Total posts: 8,050
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Your entire argument looks to me like "If I can imagine a better reality than the one we live in, God doesn't exist."
This is clearly loony toons
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
You are not argiing against my God.
Irs really simple. I don't need to address your arguments against straw man false god idols.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgmi
You have never spoken to me before, and you are speaking against me to the one who spits at your faith.
Something ain't right about that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Everything is wrong because you are speaking about things you don't understand.
I see nothing but nonsense and superstition.
Created:
Posted in:
If you are not able to tell me what I’ve gotten wrong, whilst you continue to repeatedly and vociferously assert how wrong I am : the only logical conclusion is that I’m actually paraphrasing your religion and God quite accurately - and as you know I’m broadly correct, you’re only left with the ability to wildly assert how wrong I am, as you are doing here.
This is the type of haughty and foolish reasoning that allowed you to come up with Ramshitu's razor to begin with. You are unjustifiably smug for somone who has no ground to stand on.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Actually, the fact that you think you can disprove that the ultimate reality's existence is illogical.
See, I'm not answering you according to your folly, then I will be as foolish as you. No, I am pointing out the root of your folly. Your argument is stupid. You should abandon it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
The Ultimate Reality is God.
You can be certain that God isn't whatever you imagine or can conceive God to be.
Amd this is what we have always taught, so don't presume to understand our religion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
You still think I am refering to a conception of God as God.
No, God is what God is.
It is not an argument, it is apodictic truth. It isn't "such and such is God and this is the ultimate reality" it is "The word "God" means the ultimate reality".
Whatever the ultimate reality is, that is God. That is what the word means.
When I say God, I am refering to The Ultimate Reality.
And that is always how we have understood God.
There is no "if".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
If you grant that God is the ultimate reality, then you should also grant that no sophistry can undermine God's existence.
The Ultimate Reality can never not be The Ultimate Reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Right off the bat you make God something other than the ultimate reality.
I am the only Orthodox Christian in this room.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
You don't actually know my God, you just think you do.
No, the ultimate reality is literally our God. That is why our discipline is about cleansing the nous. How would this make sense unless it was in the context of Truth worship? Why do we care so much about ridding ourselves of spiritual delusion?
You don't know our God. If you knew the God we worship, you certainly would not deny its existence.
No, what you have in your mind is a conception of what you think my conception of God is. The Ultimate Reality is not a conception, it is existence in the truest sense of what that means.
It is never too late to learn, you know.
First lesson. The word "God" with a capital "G" refers to The Ultimate Reality. There is no argument against the existence of God that can stand.
Created:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
We would not see that sort of thing as necessary or desirable.
That said, tbere are thousands of years worth of commentary on the scriptures.
The important thing to get is that our religion is Truth worship, and all of our discipline follows from that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
I’m judging based on the Goals and rules of Morality you claim God adheres to
I have made no such claim at all, quite the contrary. I am calling you superstitious.
And you can make all these claims about me all you want, but they won't stick because I know that you are ignorant. Really, you are not in the position to teach me about God. You are, after all, denying the existence of ultimate reality. If you knew what that meant, you would know that you aren't standing on anything.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
I do no such thing.You are conflating the psychological brainstates of belief and disbelief with believing or disbeliving claims again. Please don't become Mopac.
Created:
-->
@Harikrish
Actually, Rome without consent of the rest of the church altered the creed of faith, tried to depose bishops, and was working outside of its ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Every other Patriarch sided against them.
The Roman Catholic church broke communion with us, they are the ones in error. The proof is really in examining the history of the church. The pope of Rome is not, nor ever had papal supremacy over the church, neither have they ever had the authority to alter the creed agreed on by the entire church. Altering the creed is something that in every ecumenical council that the matter was brought up, would lead to anathema.
So no, there is no division. You are either Orthodox or you aren't with the church.
Heterodox means other than orthodox.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
Quite the contrary, we hold free will in reverence which naturally make us tolerant.
But really, we have a way better way than tolerance even. Charity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
It is sufficient that the universe is the way it is.
You are judging based on your arbitrary sense of personal aesthetics and your own superstitions concerning God.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
All free will means is that you have some measure of control over mind.
Which we all do. We can even reprogram our minds if we wanted to!
Choice. That what it is.
Created:
Posted in:
No, I am recognizing that the question will never be settled beyond reasonable doubt. I am acknowledging that the debate is absurd.Ah, so, now you're advocating for the noble lie.
That isn't at all the same thing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
No one claims that our ability to make choice is free from causal influence.
What is claimed is that we have the ability to choose, even choose to do things that defy expectations, like say, choose to be tortured to death rather than give the enemy the access codes. Or even to choose to not be seduced by someone very desirable. To choose to help someone rather than leave them to suffer. To make an active effort to change one's own situation in life. To grow up.
We certainly experience the ability to choose and that alone is reason enough to operate as if it is reality. Whether we are ultimately led around like clockwork is an absurd question because it is impossible to establish this beyond a reasonable doubt. The elephant in the room is certainly that we can choose.
And it is a very dangerous thing to reduce people to simply being cogs in a machine. This dehumanizing mentality can, has been, and will be used to justify all manner of evils committed by the powers thst be in the world. When humankind is reduced to the level of cattle, or even spiders. Sand.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
As this is an absurd argument to begin with, I must defer to a previous point that I made..
That perhaps more useful than discussing the veracity of free will would be to discuss the effects and utilization of the belief itself.
The approach Jacques Vallée takes to UFOs and apply it to free will instead.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Again; I don’t entirely know what planet you’re on: but the concept here is that if your God exists, I should not be ableto imagine a universe that better fulfills the goals attributed to him. If I can, that God cannot exists.
There is nothing rational about this argument. In fact, it is so stupid the person who came up with it is deserving of mockery.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
The Ultimate Reality is not a conception. It is what it is. The Truly Existent One.
The fact that this is not a common ground that we can all agree on, that is, that reality in the truest sense of the word exists, demonstrates that there is no unifying common ground. After all, if people can't get this right!
To say that the ultimate reality does not exist is like saying, "It is the truth that there is no truth!". This is a nihilism that not only destroys everything, but even itself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
The Church has always understood God as such.
And nothing about our spirituality can make sense without the understanding that we worship The Truth as God.
Your reasoning is nonsense, and utter folly. You cannot create a universe through your vain imaginings. You cannot even create an ant.
You don't know God, you are arguing from a position of ignorance.
Created:
Posted in:
There is nothing fanatical about finding child sacrifice abominable.
And not only is there no freedom of religion in any real sense under sharia, but abortion is practically a non issue because unchaste women are not tolerated.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
The Ultimate Reality is God. If you make God to mean anything else, you are no longer talking about the same thing as me, but are propping up a straw man.
If God doesn't exist, then what you are calling God does not even fulfill the basic essence of what God is.
Created:
-->
@Harikrish
Peter and Paul are Orthodox saints. They certainly did not "grab Peter and Paul".
The Orthodox Church has been in a never ending position of being persecuted, and has even been the object of genocide. Yet despite this, it is the second largest congregation of those that go by the name Christian in the world.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
The fact that reality does not conform to your arbitrary sense of aesthetics is not any indication that you can somehow poof it out of existence through your vain imaginings.
If the ultimate reality doesn't exist, then nothing is ultimately real. As there is clearly some form of existence as is scientifically proven by everyones experience... there is clearly some form of reality. Even if illusory, it still exists as illusion. If there is reality at all, and there is, the ultimate reality is a necessary existence.
Created:
-->
@Harikrish
The Roman Cathllic church broke away from Orthodoxy over a thousand years ago because they had this crazy idea that the bishop of Rome was the king of all Christendom and could arbitrarily alter fundamentals of the faith that the entire church agreed would lead to anathema and being cut off from the church.
The Anglican Church broke away from Roman Catholicism because the King didn't like being told how to conduct his married life. Methodism was inspired by the teachings of John Wesley, an Anglican priest.
So Methodism is a schism of a schism of a schism.
Roman Catholicism is a schismatic church.
The Orthodox Catholic Church is THE Christian Church.
We don't recognize denominationalism as a thing. You are either Orthodox or you are heterodox. Either with the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, or with something else.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
If you think you are smarter than God, that is a sure sign that you are delusional.
I don't think you know what you are saying.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
You are saying that The Ultimate Reality doesn't exist. That is the Christian God.
If you are saying The Ultimate Reality doesn't exist, you have adopted a self defeating and nihilistic position.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
But to go even further, to think that belief in one's vain imaginings can somehow disprove the ultimate reality's existence is ridiculous.
Think about it.
"I don't like the way things are, so I'm going to imagine a better world... reality overturned!"
Rather silly. I think your razor is rusty.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Orthodox Christianity is quite a bit different than heterodox Christianity. The heterodox are after all, not with the Church.
The Orthodox Catholic Church is the original Christian Church. Even if you have a bad understanding of Roman papalist Christianity or protestant Christianity, you are still getting your information from schismatics and/or heretics. We actually know the God we worship.
We know that God is The Supreme and Ultimate Reality, and there is no argument that stands against this God.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Are you saying that you are merely presuming and not speaking with knowledge that...
Religions all state that God has a generalized set of goals for the universe
Because that is what it sounds like.
Created:
Posted in:
I think thst the guns and dope party offers the best compromise between left and right.
Guns for those who want them, no guns for those who don't.
Drugs for those who want them, no drugs for those who don't.
Equal rights for ostriches.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Religions all state that God has a generalized set of goals for the universe
And what do you think those goals are in Orthodox Christianity?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Harikrish
i am a Brahmin and come from the priestly caste. So you can and should hold me to a higher standard.
Well then, you should know better than to take yourself an expert in Christianity. It appears to me that you can't even tell the difference between Orthodox Christianity and Roman Papalism.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
There is a difference between condoning slavery and recognizing it as a reality. Christianity doesn't condone slavery, but if you ever find yourself in position of slavery, there is a Christian way to go about.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
@keithprosser
@Stronn
@Fallaneze
As God is The Ultimate Reality, the only way to say God doesn't exist is to adopt the position of nihilism.
If you could tell the difference between the created and the uncreated, you would understand that there is a certain level of absurdity involved in communicating God. We are, after all, created beings in the world of creation. Creation is our medium.
Archimandrite Sophrony was highlighting a great truth when he wrote "Throughout the ages the doctors of the Church sought ways and means whereby to communicate to the world their knowledge concerning Divine Being. In their attempts they constantly found themselves torn between unwillingness to abandon their imageless contemplation of the essentially one and only mystery, and the love which impelled them to communicate the mystery to their brethren."
With out the Holy Spirit, you will see images, but you won't really see what they are communicating. Or to use another example, it is like staring at the finger of someone who is pointing you to look at something.
The Ultimate Reality is God. The God we worship and acknowledge is The Truth.
That being understood, the flimsiness of all arguments against God is made manifest, and these spaghetti monsters, invisible pink unicorns, and what have you are also exposed for what they are. They are the products of a reasoning mind that is superstitious concerning God. And so, the very superstition that is mocked in these satirical mockings of God is revealed to be the very superstition the mockers themselves have concerning God.
And this is a topic about free will, not the existence of God. It should be clear that whether or not the cogency of evidence compels one into acceptance of the truth of free will, it cannot be said that there is no evidence. After all, if one says there is no evidence, they are in denial of the fact that they had to ignore their perception of making the choice to make such an obviously false assertion.
Created:
Prelest is spiritual delusion, deception, illusion, etc. That is what it means.
Here is a pretty good quote from that article...
St. Gregory of Sinai also writes that "around beginners and those who rely on their own counsel the demons spread the nets of destructive thoughts and images, and open pits into which such people fall; for their city is still in the hands of the workers of iniquity, and in their impetuosity they are easily slain by them. It is not surprising that they are deceived, or lose their wits, or have been and still are deluded, or heed what is contrary to truth, or from inexperience and ignorance say things that should not be said. Often some witless person will speak about truth and will hold forth at length without being aware of what he is saying or in a position to give a correct account of things. In this way he troubles many who hear him and by his inept behavior he brings abuse and ridicule on the heads of hesychasts. It is not in the least strange that beginners should be deceived even after making great efforts, for this has happened to many who have sought God, both now and in the past".
I think the important thing to note here is that it is really easy to fall into prelest when you rely on yourself and do not have guidance.
True view of oneself (of own spiritual condition, position relative to God, sinfulness etc.) is tightly connected with the passions of pride and vainglory and is distorted by these passions. The degree of prelest is the degree of such distortion, i.e. the amount of falsehood in the view of oneself and the degree of difficulty of change from the false view to the true one.
Pride and vainglory lead into all manner of prelest, and it is very easy to fall into.
Really, in the broadest sense, we all suffer from some sort of prelest. That being the case, to say that you are completely free of prelest is the surest indication that you are in fact in prelest!
Created:
-->
@Fallaneze
If education has lead you to believe that there is no ultimate reality, that really puts into question the value of your education.
Created:
-->
@Outplayz
And what is the definition you agreed on with me?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Harikrish
You are making a non point.
Without closely examing even these examples for veracity, nothing after 650 AD is Orthodox.
Also, yes, just as the church doesn't teach to overthrow government, we do not encourage slaves to rebel against their masters.
Created:
-->
@Harikrish
You are making a non point.
Without closely examing even these examples for veracity, nothing after 650 AD is Orthodox.
Also, yes, just as the church doesn't teach to overthrow government, we do not encourage slaves to rebel against their masters.
Also, none of this has anything to with racism.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
I find it amazing that you say there is no evidence for free will when the fact that you are choosing to post on this forum is clearly evidence, whether or not it constitutes proof to you.
I think you really have to make an active effort to ignore reality to maintain that there is no evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Skepticism is certainly your default.
And that is your choice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
What this demonstrates is an illogical aversion to the word itself, as you cannot even say what you don't believe.I do not propose any definition of god over any other
But you do not simply deny gods, you also lump God in with these gods. If you say you don't believe in the existence of God, you are saying that you don't believe that there is ultimate reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
It seems to me that it is just as much a leap of faith to "withhold belief" in free will as it does to accept it, as our experience makes it intuitively true that we have free will. Because of that even, it may even be more of a leap of faith to deny freewill than it is to accept it. I don't think that disbelief in freewill is necessarily the default position. Denial of free will implies belief in something else that overrides that intuition.
Do you really see no functional difference though? You don't think that belief in one or the other would effect your outlook or psychology?
Created: