(IFF) Deism is true (THEN) what?

Author: 3RU7AL

Posts

Total: 178
#61
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Plisken
Children are told to recite it before they understand it. I think there is something vile about that.

By contrast, the church teaches a creed, a declaration of belief, and every Sunday at my church they teach the kids about a different line of the creed and what it means. The kids are right there with the adults, everbody else. Even the aduots learn from what is taught to the kids! And I like that, because we are supposed to come as children.

I could go on and on about how beautiful liturgy is, which is what I feel like doing now, but that is off topic. Hah.


Topic's author
#62
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Plisken
You are claiming revelation with your characterization, and also happen to be misconstruing what I intend to say to Mopac.  
Please make a point if you have one.

If you dispute my scriptural interpretation, offer an alternative.

If you dispute my understanding of your intended message, please clarify.
#63
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@3RU7AL
Towards Mopac it was just to point out that you weren't speaking for me

Topic's author
#64
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Plisken
It's just to point out that you weren't speaking for me
This much should be obvious.

#65
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@3RU7AL
I didn't think your response to my statement towards mopac made any sense.  It's not a deep message
#66
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@TwoMan
Is that necessarily the case? Is an atheist also an adeist by definition?

In 2018 the main debate is between theists and 'full on' atheists, with deism a very distant 3rd.  In 1818 (say) the debate would have been between theists and deists, who the theists would accuse of atheism.   What I called 'full on' atheism barely existed until the C19th.

Today if you self-identify as an atheist it implies 'adeism' simply because you have the option of self-identifying as a deist if that is more accurate.
 
#67
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@keithprosser
You mean agnostic deism?
Topic's author
#68
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@keithprosser
In 2018 the main debate is between theists and 'full on' atheists, with deism a very distant 3rd.  In 1818 (say) the debate would have been between theists and deists, who the theists would accuse of atheism.   What I called 'full on' atheism barely existed until the C19th.
Today if you self-identify as an atheist it implies 'adeism' simply because you have the option of self-identifying as a deist if that is more accurate.
The only reason I am driving towards Deism is because every logical defense of Theism (Aquinas, et al) is merely a defense of Deism.

Most atheists fight tooth and claw to deny Deism (and paint themselves into a paradoxical corner) because they believe that admitting Deism is a "win" for the Theists.

I'm merely pointing out that Deism is actually a "win" for atheism, because Deism is functionally identical to atheism.
#69
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@Plisken
You mean agnostic deism?
I'm having problems working out what an 'agnostic deist' believes in!

#70
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@3RU7AL
They certainly fall short of proving the existence of an entity that "so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." and has strong views on marriage.
Topic's author
#71
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@keithprosser
They certainly fall short of proving the existence of an entity that "so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." and has strong views on marriage.
That is exactly the line they need to draw.

For example, "the thing that made the things for which there is no known maker" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVbnciQYMiM

#72
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@3RU7AL

The only reason I am driving towards Deism is because every logical defense of Theism (Aquinas, et al) is merely a defense of Deism

And Aquinas was probably the king of the Scholastics.
And as I said, Orthodoxy rejected scholasticism. Why not? The Latins don't even buy into it anymore, and scholasticism has a great deal. to do with why the west went in a secular direction.

The scholastics in their haughtiness thought they were philosophically more advanced than the church fathers. 

Add that to the lists of Roman Catholic fumbles.


Did I mention they were excommunicated by us?




#73
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@Mopac
When it comes to scripture, you have to understand that it belongs to the church. It isn't really yours to interpret.
Therefore, based on the hundreds and hundreds of times you've repeated that God is the Ultimate Reality while waving a dictionary around leads us to conclude that you are the Church and that you own Scriptures.

#74
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@Mopac
thinking is alien to orthodoxy
Well said, couldn't agree more.
#75
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@Mopac
God does not send people to hell. People choose to go to hell

No we choose to go to hell so we don't have to spend an eternity with people like you.
#76
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
Hesychasm, the method of Orthodox Christians...

Very different than

Scholasticism, the method of Latin Papalism and the west for a good chunk of the last 1000 years.



How do you see God? By purifying the heart, not through vain intellectualism.

And well, at least with those with eyes to see, the fruit of this method is clear. The Latin church has fractured into over 23,000 denominations, the church is more secular than ever, struggling to remain relevent as they compromise more and more tradition.


Really, the state of what passes for Christianity in Roman Catholic and Protestant circles is shameful.

I would love to see a return to the real church. There is something wrong, and it is plain for all to see. I'm especially going to give a shout out to you American protestants. The church is really tiny in America. If you find it encouraging, there are at least 3 protestant pastors who lead congregations for more than a couple decades who ended up becoming Orthodox! It is very different than what you are used to, but have an attitude of charity and it will hopefully all make sense eventually. It's the real church.


Get on board, cuz the anarchistic and increasingly secular protestant church is a sinking ship. 







Topic's author
#77
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Mopac
Logic and independently verifiable evidence isn't what really convinces people.
People might say that is what they find convincing, but I think that is naive view.
The most powerful persuasion is "an appeal to fear".

This does not make it the most valid, or the most honest, or the most durable form of persuasion.
Topic's author
#78
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Plisken
I didn't think your response to my statement towards mopac made any sense.  It's not a deep message
You are entitled to your opinion.
Topic's author
#79
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Mopac
You are thinking in a legalistic sense, which is not how we think.
Playing the blame game is fundamentally in opposition to a heart of forgiveness.
You who are corrupted by the excommunicated church see the church as a courthouse. That isn't the Orthodox view. We see the church as a hospital. And this legalistic mindset would be seen as a sickness to be cured.
This sounds nice.

So the Eastern Orthodox Church doesn't tend to go around telling people they're going to hell for breaking the rules?

Do they have any strong views on things like birth control, abortion, gay marriage, and or recreational drug use?
Topic's author
#80
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Plisken
The pledge itself is not legally binding.  It is however, constitutional, not irrelevant.

"As the 9th Circuit recognized, there is a strong argument that the Pledge violates the [first amendment] Establishment Clause under the endorsement test as well as Lemon. This is true, not in spite of, but rather because of, the Pledge's primarily patriotic intent. As an affirmation of citizenship, the Pledge defines membership in the political community. As amended in 1954, the Pledge refers to a particular belief, monotheism, that many people—not only atheists, but members of religions such as Buddhism—do not share. This official reference to a single God may well strike nonbelievers as an act of exclusion..." [LINK]

The pledge is not a legally binding document.

The only reason "under dog" has not been removed, is specifically because it is sufficiently vague.

If schoolchildren were expected to read, "One nation, under YHWH" every single day, you can bet that would've been struck down immediately.

The only "cover" christians have for "under dog" is DEISM.  The ridiculous assumption is that DEISM is somehow magically compatible with their personal superstitious belief in "YHWH".
#81
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@3RU7AL
The pledge of allegience is religiously neutral.
#82
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@3RU7AL
I didn't think your response to my statement towards mopac made any sense.  It's not a deep message
You are entitled to your opinion.

  If I am wrong, which I am not, just say so please.  It appears to me, at best, you were reading into something that isn't there. I probably will not have time to play with this until after Christmas, and I am very busy.  I'm not debating with you, if you haven't noticed.  We are going to need some mutual respect if we are to have this conversation
Topic's author
#83
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Plisken
The pledge of allegience is religiously neutral.
Would you be happy with "One nation, under some unspecified number of possibly hypothetical gods, indivisible..."?

Or how about, "One nation, under Zeus, indivisible..."?

Or perhaps, "One nation, under Allah, indivisible..."?

Many (if not most) people read (capital G) "God" as "YHWH", do you disagree?

Don't you think we should be more specific, you know, in order to avoid confusion/conflation?

Who has the best god?  The answer is here - https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3v5yui

Topic's author
#84
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Plisken
If I am wrong, which I am not, just say so please.  It appears to me, at best, you were reading into something that isn't there. I probably will not have time to play with this until after Christmas, and I am very busy.  I'm not debating with you, if you haven't noticed.  We are going to need some mutual respect if we are to have this conversation
Only you can explain your intention.

If you refuse to explain your intention, then it is merely your opinion and you are entitled to it.
#85
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@3RU7AL

The church has even from the first centuries been anti-abortion. Marriage is definitely between a man and a woman, and only sex within marriage is considered moral. Homosexuality is usually a symptom of idolatry, as is recreational drug use.

No, the church doesn't go around telling people they are going to hell for "breaking the rules". That said, the church isn't going to lie to you and tell you that evil is good and that good is evil. The church is there to heal you. There is no force or coercion involved. You do have freewill. And part of having freewill means that you can choose to reject healing and go on sinning in your pride. However, this isn't really beneficial for you, and it isn't always easy to see this when you are being blinded by your affliction. There is a certain trust involved. We see God as our father and the church is our mother. 


The church doesn't really tell people they are going to hell. We all pretty much understand that God is the rightful judge of these things. 

And we pray for those who persecute us and bless those who curse us. That is at least, the example we are given.

And well, Orthodox Christianity might have been what ended up toppling The Soviet Union, because they had an officially "Scientific Atheist" government, and did everything they could to eradicate God from their country. Millions of martyrs. Christians were second class citizens. They demolished churches, seminaries, slaughtered so many priests, even tried to corrupt the church through infiltration. For 70 years, they did these things to the church. But it didn't work, and it wasn't long after the Soviet Union stopped its persecution that it fell. And good riddance.

And we Orthodox do not believe in revolting against civil authorities. We are innocent, and walk the path of peace. Despite this, you will not find any other church that has been on the receiving end of so much persecution. That is why we are nicknamed the church of martyrs. Over 20 million of us killed in the last century for our beliefs, and despite this, anti-Christian rhetoric is fairly normal. Everytime the heretics do something evil in the name of Christ, we are the ones who seem to get killed for it. Very tragic.


Topic's author
#86
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Plisken
How do you personally imagine our relationship with natural law?  That may be helpful 
Gravity is natural law.

Gravity (natural law) does not need to be enforced by a government or police force or any human agents or mechanisms whatsoever.
Another example of "natural law" would be if you designed an unbreakable lock.

You would never need to pass a law stating, "if you break an unbreakable lock, you will face a hefty fine and up to six years in prison".

Because, the lock either is unbreakable, or it isn't.  No law enforcement required.
#87
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@3RU7AL
If I am wrong, which I am not, just say so please.  It appears to me, at best, you were reading into something that isn't there. I probably will not have time to play with this until after Christmas, and I am very busy.  I'm not debating with you, if you haven't noticed.  We are going to need some mutual respect if we are to have this conversation
Only you can explain your intention.

If you refuse to explain your intention, then it is merely your opinion and you are entitled to it.
Why are you reiterating this?  I found it unnecessary the first time as well.  That's why I addressed the implication, rather than the obvious literal.  There is no expectation for you to understand the conversation I was having with Mopac.
Topic's author
#88
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Plisken
Why are you reiterating this?  I found it unnecessary the first time as well.  That's why I addressed the implication, rather than the obvious literal
You seem to be taking offense.

I am merely stating facts.
#89
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@3RU7AL
Negative, no offense taken, even in the slightest
Topic's author
#90
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Plisken
Negative, no offense taken, even in the slightest
I am ever so glad to hear that.