The Spock principle

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spock
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have nothing to fear. Either God is reasonable, and then we shall be good buddies, or God is the tyrannical, egotistical, self-centered being of the Bible. If he is reasonable, I have nothing to fear, and that is the bet I am making. If I am wrong, and you are right, then there will be some nice everlasting fire, but that is ok. I like warmth, and hate cold. 🙂 Oh, and don’t try to scare me.
Why not try to scare you? (Not that I was!) Are you not confident in your claim that you have nothing to fear? If you are reasonable, you certainly shouldn’t be confident in it, since your argument for that claim is obviously silly. (And I assume you recognize that - please correct me if I’m wrong.)
 
I have nothing to fear. Either God is reasonable, and then we shall be good buddies, or God is the tyrannical, egotistical, self-centered being of the Bible. If he is reasonable, I have nothing to fear, and that is the bet I am making. If I am wrong, and you are right, then there will be some nice everlasting fire, but that is ok. I like warmth, and hate cold. 🙂 Oh, and don’t try to scare me.
Or a third option - God is neither your buddy, nor an egotistical self-centred being, but rather, He is the one in charge in Heaven, and He is the one who decides who gets in, or not, based on His criteria; not the applicant’s criteria - just like the principal of an elite school, or the owner of a prestigious business gets to decide who gets in, and who does not - if you don’t qualify to join, it’s not about “being mean” to you; it’s just that, hey, you’re not qualified - not His problem, nor His fault. 🙂
 
Or a third option - God is neither your buddy, nor an egotistical self-centred being, but rather, He is the one in charge in Heaven, and He is the one who decides who gets in, or not, based on His criteria; not the applicant’s criteria - just like the principal of an elite school, or the owner of a prestigious business gets to decide who gets in, and who does not - if you don’t qualify to join, it’s not about “being mean” to you; it’s just that, hey, you’re not qualified - not His problem, nor His fault. 🙂
God is supposed to be way more than our “buddy.” he is supposed to be our lover. He is the one who is supposed to be there when everyone else leaves us. It is has nothing to do with being “qualified.” God loves us unconditionally. Nothing we can do can make God not love us with an infinite love.

He takes a tremendous interest in us being in heaven. He constantly seeks us out. He never tires of calling us at every moment of our lives. He is inviting us to know him and to love him.
 
I have nothing to fear. Either God is reasonable, and then we shall be good buddies, or God is the tyrannical, egotistical, self-centered being of the Bible. If he is reasonable, I have nothing to fear, and that is the bet I am making. If I am wrong, and you are right, then there will be some nice everlasting fire, but that is ok. I like warmth, and hate cold. 🙂 Oh, and don’t try to scare me.
Keep in mind, that the “everlasting fire” is intolerable, pure torture, infinite loneliness, and doom greater than the greatest sufferings ever endured on earth, and that these pains last for all eternity.

very scary to be making a “bet”.No human being should have to make such a bet with such HUGE stakes. (eternal destiny) God has not given us enough information to make a truly informed decision. We have to place our stake somewhere, with God or against him. But God hasn’t given us enough information for it to not be a “bet”, but an actual choice. It seems very unreasonable to me.
 
God is supposed to be way more than our “buddy.” he is supposed to be our lover. He is the one who is supposed to be there when everyone else leaves us. It is has nothing to do with being “qualified.” God loves us unconditionally. Nothing we can do can make God not love us with an infinite love.
Right, but if we don’t return that love, is that God’s fault? If we are nitpicking Him to death, instead of loving Him, who is separating us from Heaven? Not God.
He takes a tremendous interest in us being in heaven. He constantly seeks us out. He never tires of calling us at every moment of our lives. He is inviting us to know him and to love him.
Of course! Which is why when someone says they have “no evidence” of God, then I have to wonder whether they are even paying attention at all. 🙂
 
very scary to be making a “bet”.No human being should have to make such a bet with such HUGE stakes. (eternal destiny) God has not given us enough information to make a truly informed decision. We have to place our stake somewhere, with God or against him. But God hasn’t given us enough information for it to not be a “bet”, but an actual choice. It seems very unreasonable to me.
So you too are appealing to these lazy indeterminate notions of “truly informed decision” and “enough information” - but you can’t possibly reasonably claim that God has not given us enough information to make a truly informed decision without explaining what is entailed (1) by the notion “enough information” and (2) by the notion “truly informed decision.” In other words, instead of complaining about *God *not giving *us *“enough information,” you should be concerned about the fact that YOU have not given us enough information - indeed, you do not HAVE enough information - to make an informed claim (or even an intelligible claim) about the alleged insufficiency of the information God has given us. Capisci?
 
But God hasn’t given us enough information for it to not be a “bet”, but an actual choice. It seems very unreasonable to me.
Your notion of God must be false then! As Einstein said, God does not play with dice. Those who reject God in favour of themselves know exactly what they are doing…
 
Exactly my point about atheists using the Bible.

You forgot this option:
He is the reasonable, omnibenevolent of the Bible.
Do we read the same Bible? I don’t think so. I read it the way I said it. I see no benevolence and no reason at all.
 
Ok… You did NOT get my point or see the difference. I am not saying the Church’s interpretation is the correct one.
Then who is the one who makes the correct interpretation? And how do you tell the correct interpretation from the incorrect one? I hope you find these questions reasonable. 🙂
 
Then who is the one who makes the correct interpretation? And how do you tell the correct interpretation from the incorrect one? I hope you find these questions reasonable. 🙂
You read it in context (including the context of who wrote it, what assumptions they would have been making, and the original intended audience) and you use logical deduction based on the full text and the whole context, rather than pulling a few verses out here and there, reading them as if the author were a Hollywood movie producer, and you were the intended audience, to conclude that God is “unreasonable.”
 
Why not try to scare you? (Not that I was!)
No, you did not. Jmcrae did. But I consider a scare tactics dumb and unreasonable.
Are you not confident in your claim that you have nothing to fear? If you are reasonable, you certainly shouldn’t be confident in it, since your argument for that claim is obviously silly. (And I assume you recognize that - please correct me if I’m wrong.)
I don’t think it is silly. A God who is so immensely knowledgable and powerful cannot consider our feelings toward him important. (If you could communicate with ants, would you care about their “adoration”?) Also, according to Catholic teaching God instilled our reasoning power in us. I think it is “silly” to assume that God prefers that we suspend our reasoning powers (given by him) and wishes that we rely on unsubstantitated “faith”.
 
Or a third option - God is neither your buddy, nor an egotistical self-centred being, but rather, He is the one in charge in Heaven, and He is the one who decides who gets in, or not, based on His criteria; not the applicant’s criteria - just like the principal of an elite school, or the owner of a prestigious business gets to decide who gets in, and who does not - if you don’t qualify to join, it’s not about “being mean” to you; it’s just that, hey, you’re not qualified - not His problem, nor His fault. 🙂
I am willing to accept this. But in this case, why did he not communicate the requirements clearly and unambiguously? And, please, do not say that he did. It is neither clear nor unambiguous for me. I do not accept the Bible, because it is a whole set of self-contradicting nonsense.
 
I am willing to accept this. But in this case, why did he not communicate the requirements clearly and unambiguously? And, please, do not say that he did. It is neither clear nor unambiguous for me. I do not accept the Bible, because it is a whole set of self-contradicting nonsense.
He came down from Heaven in Person, and explained it out to 12 men, whom He then appointed as the leaders of His Church. He was then crucified, died, and rose from the dead, in fulfillment of prophecy.

The Bible exists because some of those men wrote down what they saw and heard, and the Church exists because it has continued from that time until now, teaching what Christ taught them, and administering the Sacraments, just as He told them to do.
 
Keep in mind, that the “everlasting fire” is intolerable, pure torture, infinite loneliness, and doom greater than the greatest sufferings ever endured on earth, and that these pains last for all eternity.
Is this the hallmark of a “loving” person? Sheeesh! As they say: “thanks, but no, thanks”.
very scary to be making a “bet”.No human being should have to make such a bet with such HUGE stakes. (eternal destiny) God has not given us enough information to make a truly informed decision. We have to place our stake somewhere, with God or against him. But God hasn’t given us enough information for it to not be a “bet”, but an actual choice. It seems very unreasonable to me.
What is enough information is decided by each person. You cannot decide for me, and I cannot decide for you. Moreover, not even God can make that decision for me.
 
You read it in context (including the context of who wrote it, what assumptions they would have been making, and the original intended audience) and you use logical deduction based on the full text and the whole context, rather than pulling a few verses out here and there, reading them as if the author were a Hollywood movie producer, and you were the intended audience, to conclude that God is “unreasonable.”
Again: “who makes the correct interpretation?”. How do you decide which is the correct interpretation and which is not? Details, please.
 
Is this the hallmark of a “loving” person? Sheeesh! As they say: “thanks, but no, thanks”.
God didn’t create Hell. Hell exists because there are spiritual beings - people and angels - who don’t love God, or who love themselves more than they love God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top