though. And He says we have one life, and then the Judgment.

I've made the point to you before, that it wouldn't be fair of GOD to judge all as equal based on the conduct of only ONE life incarnation.

Yes, it would, of course. That's the advantage of omniscience, I would say: God knows what we started out with, what we did with it, what we could have done with it, and what we ought to have done with it.

'These people', STILL, seem to NOT YET COMPREHEND that once one DISCOVERS, or LEARNS, and UNDERSTANDS WHY ALL people DO what they DO, then NO 'judging' PURSUES.

LOL God does NOT 'JUDGE' you human beings BECAUSE ALREADY KNOWS WHY you ALL DO what you DO.

I know a lady who lives alone. She's mentally handicapped, severely limited in abilities, and highly vulnerable. But she's also a very sweet, caring and generous-spirited person, one far better than many "privileged" people I know. Will her one life be better or worse, in God's eyes, than theirs, or than mine?

Your question, then, amounts to, "Would you think it unfair of God to reckon her conduct better than your own, since she started from lower down and did all she could with all she had?" And my answer is, "No, not a bit unfair: God is the Judge. I have not the slightest question of His ability to assess all my advantages against her disadvantages, all her achievements against my own, and to reckon her life better than mine. He will do what is right, and I will bow to His judgment."

Yet, as to my "privileges," you could possibly consider that my circumstances may not be even as exalted as your own. Or maybe more exalted. You really have no means to assess that, just as I have no means to assess yours.

But God knows. That's why He's the Judge, and we are not.

AGAIN, ALL MOOT, here, as there is NO "he" NOR "he".

[Age]

So you're ruling out the existence of God, then, since ordinarily He's identified as the locus of value. Right?

Uh, no. Not ruling out God. Not everyone believes in God so God cannot be the measure of all things for everyone.

He's still the measure of all things. After all, He's the Supreme Being.

So, TO A 'male' A 'male' IS the so-called 'Supreme Being'.

There is NO WONDER WHY 'males' like 'this one', here, can NOT be taken SERIOUSLY.

What they know or don't know doesn't change that.

LOL The Fact that you do NOT KNOW, here, CHANGES 'it' COMPLETELY.

ONCE AGAIN, FOR THE EXTREMELY SLOW OF LEARNING, just because you BELIEVE some thing IS TRUE "immanuel can" does NOT MAKE 'it' TRUE.

How MANY TIMES does 'this one' NEED TO BE INFORMED OF 'this' BEFORE it can COMPREHEND and UNDERSTAND 'it'?

It just means they're out of touch with real values.

LOL So, WHOEVER DOES NOT ALIGN WITH what "immanuel can" BELIEVES, then ALL OF 'them' are, LAUGHINGLY, OUT OF TOUCH WITH REAL 'values'.

HOW BLIND, CLOSED, and STUPID could one human BECOME and GET?

[Immanuel Can]

Some folks have troubles that nothing seems to cure, until they find the thing that does cure. Evangelism ideally says hey, take a look at this. It may help, it has helped many. It's not a struggle of wills, just a helpful suggestion.

The struggle of wills, I think, takes place between the individual and God, not between men/women. But the latter often prefer to struggle with other men/women, because it puts the opposition on a much lower level, and makes the struggle less dire.

I think that what Christianity offers in the practical, daily life, is that it makes the perpetual background, low-grade anxiety, vanish. The thing you mentioned that troubles their sleep. This results in true peace of mind. That allows the energy that was consumed by the needless noise to naturally turn towards goodness ... towards God.

"Perpetual, low-grade" anxiety, you say. Yes, perhaps. But "low grade" only in tone, not in magnitude. It's actually quite a serious struggle, one with the very highest sort of stakes, but one that the individual ordinarily subdues and suppresses in order to get on with what he/she considers the business of daily life. It's pushed into the background, muffled, muted...but it cannot be stopped, so in those moments of quiet reflection, when distractions, entertainments and business are not available, it inevitably resurfaces.

I know what it is to experience that. It's just not my experience anymore.

[Walker]

I know what it is to experience that. It's just not my experience anymore.

That’s consistently evident and could be the source of your clarity.

Reaction to your insightful explanation:

“subdues and suppresses” is a key element that causes the resurfacing of the magnitude of unhappiness that seems to afflict folks. Subduing and suppressing creates a mental conflict, and mental conflict creates inner violence that will eventually surface in some way.

When there is no mental conflict there is no inner violence, there is peace of mind. Christianity can awaken that truth into action. It’s one thing to awaken to that truth in relation to what one knows of how the world works, but walking that path requires application.

When the application ceases to create inner conflict and confusion and instead results in peace of mind and understanding, then there is no more inner violence to eventually make its way into the world as thought, words, and deeds. Inner conflict is a huge energy burner, so with all that energy suddenly freed up, that which freed the energy naturally turns one towards goodness … towards God. Something to consider: the essence of “this or that,” is inner conflict.

Relevance to assisted suicide: Such a preference as assisted suicide, made without inner conflict, is the authoritative voice. I think those who make that rational decision have no more inner conflict about their situation.

[Immanuel Can]

I know what it is to experience that. It's just not my experience anymore.

That’s consistently evident and could be the source of your clarity.

Reaction to your insightful explanation:

“subdues and suppresses” is a key element that causes the resurfacing of the magnitude of unhappiness that seems to afflict folks. Subduing and suppressing creates a mental conflict, and mental conflict creates inner violence that will eventually surface in some way.

Absolutely. Flashes of anger, irrationality, refusal to speak of certain topics, avoidance of "triggering" situations, fear of being alone or of having thinking time, fear of not being entertained or distracted, aversion to deep discussions about things like life-trajectory, inability to engage in deep relationships, denial of the past, feelings of aimlessness or wandering...there are lots of such pathologies.

Inner conflict is a huge energy burner, so with all that energy suddenly freed up, that which freed the energy naturally turns one towards goodness … towards God.

But first, there has to be a rupture with the old coping strategies. The person has to come to an admission, a full- on realization, that he/she is just as bad as all that. That the past was just what it was, and his/her role in it has been exactly what it was. That sort of realism, of self-analysis is hugely painful for most people. And then the decision to reject and be sorry for that past is equally important. This is what religious folks call "repentance": the realistic coming to grips with the truth about oneself, and the rejection of the lies and platitudes that have made it possible for them to proceed in life thoughtlessly. But this is not easy: it's a moment of deep, existential despair, in a way; and it would not be humane to ask anybody to do it, if there were not a definite curative beyond the despair.

That curative must come fast, because the deep darkness of this final acceptance of one's own falseness is very dark indeed. It's a giving up on the hope of making oneself a better self by one's own efforts. But if it's followed by a cry for rescue, then there is hope beyond it. As Jesus Christ put it, "...whoever wants to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it." (Matt. 16:25) This turns out to be the ultimate truth: try to "save" yourself from this "valley of the shadow of death," and you will lose your better self forever, because you will remain that distracted, dishonest, meaning-averse, nervous self that you are naturally. You'll never become what you could have been, if only you'd faced the darkness and cried out for the light.

Relevance to assisted suicide: Such a preference as assisted suicide, made without inner conflict, is the authoritative voice. I think those who make that rational decision have no more inner conflict about their situation.

Well, there are people who simply cannot stand the pain. But physical pain is one thing, and often is not so great yet as the sufferer cannot endure a little longer. But some places, like Canada, even mental depression or despair of life is considered sufficient warrant for assisted suicide. And this is quite a different motive for killing oneself.

I think it's actually the final refusal to face the truth. It's "I feel myself breaking...I cannot let myself get to that state. So I'll short-circuit the process of realization, and end my suffering before I crack." Sadly, it's the cracking that one really, really needs...the vacating of hope in the self. And it is this all-important existential moment that dispatching oneself summarily is intended to prevent.

In short, the purpose of such assisted suicide is to prevent salvation.

[attofishpi]

Now I'm going to take you back to our earlier conversation:

I think we can. Science tells us the system we're living in is entropic, so it's not going to last forever. And we do not see any unambiguous evidence of people having more than one life, so we have no reason at all to suppose it.

Do you see a problem here with you answer? Christ just proved the power of GOD in ability to resurrect - thus, can certainly reincarnate we mere humans.

Is that what He promises to do, though? Has he promised in His Word to reincarnate people, and to give them multiple cycles in which to prove themselves? In fact, does He say that proving themselves -- in the sense of doing works to show they're 'good enough people' -- is what He wants them to do? Decidedly not: we are told instead that without His salvation, there isn't one of us that's getting to God. And I believe that.

Yes, I do as per my current situation. To know GOD is through Christ.

So, no, I don't see a problem with the answer I gave, since it's the one Christ gave. I see a problem with contradicting what Christ says is going to happen, though. And He says we have one life, and then the Judgment.

No, I still don't agree with that, even if (I think it was Paul that wrote the passage you cited), even if Paul wrote that AND he was accurate in the wording of his statement, I don't agree that it holds to your interpretation only, that it negates what what sage has taught me - particulary something profoud per my previous life.

I've made the point to you before, that it wouldn't be fair of GOD to judge all as equal based on the conduct of only ONE life incarnation.

Yes, it would, of course. That's the advantage of omniscience, I would say: God knows what we started out with, what we did with it, what we could have done with it, and what we ought to have done with it.

It was while walking my dog yesterday I had been considering our discussion here and for some reason determinism (which of course is nonsense) was banging me on the head! I knew there was something missing, and it would have some pertinance to my side of the argument and then it came to me - other people's actions. That it's NOT just our initial birth place and start in life, but we are judged throughout life - everyday is a day of judgement (not THE one of course).

All through our lives, we are dealing with situations out of our control with other people. One may murder someone for reasons that we would agree with were justified.

I think the point I am making, is that let's say there was a big list of our actions placed in front of GOD from which he would ascertain his decision. Every list would have varying degrees SIN - all sorts of horrors. But, these lists with their differences would not be fairly judged if it was only the list taken into account and not the CIRCUMSTANCES - including, initial birth foundational conditions. Thus, a fair and just GOD would have to balance his judgement on YOUR version especially considering what is at stake.
My version of multiple lives cycling through time and multiple (less consequential judgements at end of each life) pertaining to karmic rebirth into family/faiths that one has decided upon throughout their lives - until the eventual BIG final judgement at the end of times ---makes far more sense to me, pertaining to a just GOD.
REASON being:- You say the only passage to know GOD, be with GOD is via Christ - we agree there. Yet, humans are born across the planet into all sorts on nonsense. A person born into an atheist family in a gang banging ghetto in South America - may have the opportunity to consider a LITTLE about the story of Christ, but never had the opportunity to truly understand the message. And that account goes for so many more in FAR more less likely to get to hear the nature of Christs message.
CONCLUSION: It then makes sense that this very just GOD would ascertain the lives of people and, let's say our South American gang-banger that had a little look at Christ, but remained atheist or open to the idea of GOD at least, it makes sense at least to me - that let's say he looked after his aging mother, took care of his family in the best way - showed LOVE - when resorted to having to even kill a man, to protect a loved one. It makes sense in my version with reincarnation through time, that his soul would elevate, that he would reincarnate into a Christian family to further develop his inkling. Rather that - burn in hell forever!!!

[Immanuel Can]

He says we have one life, and then the Judgment.

No, I still don't agree with that, even if (I think it was Paul that wrote the passage you cited), even if Paul wrote that AND he was accurate in the wording of his statement, I don't agree that it holds to your interpretation only, that it negates what what sage has taught me - particulary something profoud per my previous life.

I'm just pointing out what the Bible says about that. One can believe it, or choose to believe otherwise; but it's helpful to know what it says. You're right about the passage I quoted being from later Biblical writings; but Christ says essentially the same thing, on several occasions, and even gives examples. And at no time, anywhere in Scripture, including in all of Christ's teaching, is reincarnation ever taught. So it would be the task of somebody who wanted to believe reincarnation could be reconciled with Scripture to find out how; and I 'm quite confident that task cannot be done at all.

That it's NOT just our initial birth place and start in life, but we are judged throughout life - everyday is a day of judgement (not THE one of course).

I think that requires us to use the term "judgment" in two different senses, then. There's THE Judgment, as you say, which is when actual justice is done...as for lesser "judgments," I'm not sure how they'd even be detected, given that so often in this world the wicked seem to prosper and the righteous often suffer. It would be very hard to sustain the belief that justice is available in the here-and-now.

REASON being:- You say the only passage to know GOD, be with GOD is via Christ - we agree there. Yet, humans are born across the planet into all sorts on nonsense. A person born into an atheist family in a gang banging ghetto in South America - may have the opportunity to consider a LITTLE about the story of Christ, but never had the opportunity to truly understand the message. And that account goes for so many more in FAR more less likely to get to hear the nature of Christs message.

I don't think this presents a serious concern, actually. God is certainly able to know where people are starting out, what He expects them to know, and what they do with that. And should He wish to, He can make any message available to anybody anywhere. Moreover, He knows all possibilities and alternatives...so He knows how a given person WOULD respond IF he/she heard a particular message, and who would not. This is a big discussion, and has to do with what's been called "middle knowledge," if you want to look that up.

In any case, it's not problematic for an omniscient God. His justice will never be short of the relevant facts.

[attofishpi]

Sorry mate, the old chestnut has returned where you think its appropriate to lop the KEY part that supports my REASON point in particular such that you make your argument without the consideration of the part(s) you lop from my arguments.

It makes your argument always have the upper hand once the KEY backbone to the reasoning required of mine has been removed by you.

Forget it. It's an unethical way to debate philosophically.