How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 Philosophy 101
 Second Coming   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Second Coming

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


25 posted 08-18-2007 04:20 AM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

quote:
As my husband puts it, you could get hit with a Katrina tomorrow or get run over by a bus while crossing the street.


Tell him I would druther the bus.

It's faster, and being more expedient, I would hope it is more humane.
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


26 posted 08-18-2007 04:49 AM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

To XOx Uriah xOX

there is

God
holy spirit
Jesus
dead Jesus
Resurrected Jesus
back to heaven Jesus
God's kindom
Heaven
hell

how do they work on human or how are they related to human?
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


27 posted 08-18-2007 05:06 AM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

Huan,

"So if He doesn't, what's the big deal?"

If you are asked what if the Budda did not tell the truth?

So, if there is no second coming, then the Bible will be dropped. then gone all the Christains, the Vatican, then the middle east, what a big deal!!!  Think about all the Saints.  Then still, people will countinue to look for creator and the purpose of human life, the soul and other things too.

we can live and die
we can live and think and die
we can live and think and think and die
though without solutions but with a faith. (that there is a God)
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


28 posted 08-18-2007 08:05 AM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


Stephanos,

quote:
The "Wager" of course is no complete answer either way, to justify belief or unbelief.  But it is highly suggestive ... since you brought it up as a less sophisticated reversal of Pascal.  As the book of Romans describes, we've all been given no small amount of evidence.  But if it were just a kind of blind gamble, as Blaise pointed out, belief would be the better and safer bet. .


Iím convinced; Iím converting to Islam tomorrow!

Whatís that? I lose because Iíve chosen the wrong god but Pascal never mentioned that there was a penalty for believing in the wrong god. So how many possible gods are there? Hundreds! Do they all punish anyone who doesnít believe in them? Ah, so most of them only punish people who believe in false gods, I see, and some of them offer rewards based on how good youíve been regardless of whether you believed in gods or not. So what youíre saying is that Iíd be better off edging my bets.

Iím convinced: Iím sticking to atheism.


Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


29 posted 08-18-2007 12:34 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Grinch,

Again, the wager can only be a kind of beginning, not the destination.  Biblically, there's a distinction between faith (the assurance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen) and mere hope.  Its the kind of difference that can be known only from within that experience.  As with love, felt invitation rather than logical demonstration is the most persuasive path to faith.  Though that might sound dangerously emotive, the mind in not left out of the invitation:  "Love the Lord your God with all your heart ... soul .. mind ... and strength."


As far as other religions go, the Bible clearly says that redemption comes only through the person of Christ.  But much less clear is any proposition that all people of other religious persuasions will perish without opportunity to be saved, to keep what sincere truth they've known, and to reject what was erroneous.  


I see two threads working in all religons (including Christian religions):  truth and error.  And so while Satan is certainly involved in other belief-systems, God is involved as well.  The Athenian "Altar to the unknown god" was not accidental, and neither was the recurring theme of ressurection in ancient nature-religions.  In my opinion such religions present something different enough from the truth to risk perdition on the part of the hearers, but similar enough to lead to a kind of awakening ... to set the groundwork for something much greater.  I feel sure that those who seek will ultimately find.  (Though don't confuse what I'm saying with the popular idea that all paths lead to salvation)


Stephen    
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


30 posted 08-18-2007 01:07 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

"As far as other religions go, the Bible clearly says that redemption comes only through the person of Christ."


How do you determine that that should be taken to heart and believed in, or wholly believed in?  

Do you believe everything written in the bible, Stephanos?  How do you "decide" how far to believe?


Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


31 posted 08-18-2007 03:39 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
Again, the wager can only be a kind of beginning, not the destination.


You mean it suggests that a belief in god is better than disbelief and, hopefully, armed with that a good man will eventually select the correct belief (presumably Christian in your view), but I think Iíve shown that Pascalís wager proves nothing of the sort. In fact if you expand the wager to encompass all religions, as I pointed out earlier, the odds are more in your favour if you abstain from subscribing to any religious group.

Youíre on rocky ground with the Pascal in any case Stephen if we adhere to his betting analogy.

We canít know if a god or gods exist so the odds are even money for belief versus disbelief, if you want to put your money on Christianity however and there are, lets say, nine other religious players in the running your odds start to look decidedly long. Betting on belief or disbelief is like picking the winner of a soccer match where you donít know the teams, youíve a 50% chance of getting it right. Betting on Christianity would be akin to betting that a particular player (jesus) would score the first goal.

quote:
As far as other religions go, the Bible clearly says that redemption comes only through the person of Christ.


That may be true but only if a Christian god actually exists, if one doesnít then the bible is just a book of fairytales written by men. It can hardly be put forward as evidence that god exists and as guidance of how to gain redemption from that god if thereís a 50% chance that itís simply a book of fiction and lies. Doesnít any reliance on its contents simply beg the question?

You donít believe thereís a 50% chance that the bible is wrong do you? Why not? Pascal did, thatís the reason he created the wager. His premise was that man cannot know by reason alone whether god exists, then he set out to suggest that even without knowing you were better off betting in favour of a god.

Iím still sticking to atheism; itís the best bet.


Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


32 posted 08-18-2007 04:06 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Whether you refer to something as "god" or "not existant," something is still there.


Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


33 posted 08-18-2007 04:25 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


Ess,

On a scale of obtuse sentences this:

quote:
Whether you refer to something as "god" or "not existant," something is still there.


Has to be close to the top.

If you give me a clue as to what you mean Iíll be happy to argue against it (just for the heck of it).

Craig


Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


34 posted 08-18-2007 04:26 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


Isnít faith in the Second Coming  much like faith in
the Resurrection, ( I think Paul wrote about this in Corinthians 15);
if the former isn't going to happen, or the latter didnít,  itís all pretty pointless
and we might as well enjoy ourselves in the time we have.


.

Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


35 posted 08-18-2007 04:45 PM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Grinch,

Of course no one can make your decisions for you.

I would like to explain why I think you're misrepresenting Pascal ... but I'm going to be busy for a couple of days.  Be back as soon as I can.


Essorant,

How do you interpret Jesus' words when he said "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and no man comes to Father except through me"?

I know that the Bible relates some provisional and pro tempore "truths",  and prescriptions that change.  (I, as a Christian, no longer recognize animal sacrifice as "truth" though it was prescribed by God in the Old Testament)  But I also recognize that the Bible relates many universal and unchanging truths.  There are also some ambiguous things about the Bible.  I just happen to think that the exclusivity of salvation through Christ isn't one of them.  

To ask how one tells the difference, is a question of exegesis and valid interpretation ... asking whether the original teaching was provisional or universal in nature, and asking whether anything has changed it and why.  And that would get down to talking about specific doctrines and passages ... and details.    

I would ask you if you can exegetically support a temporary exclusivity of Christ as the sacrifice for human sinfulness ... or either a temporary sinfulness on the part of human beings.  Unless such can be supported with the data we have, I don't see how the statements of Jesus can be rightly understood in any other way.


And as far as your statement about everything "existing".  I don't think either Grinch or I, were talking about existence in that sense of the word.  There are different kinds of existence and being.  Micky mouse has a dependent and contigent existence upon its creator.  His creator has a personal existence that is on another level entirely.  To say that God exists, is not to say that he merely exists as an artifice.


We've gone over this before ... so I'm wondering why you always bring up that general point, whenever existence is spoken of in a very specific and particular way?  It's not even related to the kind of conversation we're having.


Peace,


Stephen
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


36 posted 08-18-2007 05:48 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Grinch,

What I was trying to imply is that you are both referring to something beyond so fully misty you both have the room to go to extremes of either broadening the imagination or bridling it as much as possible to make your interpretation.

Stephanos points at the sky and says "Lo, God is at the center of Universe.  It saith so in the bible!" And you point at the sky and say "There is no God at the center of the Universe!  It saith thus in Atheism!"

What's the difference, except that you seem to refer to the same thing, but in terms of an opposite extreme?

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


37 posted 08-18-2007 06:09 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Stephanos,


How do you interpret Jesus' words when he said "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and no man comes to Father except through me"?"


It is easy enough to interpret as a literal statement.  I read it exactly as it is written.  But how do we decide to believe it?   And once that is figured out, how do we decide how far or fixedly to believe in such a statement?  


Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


38 posted 08-18-2007 06:31 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


It seems to me
to be about
death being oblivion
that drives faith.

The fear that
however bad it was,
life, consciousness,
will come to an absolute end.


.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


39 posted 08-18-2007 08:42 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

Ess,

quote:
Stephanos points at the sky and says "Lo, God is at the center of Universe.  It saith so in the bible!" And you point at the sky and say "There is no God at the center of the Universe!  It saith thus in Atheism!"


Ah, I see your point now.

Youíre wrong but at least now I can understand enough to put you right, think of it like this:

Stephanos points at the sky and says "Lo, God is at the centre of Universe.  It saith so in the bible!" And I say, "I see no god or any evidence for a godĒ then everyone points at me and says, ďBehold an atheistĒ.

Atheism isnít built on a belief in anything in particular, rather itís a label attached to anyone who disbelieves in one thing in particular Ė the existence of a god or gods. I donít disbelieve because atheism says so, Iím labelled an atheist because I disbelieve.

quote:
What's the difference, except that you seem to refer to the same thing, but in terms of an opposite extreme?


The difference is that Iím not pointing at anything; the irony is that I donít think Stephen is either.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


40 posted 08-18-2007 09:07 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Why do you think that is? Is such a need basic and proper, or is it only a form of neurosis? You've said in past threads that you are convinced that there's a God, and that this present life isn't all there is. And though your beliefs are less specific, and deistic, what makes your answer more respectable in regard to your "need"? Does your criticism apply to your own beliefs?
Good question. Yes, I think it is basic. I think it ia natural to not want to believe that our life here is all there is. Everyone wants to survive in some way and/or believe their life here counts in some way for something. Yes, I believe in a superior force or being or plan such as reincarnation or exchange of souls or some such avenue. I certainly have never said that my answers are "more respectable" than anyone else's. They are simply mine.

Why has humanity always sought that which is spiritual? Why has humanity (including yourself I'll bet) viewed death more like a question demanding an answer than just a bland and unremarkable fact?

and why not?  Death is indeed a fact. The question is what happens afterward. You ask why humanity (including me) would not explore that question? I can't imagine why anyone would not.

Why do even the anti-religious decry deplorable behavior and motives (as if it were somehow transcendental and more than just opinion) in their own arguments?

Well, how do you define anti-religious? Those who do not believe in Jesus Christ? Those who do not believe in any organized religion? As I mentioned above there may be many "life after death" possibilities, such as reincarnation of souls that could depend on our behavior and morals while here on earth.

What is wrong with even a "threat" if it is based upon something true and just?   Nothing. Prove it is true. If it is just, does it need threats? Surely you don't reject law (in principle) simply because it involves threats? No. Is belief in Jesus law?

As far as other religions go, the Bible clearly says that redemption comes only through the person of Christ. But much less clear is any proposition that all people of other religious persuasions will perish without opportunity to be saved, to keep what sincere truth they've known, and to reject what was erroneous.

From what I understand, one cannot enter the kingdom of heaven without accepting Jesus as his Savior. Do you mean to say there may be different heavens for people of other religious persuasions? They may be like a variety of heavens up there to accomodate all faiths, like subdivisions in the sky?  Interesting thought.......

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


41 posted 08-18-2007 09:43 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

"I see no god or any evidence for a godĒ then everyone points at me and says, ďBehold an atheistĒ.


You find an absence of evidence, or so it seem.  Yet you cannot see the whole universe.  You are limited only to this extremly small point of the whole universe.  Your senses can't even cover the whole point of the earth, that is exceedingly small compared to the Universe, and yet, and yet you are willing to take this "absence" that you (and not everyone else) finds in this little space and try to project it into an absolute of the Universe?  Since you can't find any evidence, there is no evidence anywhere?  You are trying to make out an appearance of an absence of evidence as if it is an evidence for the whole universe that there is no God?

It seems you should see the faultiness in that approach.  On the other hand, trying to make another appearance or lack thereof out as an whole evidence of God and trying to project that as an absolute of the universe is another extreme that I think is faulty.  I guess all I am saying is that I personally believe that you are both referring to something, but trying to treat "appearances" or lackings thereof as evidence and indeed they are partial evidence, but then you try to project them on to the whole universe and treat them as absolutes!  I find that an extremism and fault in both of your approaches.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


42 posted 08-18-2007 10:34 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Ess, if I am included in the "both" that you refer to, I have stated nothing as absolutes. I've done nothing but state my opinions, beliefs and thoughts and call them nothing more than that.

If I'm not included....disregard this message
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


43 posted 08-18-2007 10:48 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.  Philippians 2:9-11

I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men... for this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.  I Tim. 2:1-6

I believe that one day all will come to believe, in God's own timing, and according to His purpose for each person individually.

I believe that all punishment is corrective and serves His purposes and will end when those purposes are accomplished, when disbelief and rebellion are burned away by the loving correction of God.

I believe that it is God's will that all be saved, and I believe that God has the power to change the hearts of all so that His desire is fulfilled. I don't believe that anyone, no matter how strong-willed, or self-willed, can resist forever the will of God.

And in keeping with the topic of the Thread ...

I believe in the Second Coming as prophesied, and believe that it too will come to pass, just as the birth, death, burial and resurrection were prophesied and came to pass.

And I don't believe that God predicts the future, I believe that God creates the future, and that what He has told us will happen will happen.

Of course no one can prove the existence of God, just like no one can prove that He speaks to mankind through the Bible, and I suspect that that is the way God has designed it.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


44 posted 08-18-2007 10:52 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Well said, Denise. You began your thoughts with "I believe" which is as it should be. I respect and salute your beliefs
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


45 posted 08-19-2007 12:02 AM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

Balladeer

Will you respect and salute someone who believes in a cow, a tree, a mountain, a rock or a sculpture or a star just because he says "I believe"?
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


46 posted 08-19-2007 12:08 AM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Balladeer

Well now that you mention it      

"state my opinions, beliefs and thoughts and call them nothing more than that."

I wouldn't say they aren't anything more than just opinions, beliefs, and thoughts, suggesting that they are truthless and factless.  For opinion, beliefs, and thoughts come along with more than just themselves and refer to more than just themselves.  They also participate as a part of the "whole" that everything else is part, including truths and facts. None of them works alone in void detached from reality.   It may be difficult to say how much they are "more", but I think it is belittling to say that they are only opinions, beliefs, and thoughts, as if they are detached from or void of reality and truths.  If our opinions, beliefs, and thoughts were just mental mist without any truth or fact, what would be the point of having them?


Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


47 posted 08-19-2007 08:03 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Tom, if a person says he believes that a cow is the most majestic creature on earth, or a sculpture I consider ugly to be the greatest work of art ever produced, I will respect his belief, whether or not I agree. If that same person says the same of a cow and that, whoever does NOT believe that are wrong, then i have a problem with that individual. I will never interfere with another's belief as long as I am not affected by them.

Essorant, I have never said that my beliefs are truthless or have no basis in fact. They are based on the truth and facts as I see them, just as all beliefs are based on the same things. I can look at the Bible and see a good piece of fiction and Stefan can see the word of God, for example. We all have our own pereceptions, which makes the world such an interesting place.  

The problem comes when people claim their beliefs (whether or not they claim to have factual evidence ) are the only true ones and anyone who doesn't believe the same way is wrong and, in some cases, the enemy (can you say terrorist?)

At times, life and our beliefs can be one big ink-blot test.....

If our opinions, beliefs, and thoughts were just mental mist without any truth or fact, what would be the point of having them?

Beats me...ask the Pope.




icebox
Member Elite
since 05-03-2003
Posts 4246
in the shadows


48 posted 08-19-2007 11:28 AM       View Profile for icebox   Email icebox   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for icebox

Why assume a return of this being would be only the "Second" time it has been manifest on this planet?  Why assume the last time was the first time?

On the other hand, why expect it to return at all?  The last time it was here, by most accounts, humans tortured its body and then nailed it to a tree; "Welcome to earth!"
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


49 posted 08-19-2007 11:33 AM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
You find an absence of evidence, or so it seem.


It doesnít just seem that way Ess it is that way, show me one piece of irrefutable evidence that a god or gods exist and Iíll convert tomorrow.


quote:
Yet you cannot see the whole universe.  You are limited only to this extremly small point of the whole universe. Your senses can't even cover the whole point of the earth, that is exceedingly small compared to the Universe, and yet, and yet you are willing to take this "absence" that you (and not everyone else) finds in this little space and try to project it into an absolute of the Universe?


It isnít just me Ess, the absence of evidence is there for all to not see, show us some irrefutable evidence and weíll all convert tomorrow.

God and gods fall into the same category as pixies and unicorns, you can believe in them if you like, you can even argue that a lack of evidence doesnít preclude them existing somewhere in the universe. What you canít do is use the lack of evidence to prove they do exist simply because you believe they exist.

If someone came up to you tomorrow and said theyíd talked to a six foot tall pink rabbit with polka dot ears and he said you should give up work and start building him a hutch would you believe them simply because they believed? Remember the universe is a big place, using your argument the phantom rabbit might exist.

Michael seems to be suggesting that he wouldnít start building the hutch but he doesnít mind if someone wants to believe in pink rabbits.

Stephen would probably suggest that the rabbit was the devil in disguise trying to tempt people from the one true god.

Iím more likely to point out that the pink rabbit doesnít exist and suggest that the person who talked to it seeks professional help.

As far as a second coming is concerned, Iím still waiting for evidence of the alleged first coming.

"There's a blaze of light in every word
it doesn't matter which you heard
the holy or the broken Hallelujah"
Leonard Cohen

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> Philosophy 101 >> Second Coming   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors