Olá, Olá!
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a0dd6/a0dd67a17ec8b6e6bcb45d7047f3d9bfe87084bb" alt="Slightly smiling face :slight_smile: 🙂"
Yes, the inhuman monster, in a human guise. Can such a human be forgiven?
Why are they like that?
Are they not knowing something? Or are they knowing something extra? Or are they knowing something very skewed?
Is being convinced of something which is not accurate a form of “not knowing”?
Oi!
Yes, such a human can be forgiven. It starts with understanding, and making a lot of painful admissions. I can honestly tell you that I could do all the most horrible things you can think of and tell you why I would do it, where my “knowingly and willingly” would fall short. Understanding is a matter of transcending one’s “shadow”, one’s conscience. It involves some painful objectivity.
Are they not knowing something? Yes, absolutely. Are they knowing something extra? Well, if that is the case, the relevant “knowing” if a falsehood. Yes, being convinced of something inaccurate is definitely “not knowing”, right? The people who hung Jesus were convinced that Jesus was a monster (of sorts). He was dehumanized/demonized in their minds.
What do they want?
Revenge? against society?
It is best to go with our “guesses” because these guesses go directly to the part of ourselves that we may resent. For example, how do you feel about the human compulsion to punish what we see as wrong?
Revenge may have been part of the motive, see the last line:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Nickel_Mines_School_shooting#Possible_motives
Taking revenge against God, would that be because he perceived that God instilled in him a desire to molest children? This was a man with some serious problems, serious disorder.
Did you know that there is a case where a brain tumor caused a person to want to be intimate with children? It is very bizarre. They extracted the tumor, and the drive went away. Later, he began looking at child porn again. The tumor had grown back.
Do you understand the killer? Can you forgive him? Or is there something lingering, more resentment to address? After all, when we say someone is a monster, we are expressing some resentment, right?
Sounds good…
I see all those, but cannot posit a god in them.
I actually cannot do it. Can you believe it? I can imagine it… imagine your view where an underlying entity is controlling all of its creation… but I can’t take it as a serious description of the reality around us.
I am unable to believe and have faith like you do.
This, to me, is the reason why arguments like Pascal’s Wager fail. At best, I can pretend belief… but no god should accept that.
I had to look it up.
iep.utm.edu/pasc-wag/#H1 Are you addressing the tradional epistemic argument?
I speak from the position of someone who humbly can only speak for himself, thus my moniker in this forum. Yes, for me there is somewhat a traditional aspect, but only because of the experience of beauty and in contemplative prayer. No proof whatsoever in a scientific sense. Is faith good for me? Yes, because the journey has led to an inner reconciliation, a transcendence of my mind. In addition, though you seem to pooh-pooh an afterlife, I really want to see some folks again, and when we want something badly, we can believe almost anything. I make no apologies for that apparent justification for self-delusion. Again, that is only part of it. Faith sustains me today, in the here and now, and I have bought into Jesus’ vision of the Kingdom, beginning with forgiveness, and His forgiveness of the unrepentant from the cross is a huge thing for me.
But I go back to Life of Pi. When absolutely nothing can be scientifically proven, why not pick a better story? I am seeing that you have picked a better story, and that’s all okay, so have I.
The bit about the details of the “wager”? Pascal was a genius, I know that, but when one of the possibilities is “infinite punishment”, well, I have a different view of God. I disagree with Pascal on that count, but I do believe that there is a place in Catholicism for belief in “infinite punishment” (the “first alternative”, do you remember the alternatives I presented in the middle age of this thread?) because it is very “organic”. It is a view that is a logical conclusion for a person who believes in heaven as “reward”, and that there ought to be a place of punishment. This is exactly the way our conscience operates. After all, one organically concludes, the worst of behaviors deserves the worst of punishment, right? And “those monsters cannot possibly be going to the same place I am.”
This is the way our conscience operates. When we do good, we get a shot of “happy” neurotransmission, there is a bit of elation. When we do bad, we get a shot of the opposite (we feel guilt). It is hard-wired. So, naturally the human is going to perceive an eternal punishment or eternal reward if they believe in some sort of afterlife.
Sometimes, I feel like we should get a thread with no defined topic - just a general discussion where we expose our ways of looking at the world as a whole and also how we interpret some special details which arise from the conversation. A sharing of experiences, of information, of interpretation, of curiosities… how your belief in the existence of god shapes your interpretations… and how my lack of such belief shapes my interpretation. Of course, all members of the forum would be welcome… Always with the caveat that each individual’s should be taken as just that - individual view. I know that atheists are like a herd of cats… I assume catholics also have their individual differences, even if the main stuff is all alike.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b43e5/b43e59177c0ee1b978ff89157a42f60fe7175079" alt="Thumbs up :thumbsup: 👍"
até tarde
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a0dd6/a0dd67a17ec8b6e6bcb45d7047f3d9bfe87084bb" alt="Smile :) :)"