Vote on debate

Author: Mopac

Posts

Archived
Total: 242
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Plisken
No, he has landed himself in the territory of even questioning whether there is reality at all or not.

Since God is The Ultimate Reality, he realizes at this point to deny God or justify his lack of belief in God, he cannot outright say he is certain that reality exists. If he says reality definitely exists, then God must necessarily exist.


As the scriptures say, "Those who receive not the love of The Truth will be cursed with strong delusion."
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Mopac
So you don't know what your talking about then?

Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
Jesus, how much longer can the Ultimate Reality horse be beaten. 
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Mopac
he realizes at this point to deny God or justify his lack of belief in God, he cannot outright say he is certain that reality exists.
Again I do not care what you call reality. You may call it god or Sam the eagle or Conan the barbarian. It is your claims about reality/truth/god that I find unsupportable. In fact if the reality that I perceive is real then your claims are even less likely to be true. If I admit that reality as I observe it is real then I must also admit that I don't observe anything the likes of which you are claiming.
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
I would like to ban these posts saying come vote on a debate. The forums are separate for a reason. 
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@secularmerlin

The reality you experience is real in some sense.

Like, they are really perceptions.


If you honestly examine the reality you experience, you will find that reality isn't the way it looks to you.

If you take that as a reason to doubt reality all together, what does that say about the state of your intellect? There is definitely a pride issue here.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Mopac
If you honestly examine the reality you experience, you will find that reality isn't the way it looks to you.
In that case we are not qualified to make true statements about reality. Don't you see how this position is self defeating? We as humans can only make true statements about what we perceive (even if what we perceive is not real it is true that we perceive it) so if what we perceive is not real then we have no way of determining what is objectively true or false.

Now I really must insist that you answer these questions. 
 
What sins? What evil? Forgiven by whom? Repent of What?

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Jesus, how much longer can the Ultimate Reality horse be beaten. 
I'm not sure, every time I think I am done and give up on it he draws me back in with his violation of epistemology. I keep thinking that if I can just find the right words I can... well actually at this point I'm not sure what I'm hoping for out of this conversation.

Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@secularmerlin
In that case we are not qualified to make true statements about reality. Don't you see how this position is self defeating? We as humans can only make true statements about what we perceive (even if what we perceive is not real it is true that we perceive it) so if what we perceive is not real then we have no way of determining what is objectively true or false.

So your goal is to determine objectively what is true or false. That seems to be your ultimate goal. Well, that isn't the point of my faith. We Orthodox acknowledge what we call mysteries. Mysteries are not things to be solved, as people tend to think of a mystery in the west, but things to experience. 

But you are wrong, the position is not self defeating. Because you can make several true statements about reality.

For example, I perceive reality as I experience it is not reality as it truly is. What does that mean? It means that I am objectively wrong, but that God, reality as it truly is, is right.

And what do I claim? That The Ultimate Reality is God, and this is more true than any sense I can make of anything.








Now I really must insist that you answer these questions. 
 
What sins? What evil? Forgiven by whom? Repent of What?

Sin is to fall short, to miss the mark.
It is evil to intentionally sin when you know it is wrong.
God forgives those who repent, or turn away from doing things they know are wrong.

So if you are in error, and you become aware of it, stop making the error. Turn around, don't do it any more. That is what it means to repent.

But if you really want to know this. stuff, I would suggest you go to an Orthodox Priest. It is their job to answer these kind of questions.

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Mopac
So your goal is to determine objectively what is true or false. 
Nope. That is a foolish goal. My goal in this context is to believe in as many true things and as few false things as possible and to be able to admit it honestly when I don't know. Determining any objective truth is almost certainly beyond the scope of human epistemology.
Sin is to fall short, to miss the mark.
To fall short of What? To miss what mark?
It is evil to intentionally sin when you know it is wrong
And how does one make this determination? What standard are you using when claiming that something is "wrong"? If I think something is wrong and you disagree how do we determine which of us is correct if indeed either of us are?
I would suggest you go to an Orthodox Priest.
And what makes an orthodox priest an authority on the subject? Are they a better authority on the subject than a buhdists monk or the dudely lama (leader of the dudist movement)? If so how have you made this determination?
It is their job to answer these kind of questions.
Which does not necessitate them having the correct answers. You cpuld just as easilybsay thst it is the job pf a con man or cultbleader to answer these questions and it would not necessarily be untrue. Con men and cult leaders have both made very comfortable livings answering these questions questionably. Do you know who else's job it is to answer these questions? Philosophers and scientists. Of course the difference between an orthodox priest a con man or a cult leader and a philosopher or a scientist is that a philosopher or a scientist can admit they don't know without losing their livelihoods.
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@secularmerlin
We aren't going to go anywhere like this.


If someone is telling you the truth, and they know what they are talking about... are you ever going to find that out by doubting everything they say? A certain level of good faith is needed for certain things to get communicated. For you to be healed.


Do you know you are sick? I will pray for you, that God is revealed to you, that you may be loosed of your chains, and find freedom in Christ. That your eyes may be opened to see these things that are spiritually discerned. That God The Healer would cleanse you of your infirmity.


secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Mopac
So now I am sick? I'm sorry but you have claimed that you do not believe in freewill and that everything happens according to some cosmic plan. If your god(s) wanted me to believe their first mistake was making me an atheist. Perhaps your god(s) are/is the sick one.

Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@secularmerlin
Well, I might have misspoken. We do have a choice. In Orthodox theology it is called synergism.

You can cooperate with God, or you can fight God. 

It is not God that rejects you, it is always the individual that rejects God.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Mopac
That sounds like freewill. Is there freewill or not?
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Mopac
The hubris of godists is amusing.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@disgusted
That is qualia not quanta. Just the facts please.
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Mopac
It is not God that rejects you, it is always the individual that rejects God.
Obviously a fantasy creation/god can't reject anything.

Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@secularmerlin
Short answer

Yes



secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Mopac
I see no evidence of freewill and so I reject that claim but let's assume for a moment you are right why give us freewill and the capacity for deductive thought and then withhold all evidence of oneself and then punish those that use this freewill and deductive thought to determine that there is no logical reason to believe? This still sounds like the hypothetical god(s) in question is/are the real one(s) at fault here. If your god(s) want me to believe why not just contact me directly? Why send you, a flawed human with the same epistemological limits that I have, to try to convince me? Either god(s) don't care if I believe or god(s) do not know how to convince me. Neither sounds like a deity I would like to worship.
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@secularmerlin
Are you responsible for your actions?
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@janesix
I will be held accountable for my actions by my fellow humans. 
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@secularmerlin
Will you? It doesn't look like they have any choice in the matter.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@janesix
That is correct they have no choice but to hold me accountable for my actions especially if those actions represent a danger to the public.
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@secularmerlin
And what if they don't want to do that?
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@janesix
I'm not sure what you mean since most people observable do want others held accountable for their actions. Do you mean hypothetically?
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@secularmerlin
I'm sure you could think of a scenario where that is the case.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@janesix
If no one knows of my actions or if no one cares to hold me accountable then I suppose hypothetically I would not be held accountable.
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@secularmerlin
Then in your mind, you really can't be held accountable for your actions. 

I don't really think you REALLY don't think you have free will. 
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@secularmerlin
Do you limit yourself to physical evidence for free will? 

secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@janesix
In my mind I accept that I will be held accountable. You presented the hypothetical in which this was not the case not I.