The most important question of all

[Neuropteron]

Is there a God ?

Geneticist Francis S.Collins. Made a valid point. "If there is no God, then there is no life beyond the present one, no higher authority on moral issues".

The answer however is certainly not evident.
Atheists view this question through the lens of materialism and a philosophy that assumes purely material causes for the origin of life.
Evolutionist Richard C.Lewontin made his bias clear: "We (atheist) have a prior commitment to materialism, ... materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."
Hence, materialists embrace the only alternative they have- evolution.

Regrettably, many of the world's religions have added to the confusion by teaching things that contradict not only scientific knowledge but unambiguous scriptural doctrines, replacing them with their own.

In the 13thcentury, " Saint" Thomas Aquinas, called the Angelic Doctor, advocated the death sentence for heresy. The "right" of the church to torture and burn heretics was, in fact, a horrible corollary to the unscriptural doctrines of hell and purgatory. The church tortured in the name of a God whom she blasphemously claims is a torturer himself.

Faced with conflicting theories and philosophies, many give up their search for the truth about God's existence.

But what could be more worthwhile and of greater consequence- than finding a trustworthy answer to such a fundamental question ?

 

[Nakosis]

Is there a God ?
But what could be more worthwhile and of greater consequence- than finding a trustworthy answer to such a fundamental question ?

One could spend their whole life looking for certain answers, die and be none the wiser.

How many millions and millions of folks have come before only at the end of life finding no answers have been forthcoming?

Worthwhile to come up empty? I think not. I feel there are better ways to spend my time than seeking answers to unsolvable questions. Whether God exists or God does not has no affect on my life. Why seek answers to questions which do not matter in this life?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Is there a God ?

Geneticist Francis S.Collins. Made a valid point. "If there is no God, then there is no life beyond the present one, no higher authority on moral issues".

The answer however is certainly not evident.
Atheists view this question through the lens of materialism and a philosophy that assumes purely material causes for the origin of life.
Evolutionist Richard C.Lewontin made his bias clear: "We (atheist) have a prior commitment to materialism, ... materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."
Hence, materialists embrace the only alternative they have- evolution.

Regrettably, many of the world's religions have added to the confusion by teaching things that contradict not only scientific knowledge but unambiguous scriptural doctrines, replacing them with their own.

In the 13thcentury, " Saint" Thomas Aquinas, called the Angelic Doctor, advocated the death sentence for heresy. The "right" of the church to torture and burn heretics was, in fact, a horrible corollary to the unscriptural doctrines of hell and purgatory. The church tortured in the name of a God whom she blasphemously claims is a torturer himself.

Faced with conflicting theories and philosophies, many give up their search for the truth about God's existence.

But what could be more worthwhile and of greater consequence- than finding a trustworthy answer to such a fundamental question ?

Briefly with the atheist bit, I believe in rebirth and I am a full hundred percent atheist. So, its a generalization that because I dont believe in god, other views out god, if one likes, afterlife, and origin of purpose is strictly material for athiest just because god isnt a part of our lives

But, outside of that, to some people its worthwhile but I dont see it worthwhile for the benefit of the whole. I guess a full percentage of people ask questions like this but I lived in a isolated family so I had no time and chance to ask these type questions even if I knew if they were important (as I see now) for me to ask it. So, a lot of generalization in this post.

But many people do give up when the suffering and mystery outweighs their needing motivation and passion to get beyond research. Research and writing questions is exhausting after awhile.

I think a better way to search for answers is through ones passion. Say if one loves nature, instead of trying to find "god" in temples of worship, go outside and be in a state of meditaiton. God isnt that hard to figure out when, another way to find this, when you put aside what you think god should be like. When you have preexisting definition of god-which by definition there are none-the search is even harder.

Thats like trying to use teh definition of the christian god but feeing pulled to a Pagan one. It leaves one confused. If they set aside one god and fully understand the other then the confusion would be less. But syncronizing the two just doesnt work.

Many atheist are materialist but there are many others like myself that "get it' but insofar follow a belief just because we figured out the religious answers to life questions. It really goes beyond that.


I do think philosophies do help understand the analogy and concept of god. Plat's the Myth of the Cave is a good example of what he calls the human condition (dont read ite commentaries if you look it on on google).

God is present just the problem is, god isnt abrahamic nor hindu nor pagan nor... so a lot of terms are too vague to even consider who believes what and what exists and how this vague concept can anwser someones specific questions.

 

[Neuropteron]

One could spend their whole life looking for certain answers, die and be none the wiser.

.....

I agree, that is the case, with most people.

" the gate leading into life is narrow and cramped and few are finding it..."(Matt 7:13)

 

[siti]

In the 13thcentury, " Saint" Thomas Aquinas, called the Angelic Doctor, advocated the death sentence for heresy. The "right" of the church to torture and burn heretics was, in fact, a horrible corollary to the unscriptural doctrines of hell and purgatory. The church tortured in the name of a God whom she blasphemously claims is a torturer himself.

There's a fair bit wrong with your post but this is a complete misrepresentation of Aquinas' argument. You can read it here https://dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles3b.htm#146 and you will, no doubt, note that he uses very similar argumentation that JWs currently rehearse to justify "disfellowshipping" - "a little leaven ferments the whole lump" and all that. If anything it was his opposers who invoked punishment in the hereafter as a counter-argument (although of course Aquinas believed in hell etc. as did almost (if not) all of his Christian contemporaries).

I don't agree with Aquinas - personally I don't believe the death penalty is ever justified - and certainly not for 'heresy' - as long as there are obviously (as there always are and always gave been) more humane methods available. And in saying that, are we really to believe that a perfect God should uphold a lower standard of justice and mercy than is beholden upon his imperfect creation? I think not.

But I do admire his skilfull use of scripture to support his argument. You have to see another side to Jesus' words in Matthew 5:21-22 after reading this.

 

[Neuropteron]

God is present just the problem is, god isnt abrahamic nor hindu nor pagan nor... so a lot of terms are too vague to even consider who believes what and what exists and how this vague concept can anwser someones specific questions.

...

Thank you for sharing your views.

Be well

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Whether God exists or God does not has no affect on my life. Why seek answers to questions which do not matter in this life?

Thing is you don't know the above.

 

[Neuropteron]

There's a fair bit wrong with your post but this is complete misrepresentation of Aquinas' argument. You can read it here https://dhspriory.org/thomas/ContraGentiles3b.htm#146 and you will, no doubt, note that he uses very similar argumentation that JWs currently rehearse to justify "disfellowshipping" - "a little leaven ferments the whole lump" and all that. If anything it was his opposers who invoked punishment in the hereafter as a counter-argument.

....
The book you are quoting from is called the Contra Gentile and is written by the Catholik Church. I was, -albeit loosely- refering to general history.

Jesus was making a perfectly logical comparison between sin and leaven, and actions to be taken to hinderi it's negative influence.

 

[siti]

The book you are quoting from is called the Contra Gentile and is written by the Catholik Church. I was, -albeit loosely- refering to general history.

Jesus was making a perfectly logical comparison between sin and leaven, and actions to be taken to hinderi it's negative influence.

The book I quoted from is the exact chapter where

In the 13thcentury, " Saint" Thomas Aquinas, called the Angelic Doctor, advocated the death sentence for heresy.

You then linked his argument to the ridiculous medieval Church doctrines about hell-fire and purgatory - Aquinas did not do that - he based his argument on scripture...and if you were around in 13th century you would almost certainly have been convinced by it because you buy almost the same argument to justify the "shunning" of erstwhile members of your Congregations who are guilty of "heresy" - except you call it "apostasy". Both the Watchtower and Aquinas based their arguments principally around the principle in 1 Corinthians 5:6 and the example of capital punishment in the Mosaic Law and both you and he made the "negative influence" of wilful wrongdoers on the rest of the congregation the main concern. That is really the only principle that Aquinas was concerned with - the overall good of society - that moved him to support capital punishment (which was, in any case, the norm in those days).

Aquinas writes:

Furthermore, just as a physician looks to health as the end in his work, and health consists in the orderly concord of humors, so, too, the ruler of a state intends peace in his work, and peace consists in “the ordered concord of citizens.” Now, the physician quite properly and beneficially cuts off a diseased organ if the corruption of the body is threatened because of it. Therefore, the ruler of a state executes pestiferous men justly and sinlessly in order that the peace of the state may not be disrupted.

Hence, the Apostle says, in 1 Corinthians (5:6): “Know you not that a little leaven corrupts the whole lump?” And a little later he adds: “Put away the evil one from among yourselves” (1 Cor. 5:13)...​

...Indeed, in the law which says “You shall not kill” there is the later statement: “You shall not allow wrongdoers to live” (Exod. 22: 18).​

The Watchtower publication Keep Yourselves in God's Love has an appendix that uses the same argument - but the other way round - i.e. it goes Mosaic Law to Corinthians - to justify disfellowshipping and shunning.

...reflect on the severe cutting off mandated in God’s Law to Israel. In various serious matters, willful violators were executed. (Leviticus 20:10; Numbers 15:30, 31) When that happened, others, even relatives, could no longer speak with the dead lawbreaker. (Leviticus 19:1-4; Deuteronomy 13:1-5; 17:1-7) Though loyal Israelites back then were normal humans with emotions like ours, they knew that God is just and loving and that his Law protected their moral and spiritual cleanness. So they could accept that his arrangement to cut off wrongdoers was fundamentally a good and right thing.—Job 34:10-12. 10 We can be just as sure that God’s arrangement that Christians refuse to fellowship with someone who has been expelled for unrepentant sin is a wise protection for us. “Clear away the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, according as you are free from ferment.” (1 Corinthians 5:7)
​

And by the way, it wasn't Jesus who made the comment about leaven and lumps - it was Paul.

So - OK - I know you did not intend to open a debate on the similarities between Aquinas' medieval Church reasoning and 21st century Watchtower teachings - remarkable though that is - but if you take away the mischaracterization of Aquinas' argument from your OP, all you have really said is "people have different ideas about God - how do we know which is right?" - isn't it?

I'm guessing that your intention was to lead people to the conclusion that the "answers" are to be found in the Bible...and therefore to the more specific conclusion that we need to find someone (or more specifically some - perhaps God-appointed - organization) that knows how to interpret the Bible correctly...yes?

But should we really be trusting an interpreter that essentially uses the same kind of logical thought patterns that the medieval Church used to justify capital punishment for heresy?

Should we even be putting our trust in a collection of writings that are - it would seem - so open to ghastly misinterpretation that Aquinas was able to make a perfectly logical case for capital punishment for heresy based on the same scriptures?

I'm sorry if I seem to be reframing your debate - but I think these are very pertinent questions. Don't you?

 

[sayak83]

Is there a God ?

Geneticist Francis S.Collins. Made a valid point. "If there is no God, then there is no life beyond the present one, no higher authority on moral issues".

The answer however is certainly not evident.
Atheists view this question through the lens of materialism and a philosophy that assumes purely material causes for the origin of life.
Evolutionist Richard C.Lewontin made his bias clear: "We (atheist) have a prior commitment to materialism, ... materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."
Hence, materialists embrace the only alternative they have- evolution.

Regrettably, many of the world's religions have added to the confusion by teaching things that contradict not only scientific knowledge but unambiguous scriptural doctrines, replacing them with their own.

In the 13thcentury, " Saint" Thomas Aquinas, called the Angelic Doctor, advocated the death sentence for heresy. The "right" of the church to torture and burn heretics was, in fact, a horrible corollary to the unscriptural doctrines of hell and purgatory. The church tortured in the name of a God whom she blasphemously claims is a torturer himself.

Faced with conflicting theories and philosophies, many give up their search for the truth about God's existence.

But what could be more worthwhile and of greater consequence- than finding a trustworthy answer to such a fundamental question ?

I am not buying whatever it is you are intending to sell. Thank you. Good bye. (Shuts the door).

 

[siti]

I am not buying whatever it is you are intending to sell. Thank you. Good bye.

Did you know that the Bible says people would respond like this...here in...er...second Peter...er...

(Shuts the door).

Oh! (Shakes the feet as if to remove the dust and goes to the next house).

 

[danieldemol]

Is there a God ?

Geneticist Francis S.Collins. Made a valid point. "If there is no God, then there is no life beyond the present one, no higher authority on moral issues".

The answer however is certainly not evident.
Atheists view this question through the lens of materialism and a philosophy that assumes purely material causes for the origin of life.
Evolutionist Richard C.Lewontin made his bias clear: "We (atheist) have a prior commitment to materialism, ... materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."
Hence, materialists embrace the only alternative they have- evolution.

Regrettably, many of the world's religions have added to the confusion by teaching things that contradict not only scientific knowledge but unambiguous scriptural doctrines, replacing them with their own.

In the 13thcentury, " Saint" Thomas Aquinas, called the Angelic Doctor, advocated the death sentence for heresy. The "right" of the church to torture and burn heretics was, in fact, a horrible corollary to the unscriptural doctrines of hell and purgatory. The church tortured in the name of a God whom she blasphemously claims is a torturer himself.

Faced with conflicting theories and philosophies, many give up their search for the truth about God's existence.

But what could be more worthwhile and of greater consequence- than finding a trustworthy answer to such a fundamental question ?

I believe in God and evolution.

 

[Sir Doom]

Existence is a given. What is God?

That's a far more important question.
A myth?
A legend?
A story?
An illusion?
A delusion?
Is it self?
Is it everything?
Is it love?
Is it the universe?
Is it a feeling?
An emotion?
A sense?
A voice?
A calling?
A title?
A person?
A place?
A state of mind?
A state of nevermind?

I could keep going.

 

[Nakosis]

Thing is you don't know the above.

Ok, what don't I know?

It's my choice to believe or not. It's my choice that affects my life, not God.

 

[Nakosis]

.....

I agree, that is the case, with most people.

" the gate leading into life is narrow and cramped and few are finding it..."(Matt 7:13)

Sure, lots of paths lead to death. 10s of millions of people die each year, many from making wrong choices. A belief in God is no gurantee that you're always going to be making the right choices.

 

[syo]

Is there a God ?

That's the most important question? No way.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Ok, what don't I know?

It's my choice to believe or not. It's my choice that affects my life, not God.

God may affect your life but choose to not reveal it to you.

 

[viole]

Is there a God ?

Geneticist Francis S.Collins. Made a valid point. "If there is no God, then there is no life beyond the present one, no higher authority on moral issues".

And?

Is he trying to prove a premise by showing the absurdity of the conclusion if the premise is false? If that is the case, where is the absurdity of the conclusion?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Nakosis]

God may affect your life but choose to not reveal it to you.

In which case my lack of knowledge doesn't affect anything, right?

I mean my life would will be the same regardless of whether God exists and I don't know about it or God doesn't exist in which case there'd be nothing to know anyway.

 

[Quintessence]

I'm hard-pressed to process how and why this would be an important question, much less "the most important question of all." Asking about whether or not something exists is an example of shallow-level thinking. I don't intend that as an insult, but asking that question doesn't tell you anything about the nature of that thing or what your relationship with it is (or ought to be). Those are the important questions. What is the nature of this thing, and what relationship do I have (or should I have) with it? That's what religion done right deals with - deep questions that have more significant consequences for our way of life.