Re: How strong is your faith?
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2005 5:33 am

Official Discussion Forum for the works of Stephen R. Donaldson
https://kevinswatch.com/phpBB3/
Actually, I think Abraham believed in God's promises, namely, He would build a nation through his son Issac. So, Abe had to believe God would just raise him from the dead, or do something in order to bring about His promise. It is also the precursor of God sending His Son as a sacrifice for others.The Esmer wrote:ur-bane wrote:YOU are Abraham.
Your God, as you know him/her, has asked you to prove your faith by sacrificing your child.
Could you do it?
I would either be sorely disappointed that my God had requested such an act of me to prove my faith, and re-assess my faith on the spot (unless of course I had spawned The Evil One Itself), or assume it was an imposter and strike him down! I think that ur-bane's question bears directly upon the ability God has given us to disobey or even disregard Him, and the natural laws as He exists within them,( ie: instincts or ideals or simple pure perception of the universe in its totality). We have the capability to interpret the emanations of existence itself in whatever way we choose, or are able, and confront or deny our God at our own choosing, or mistake, but always with His permission.
Somewhere around here, someone completely deconstructed this song. I'll have to find it, because looking at it cynically, this verse is rather disturbing.Plissken wrote:Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No Hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people...
The Esmer wrote:Avatar wrote:As a non-believer myself,
The Esmer wrote:...Avatar, I don't know where to begin! I have never spoken to, much less admired, one of "you people",and never would have assumed that of you in the small amount of posts I have enjoyed of yours! (I "confess" to jumping to the end of this topic, initially responding to the original question without following from the beginning, is this a forum "sin"?)
The Watch has a goodly number of "us people"
(the source of many interesting debates) and you'll find much to surprise you here once you've played along for a while.
I'm curious though...very curious. What would you have "expected" for one of "us people"?
(And really never talked about these things with anybody who didn't share your belief system? Wow!)
Sure something is responsible: Physics. Or random chance. Or pure damn luck. (Good or bad, I can't decide.) I find the thought of some supernatural, omiscient, omnipotent being unlikely at best.The Esmer wrote:I cannot concieve how anyone could not believe that, at the least, something is responsible for all this, if not that it all has a purpose. To "non-believe" to me would leave such a void in my being that I can scarcely imagine it, but I also would assume that your system of beliefs makes you whole, as well, very curious indeed for me...
My belief system? I don't "believe" anything. At least, not in the sense that you mean, i.e. "having faith". I like to believe a lot of things. But I don't assume that this automatically makes them true.
We are, and can be, better. It is up to us, and we need to do it for ourselves. Not because some being will putatively be offended if we don't. Or because we need fear some punishment, or long for some reward.
And the atrocities committed in the name of a loving god boggle the mind.
I'm not sure how you see the concept of, say, free will, to presuppose a god. Surely you don't think that if we hadn't been "created" we would not have free will? Rather, I find the argument, as it relates at least to explaning why bad things happen despite a "benevolent" god, to be an all too easy, not to say pat, explanation.The Esmer wrote:I suppose, Avatar, that my main issue here is that all of those things that you mentioned about there being no God to obey, confront, or deny at our own choosing because of his "gift" of free will remains abject to the existence of a god in the first place.
As a believer myself, all of those abilities pre-suppose a god, et al, and remain perfectly valid and applicable if we simply subsitute "god" for self
Aah, I look forward to some interesting conversation.
--Avatar
I see no reason to believe that it hasn't, and certainly no evidence to the contrary. Ambition at least can be accounted for by the simple evolutionary drive to strive for more. It is our thoughts that have elevated it, and ourselves, to be certain. And those thoughts can be accounted for as well, I think, by the necessity for adaptation that faced man. Indeed, we could describe man as the "adaptable animal" if we were so inclined.The Esmer wrote:And you feel all this can account for awareness, especially self-awareness? I agree that if the universe were merely the totality of its physical characteristics, that your hypothesis could account for it, but what about our ego? What about "thought", or ambition, something "science" can't account for?Avatar wrote: Sure something is responsible: Physics. Or random chance. Or pure damn luck. (Good or bad, I can't decide.) I find the thought of some supernatural, omiscient, omnipotent being unlikely at best.
Well, in general, religions are founded and based on that very concept. That "god" not only is present, but is actively invested in the lives and actions of humanity. Not only that, but that such a god actvely demands recognition and obediance.The Esmer wrote:Doesn't this pre-suppose that the existence of a creator is dependent upon "its" presence in, and an active punitive role within, the lives of "its" "createes"? Does a god have to punish or reward in order to exist? or even be aware of "its" creation? Are you aware of every cell in your body that dies, or even lives? And since when is "it" responsible for what others have done in "the name" that really wasn't "its" name, but the name of a god that had been created by them in their own minds ?Avatar wrote: We are, and can be, better. It is up to us, and we need to do it for ourselves. Not because some being will putatively be offended if we don't. Or because we need fear some punishment, or long for some reward.
And the atrocities committed in the name of a loving god boggle the mind.
Think I cover this in the paragraph above too, and likewise, much easier to accept than a god who demands worship. Something like Nietzsche's "dead" god perhaps?The Esmer wrote:"bad things" that happen are always, and exclusively, caused by either A) Nature, and the horrendous forces that it contains, which the human body cannot withstand, but can avoid or protect themselves from,(most of the time) or B) People, who act in ways unique to them, and ignorant to "it". Belief in a force responsible for what is all around us shouldn' be reliant upon the presence of "its" benevolence, or the absence of "its" righteous ire, eh? maybe?Avatar wrote: ...to explaning why bad things happen despite a "benevolent" god, to be an all too easy, not to say pat, explanation.That the "Indescribable Force" is too complex for us to comprehend "it", and that we are too miniscule a portion of "its" overall creation for "it" to pay direct attention to us?