mrcong's forum posts

Avatar image for mrcong
#1 Posted by mrcong (3929 posts) -

if adam and eve were created ABSOLUTELY pefect then why did they sin?

also isnt god sapposed to be the only perfect one? if his first creation were "perefect" in every cense of the word woudnt they themselves be considerd "gods"? then god woudnt be the only perfect being thus negating all excistance....

legend26

One could consider them perfect in that they hadn't sinned yet; they were pure. However, they were not actually perfect because they had the potential to sin due to their freedom of choice.

Avatar image for mrcong
#2 Posted by mrcong (3929 posts) -

If that were so, wouldn't naturalism as you define it deny that happiness exists?xaos

Well there you go. By an athiest's admission, athiesm cannot bring happiness.=)

Thank you

Avatar image for mrcong
#3 Posted by mrcong (3929 posts) -

I live a moral life, treat others with the dignity I myself would like to be treated with, do not steal or purposefully injure others etc. I do not believe in God. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the Christian belief that no amount of good behavior will ever make me righteous in the eyes of God?xaos

First off, no you do not live a moral life. This may seem like a brazen claim, but it is truth. A moral life is one that has not, and never will contain any immoral action. Are you prepared to tell me that you have never made an error? You haven't lied once? You've never lusted? You've never treated someone with disrespect? In other words, are you claiming your own perfection?

Yes, no amount of good work can justify you in the eyes of God. Only acceptance of Christ's sacrifice at Calvary can earn one righteousness. Fellowship with God will result from a true conversion, and will lead to righteous living. It is not the living that justifies somebody, its the initial conversion.

Avatar image for mrcong
#4 Posted by mrcong (3929 posts) -

I notice you focus on Mammon-like sources of happiness; what about emotional connections to people? P.S. thermodynamics does not apply to ideas (such as "happiness")xaos

No, thermodynamics doesn't directly apply to human emotions. However, it does apply to the physical world. Since naturalism holds that all that exists is the physical, all happiness must come from physical items that decay. It's quite simple.

Avatar image for mrcong
#5 Posted by mrcong (3929 posts) -

So then, it's "do whatever you want, but I'll punish you eternally if you don't do what I want?"xaos

No, its not about living in a way determined arbitrarily by some human, as you imply. It is about living righteously. Fellowship with God is righteous, since God himself is righteous. Any life not focused primarily around this is unrighteous, and is deserving of judgement from a just God.

So, its more like "Do whatever you want, but only fellowship with me-which is what I originally intended-is the correct and righteous way to lead your life"

Avatar image for mrcong
#6 Posted by mrcong (3929 posts) -

No, I mean that religion is required for 'true' happiness, and there is such a thing as 'true' happiness as a superlative to normal happiness.

Funky_Llama

I already explained it to you. Humanist happiness comes in things that decay and disappear-riches, power, popularity, etc. Since these things eventually break down, so does the happiness that is brought with it. According to athiestic beliefs, all there is the natural and physical, both of which are subject to the Second Law of Thermodynamics. As a result, to a naturalist, all happiness must break down, making it temporal.

Avatar image for mrcong
#7 Posted by mrcong (3929 posts) -

then mankind came and turned it into a giant shopping mall...

legend26

Tell me, how can you access Gamespot from your nomadic clan in the plains of Africa?

Avatar image for mrcong
#8 Posted by mrcong (3929 posts) -

:lol: Whatever you say... just out of interest... how do you know this?

Also, I love my sig. It's magnificently cynical. :D

Funky_Llama

I know this from both the doctrines of Naturalistic origins, and the testimonies of humanists. A Pale Blue Dot by Richard Dawkins comes to mind...

Avatar image for mrcong
#9 Posted by mrcong (3929 posts) -

Because, no matter what, it all ends ultimately. That is the central tenet of Buddhism, that the defining characteristic of life is suffering, and that the fact that death is inevitable is the root of that suffering. Pretty much all transcendent religions teach the same thing, including ones with no God. I'll say, though, if we were designed to "live in spiritual fellowship with God", it's pretty callous of Him to make that not be innate in our nature...xaos

God choose to give men a free will so they could choose to love and honor Him. Forced love is not true love. He would have created us as automated beings that worship Him by design, it wouldn't be real. Man's purpose originally was to worship God, however, this changed when man exercised their free will and choose Satan.

Avatar image for mrcong
#10 Posted by mrcong (3929 posts) -

You like to maintain that claim, but I am not deliberately choosing to go to hell. Saying that atheists choose to go to hell is like saying that a rape victim chooses to be raped by walking down a dark alleyway.

Funky_Llama

No, its more like a rape victim walking down a dark alleyway after a helpful stranger tells them that nothing but pain and sorrow awaits them if they choose to not divert their course.

You like to maintain that claim, but I am not deliberately choosing to go to hell. Saying that atheists choose to go to hell is like saying that a rape victim chooses to be raped by walking down a dark alleyway.