I can't think "Sin" as a being without thinking of Final Fantasy 10.
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
Counter-Counter point--Having the devil define virtue will have you battling the angels.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Counter-strike: If you let the server define the rules, all hell will eventually break loose.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: I say you personify sin a la Gaiman's Sandman, or American Gods.
For some reason, I picture Sin looking a lot like Kevin Smith.
I went to his Q&A on Saturday, he didnt look at all like Tim Curry. Not Tim Curry,Tim Curry, or even Tim Curry which leads me to believe that Kevin Smith has nothing to do with the devil. He does know a bit about fleshlights and inconveniantly places troll's though.
Posted by AchillesHeel (Member # 11736) on :
Counter-stike-point-omega: if you divide by zero all hell will send you a fruit basket.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Iran-Contra Point: Just because someone has the authority to make important decisions doesn't mean that we will like what they do with that authority, and a time may come when we would be better off to revoke their decision-making power.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Originally posted by Darth_Mauve: If you let the Devil define sin...
How do you think that people do this?
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Logic Puzzle Observation:
If you listen to the guy on the island who tells you that he's the Good one and the other guy always lies, don't forget that the other guy has the exact same story.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Ooh! I know this one!
Shoot the hostage.
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
The Catholic Church institutionalized sin as anything that would harm the image of the Catholic Church instead of anything that would harm their children. The result is the scandals we face today.
Islamic Extremists have defined virtue as death and destruction of everyone including themselves. That sounds like a devil's virtue to me, but since they believe it is a virtue instilled by Allah, they don't see the devil's signature.
A group of Evangelical Christian Extremists defined virtue as defeating the devil in the guise of the Government, and planned mass murder of policemen.
A group of extremist of LDS lineage believed that disobedience was the biggest sin, and as a result married their teen daughters to the groups leaders, and sent their teen sons--those not chosen to remain--out into the streets with 0 skills and 0 hope.
These are all symptoms of the same disease--trying hard to do what is right by relying on the wrong people to tell you what is right.
Socrates traveled around Athens seeking the answer to the question, "what is sin? what is virtue?" We still do this today.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
Do you have any answers of your own?
quote:Originally posted by Darth_Mauve: Islamic Extremists have defined virtue as death and destruction of everyone including themselves. That sounds like a devil's virtue to me, but since they believe it is a virtue instilled by Allah, they don't see the devil's signature.
You seem to be able to recognize the devil's signature. What are your own criteria for determining what is Allah's virtue vs. devil's signature?
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:These are all symptoms of the same disease--trying hard to do what is right by relying on the wrong people to tell you what is right.
This is symptomatic on relying on anyone to tell you what is right, because doing so inherently puts you at the mercy of someone who might or might not be good. If you have a way to check whether they are telling the truth, you don't need them in the first place.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold:
quote:These are all symptoms of the same disease--trying hard to do what is right by relying on the wrong people to tell you what is right.
This is symptomatic on relying on anyone to tell you what is right, because doing so inherently puts you at the mercy of someone who might or might not be good. If you have a way to check whether they are telling the truth, you don't need them in the first place.
That's not entirely true. I think that you have to use the resources available to you. When you are a child and you believe your parent is good, and they solicit your help in cheating on their taxes, I don't know that you'd be morally responsible, because you made the best call you were capable of, of trusting your parents.
This is how kids, or uneducated people become indoctrinated in some pretty evil stuff. They don't know any better (and are not capable of knowing any better) but they make moral decisions to rely on other people's moral decisions.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
If that's the case, maybe we shouldn't let anyone join a church until they're an adult. That way, they're more likely to join the "right one."
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I will grant that when you are not informed enough (and don't have the time or energy) to become informed on a subject, you will need to turn to an authority on that subject.
As a kid, your choices are rather limited - you have parents, teachers, pastors, relatives, but if you parent or pastor or whatever is a crackpot you're pretty much screwed. As an adult you have a responsibility to find a variety of sources of wisdom.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tinros: I can't think "Sin" as a being without thinking of Final Fantasy 10.
I can't think "Sin" as a being without thinking of Elexis Sinclaire. Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
Mighty, I grew up religious, but the religious seminaries I went to stressed intellectual honesty. A number of my friends chose different paths than I do, and I still respect them, because I think they are being as honest as they can be and have reached different conclusions.
If a religion is about erasing your free will, then why does it even matter if you religion has adherents?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: become informed on a subject, you will need to turn to an authority on that subject.
How do you become informed on a subject WITHOUT turning to authorities on it?
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
Armoth and others, I am sorry my schedule hasn't given me time to do more than post and run. Honest, that is not how I want to discuss things.
We go, not routinely, to a very theatrical Baptist church. It is 70% music. Yet that music just seemed to be promoting the wrong values for the God I believe in.
"All Glory To God!" was repeated over and over again. While I believe that God is worthy of all glory, I don't think God is so petty that he created us for the sole purpose of giving himself glory. That sounds like something the devil would seek for himself.
And one song made me wince--"God, take my mind from me" is an exact quote. I believe that God created trillions of unique individuals. If God wanted mindless drones he would have created mindless drones. However the devil would seek mindless drones.
Finally, do I believe in the devil? I'm not convinced. However I do believe that people will fill the slot as being more interested in glory and mindless drones to follow them than in leading them to wisdom.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: become informed on a subject, you will need to turn to an authority on that subject.
How do you become informed on a subject WITHOUT turning to authorities on it?
Well, considering the key word is "informed" rather than knowledgeable, I would say there is no way. But the question is if one can be knowledgeable without being informed, or informed without being knowledgeable.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
quote:Originally posted by Darth_Mauve: "All Glory To God!" was repeated over and over again. While I believe that God is worthy of all glory, I don't think God is so petty that he created us for the sole purpose of giving himself glory. That sounds like something the devil would seek for himself.
And one song made me wince--"God, take my mind from me" is an exact quote. I believe that God created trillions of unique individuals. If God wanted mindless drones he would have created mindless drones. However the devil would seek mindless drones.
Finally, do I believe in the devil? I'm not convinced. However I do believe that people will fill the slot as being more interested in glory and mindless drones to follow them than in leading them to wisdom.
You didn't exactly answer my question, but still:
1) Your assumption is that God did not create us to bring glory to Him? Why do you assume that? Perhaps God did indeed create us to bring glory to Him and you need to change your understanding of pettiness? It's just odd to me that you have a priori notions and that you stick God into them.
2) Again. In Judaism there is a common conception that angels do not have free will. A ruler cannot be a ruler without any subjects - its is emotionally/spiritually/morally valuable that someone chooses to recognize a ruler rather than the meaninglessness of being forced to be ruled. Perhaps we are created with minds, perhaps there are so many individuals and we are so diverse so that when we pray to have our minds wiped, it is more meaningful.
Note that this is not exactly what I believe but that your derivations are not logically compelling. They may be emotionally compelling, but then you aren't really being intellectually honest, and in a sense, the God you are worshiping is really yourself.
So is that your answer? That you define good and evil, good deed and sin, based on a priori emotional analysis?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: But the question is if one can be knowledgeable without being informed, or informed without being knowledgeable.
I don't think I understand the distinction you are making.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
I think the idea is that when one is informed, one must be informed by something, e.g. an authority. However, the question is raised whether one can become knowledgeable without being informed, e.g. work out enough from first principles to become knowledgeable without consulting authorities
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Ah!
Well, it depends on the field, I expect. But generally, starting from scratch doesn't work nearly as well as some self-educated folks would like to think.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Yep. No doubt. Ability to derive from more basic principles is probably inverse to purity However, all fields have evolved enough over the years that it will be a rare person that can be considered knowledgeable without consulting an authority.
Posted by Godric (Member # 4587) on :
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: 2) Again. In Judaism there is a common conception that angels do not have free will.
My Protestant upbringing said the same. Which has always plagued me - if that is true, how the hell did Lucifer defy God?
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
quote:Originally posted by Godric:
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: 2) Again. In Judaism there is a common conception that angels do not have free will.
My Protestant upbringing said the same. Which has always plagued me - if that is true, how the hell did Lucifer defy God?
There is no Lucifer in Judaism. There is, However, an angel named Satan. In the talmud the Rabbis discuss the story of Job. One Rabbi explains that Satan is a servant of God and everything he does, he does because God wills him to. The talmud writes that at that point, Satan came to this Rabbi, prostrated himself and kissed his feet [in appreciation].
Posted by Godric (Member # 4587) on :
That might answer my question were I Jewish. Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
quote:1) Your assumption is that God did not create us to bring glory to Him? Why do you assume that? Perhaps God did indeed create us to bring glory to Him and you need to change your understanding of pettiness? It's just odd to me that you have a priori notions and that you stick God into them.
Why?
You are thinking like a human, for whom Glory--or deserved praise--is important. To say that God created people so that people would praise him--or show to other people how great he is, is circular reasoning. I find the idea that God created the universe so that people within that Universe would say, "Good job sir" is a bit weak.
Yet I can easily see Ministers and Priests saying, "All Glory to God, and as his servant I get me some of that." And that is the path to what I find not god-like.
quote: 2) Again. In Judaism there is a common conception that angels do not have free will. A ruler cannot be a ruler without any subjects - its is emotionally/spiritually/morally valuable that someone chooses to recognize a ruler rather than the meaninglessness of being forced to be ruled. Perhaps we are created with minds, perhaps there are so many individuals and we are so diverse so that when we pray to have our minds wiped, it is more meaningful.
I understand that the sacrifice idea. It is noble to give oneself up for God. Yet I am forced to ask what should we think of a God who tortures his creations? Is this idea of God a noble one? He gives his creations free will and a logical brain, but asks that they sacrifice these gifts to prove their---their what? Loyalty? Robotic behavior? Willingness to give back everything their loving God bestowed upon them?
Again, I find it more believable that a devil, or a person in the guise of a priest, rabbi, or minister, sees God in the mirror and wants everyone else to be that reflection too. He believes that he is the image of God, mentally and spiritually as well as physically, and he demands that everyone else follow.
So what do I suggest?
Instead of a church that says "Find God by following our path," I prefer a philosophy that offers guidance. "Find God by looking for these things and asking these questions."
True spiritual awakening doesn't come from looking to others. It comes from looking inside oneself. A good minister and a good church don't tell you where not to look or what you must do. They tell you how to find it on your own and encourage your self-discovery.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
You're saying a whole lot of stuff that sounds heeby jeeby.
The premises that I believe in is that God exists and that He communicated what He wants from us. So a lot of my religious work is to find out exactly what He wants, and how to get myself to do it.
Look. There are no two ways about it. God created evil. You want to lay back and snub Him for it? Okay. I think Worthing Saga did a wonderful job of explaining that evil is necessary for there to be good. I think only God can create evil to have us be able to grow, to be noble, to prove ourselves, to create ourselves.
Look. Certain things happened, or they didn't happen. What you prefer God to be doesn't really matter if He really is soemthing else. I spend more time trying to figure out what He is and how He wants us to relate to Him and reconciling any internal difficulty than creating a God from my imagination that may not really exist.
And just to be clear - I didn't agree with my own part 1- i don't think God gave us logic to sacrifice it - but I did want to point out that your derivations are not air-tight.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I think WE create evil, not God.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
How do you define evil? I can think of some definitions that would allow that statement to be correct, but not terribly useful.
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
quote:You're saying a whole lot of stuff that sounds heeby jeeby.
Yes I am. That's what happens when I try to cram years of philosophical thinking into a quick forum post.
Especially the transition from the actual Devil to a person of faith doing the misleading, that just didn't come out right.
The main point I wanted to make is that there are some very interesting arguments about why God would give us free-will and intelligence and ask us to give both up to unquestioningly follow his chosen representative on earth.
I believe it is more likely that those asking us to do that would be far from God and more likely weak humans.
However, those who most often find themselves doing evil deeds in the name of God are believers in the Devil, and to them, it would make more sense to realize that they have been tricked by the devil into doing the devil's work in the name of God.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
Dan, if that's how poorly you think of the church you're attending, maybe you should think specifically about what you're doing there instead of making sweeping generalizations.
Posted by ryanhayabusa (Member # 12339) on :
If you eat at Hell's diner, the plates will be hot. The tooth gnashing comes complimentary.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:I think Worthing Saga did a wonderful job of explaining that evil is necessary for there to be good.
I think the Worthing Saga did a really wonderful job of demonstrating that religious types are willing to set up straw men to attempt to get around the inherent contradictions of faith. Yes, yes, accomplishment is necessary to a full human life, no argument. But come now, is there really no middle ground to be found between healing every stubbed toe and wiping the memory of it, and the painful death of three in every ten infants? There is such a thing as a difference of degree.
Posted by ryanhayabusa (Member # 12339) on :
If you eat at Hell's diner, the plates will be hot. The tooth gnashing comes complimentary.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Darth_Mauve: The main point I wanted to make is that there are some very interesting arguments about why God would give us free-will and intelligence and ask us to give both up to unquestioningly follow his chosen representative on earth.
Yeah, but the unquestioningly part is mostly coming from you.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)