CREATION
Posted: 17 April 2007 11:56 AM   [ Ignore ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  99
Joined  2007-04-17

Does Creation have a beginning and an end?

Yes, God Created Creation.

No, Creation is Infinite.

Yes, Individual's can live in harmony with Creation from knowledge, without a belief in a Creator.

No, Individual's can not live in harmony with Creation from knowledge, without a belief in a Creator.


Just thought I would ask.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 April 2007 01:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  221
Joined  2007-01-24

If it’s not created, how can it be a creation?

My answer: Ø

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 April 2007 01:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  135
Joined  2007-04-12

[quote author=“PatriotsRU.S.”]Does Creation have a beginning and an end?

Yes, God Created Creation.

No, Creation is Infinite.

  [Etc.]

Patriot:

Your question (or poll) is logically incoherent because it uses the noun “Creation,” which you have not defined for purposes of your poll/question.  Based on your subsequent post, it appears you mean to refer to the biblical story of creation.  But used as a noun, and in its current context, it sounds like what you really mean is either “the Universe” (as in “Does the Universe have a beginning?”—or perhaps the more abstract “Existence”, as in “Does all that constitutes Existence have a beginning.”  I recommend that you use more precise terminology (or at least offer a definition for the reader) in formulating your questions .

And as to the “substantive” question regarding biblical creation, which appears to be your focus, atheists like myself don’t subscribe to this concept, so the question has no logical meaning.  It would be like asking:

Did the Great Ball of Cheese Popcorn have a beginning:

A) Yes, the GBoCP created itself
B) No, the GBoCP is infinite
C) Yes, individuals can live in harmony with the GBoCP from knowledge, without believing in the GBoCP
D) No, individuals cannot live in harmony with the GBoCP from knowledge without belief in the GBoCP
[Etc.]

More precise use of terms would substitute “Universe” or perhaps “Existence” in place of your term “Creation”—and would at least turn the questions into something that make sense.

In either case, I wonder if you’ll get many responses.  Out of curiosity, are you aware that this forum is largely inhabited by atheists?  Except for the few theists (largely evangelical Christians) who can be found gad-flying about on this forum, I expect you’ll find most atheists to react as I have—more or less mystified by the imprecison of word-choice in your question.

Even if you substitute “Universe” for “Creation” in your poll, you’ve now entered the realm of physics, astronomy, astrophysics, etc., and I believe that while most of Existence can be accounted for (up to fractions of a second after the beginning of the Big Bang), the question of what preceded it has yet to be explained.  I’ll comfortably bet my everlasting soul that the answer isn’t God.  But the bottom line is that the answer isn’t known.  And in terms of “knowing” a thing (such that “knowledge” can be described as referring to a fact), Christians don’t “know” either in the most meaningful sense of that word.  “Knowing” a thing and “believing” a thing based on faith are two entirely different animals.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 April 2007 01:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  99
Joined  2007-04-17

Is committing atrocities in Harmony with Creation?

Creation is Love, Truth, Choice, Knowledge, etc…...........

Does your belief allow you to violate Creation?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 April 2007 02:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  99
Joined  2007-04-17

A simple question.
A complex answer.
Next.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 April 2007 02:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  221
Joined  2007-01-24

[quote author=“PatriotsRU.S.”]Is committing atrocities in Harmony with Creation?

Creation is Love, Truth, Choice, Knowledge, etc…...........

Does your belief allow you to violate Creation?

I once created a wooden chair. It was not Love, Truth, Choice or Knowledge. The Creation was a Wooden Chair.

The earth is not a Creation and your questions are Meaningless.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 April 2007 03:18 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  135
Joined  2007-04-12

Patriot:

I have to agree with KFD.  Your definition of “Creation” is not one that I’ve ever seen used to define that word.  Love, Truth, Choice, Knowledge—each of those is a distinct word, representing a distinct concept, and bearing a distinct definition.  I’d like to thing I have a pretty broad vocabulary, and even so, I cannot think of a word in the English language that can be said to at once encompass all of those concepts.  Certainly not the term “Creation”.

But attempting to drill down into the individual concepts that compose your peculiar definition, I will try to answer the question, “is committing atrocities in Harmony with [fill in the blank]”?

I will first assume that you mean the term “atrocities” in the usual sense—as in, mass-murder, genocide, and that sort of thing.  (Though in light of your peculiar definition of “Creation”, I can’t be confident you mean it this way at all).  I’m also not 100% sure whether you’re using the term “Harmony” in the common manner—or whether you mean something more mystical.  For purposes of my answer, I will interpret “harmony” to mean the same thing as “compatible”.

I also see no need to continue with the odd habit of capitalizing these terms.  Unless they mean something different to you than the common dictionary definition, this strange capitalization practice adds no meaning to these words, and serves only to confuse me as to whether we’re discussing the same concept or not.  Unless you want your reader to be confused, you may want to drop the capitalization except when necessary.

1.  Is committing atrocities in harmony (or compatible) with love? 

Well, love is a pretty abstract concept and emotion, but presumably you mean this to refer to “having a warm heart” of “being a kind person” or perhaps you mean it in the sense of “loving one’s fellow man.”  Assuming you intend one of these meanings, I would say that committing atrocities (as I’ve defined that term) is not compatible with loving one’s fellow man, or having a warm heart.  That said—and I do not mean here to defend the practice—I suspect that history is littered with examples of men (or groups of men) who committed atrocities, yet at the same time were capable of, and did in fact love somebody on some level.  This is speculation, but it seems to me that men who wish to do bad things typically find a reason to do them.  And the mere fact that they wish to do bad things to one person or a whole race of them, does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that none of these thousands (or millions) of men have NEVER felt the emotion of love toward one person, or affection toward a group of people.  Hitler was a pretty bad guy by our standards, but even he appeared to be fond of his own people, as well as his girlfriend.  I can’t tell you whether this meets your definition of love.  But I can tell you that if you’re really trying to ask whether a person can be a good and moral person and also commit atrocities, you’ve asked the question in a way that obscured your meaning.  It is immoral to commit atrocities (as I’ve defined the term).  But it’s highly likely that people have committed atrocities and also loved some person or group of people.  So as a broad principle, I think it more accurate to say that “committing atrocities is incompatible with being a good human (or a moral human)”—and your use of the term “love” here seems to me a rather clumsy way to get at that conclusion. 

2.  Is committing atrocities in harmony (compatible) with truth?

Why wouldn’t it be?  I fail to see how one relates to the other.  The truth of a given thing is not dependent on anything else around it, and certainly not on existence or nonexistence of atrocities.  One could make this question worse only by changing it to ask “is the truth of an atrocity in harmony with truth?”  Do you see how the question is nonsensical?  If what you really meant was something like “freedom of people to disseminate the truth” or something like that, then I suppose the answer would depend on the circumstances including which people we’re talking about (the persecutors or the persecuted). 

3.  Is committing atrocities in harmony (compatible) with choice?

It probably is for whoever is being atrocitized.  But like #2, this doesn’t make much sense as a question.

4.  Is committing atrocities in harmony (compatible) with knowledge?

I’m not sure how much this differs from #2 either since knowledge presumably pertains to accurate knowledge—and accurate knowledge is truth. 

It sounds to me like you don’t know what your question is.  I recommend giving it some more thought and restating it once you understand it yourself. 

By the way—are you MPL?  Your questions are without substance, and appear to be the product of very little contemplation.  Just asking.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 April 2007 03:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  99
Joined  2007-04-17

yes, I comprehend the concept of creating a wooden chair.
Can you comprehend the concept of creating the beginning and the end of intergers? It does not matter how complex your educational level preceives the question. The end results are the same. Its that simple.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 April 2007 06:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5404
Joined  2006-09-27

I am willing to concede that committing gluttony is not in harmony with The Great Ball of Cheese Popcorn.

Of that much I am certain.

If the ball were large beyond counting (in terms of the number of kernels of popcorn contained within), it would indeed be an atrocity.

The supply of integers (note spelling) is ample for counting the number of pieces into which one may split a hair. Or the number of angels dancing around inside a pinhead.

[quote author=“Spence”]So as a broad principle, I think it more accurate to say that “committing atrocities is incompatible with being a good human (or a moral human)”—and your use of the term “love” here seems to me a rather clumsy way to get at that conclusion.

Certainly a necessary condition (but probably not sufficient, in many people’s Book) to be a good (or moral) human being would be the absence of atrocities committed in one’s past. Sorry about the caps there, Spencer, but I think it useful in that context.

[ Edited: 17 April 2007 06:30 PM by ]
 Signature 

INVEST in cynicism!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 April 2007 06:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  308
Joined  2006-10-18

This is really funny. I am so used to Michael Patrick Leahy putting on some kind of a front of rationality that PatriotsRU.S. caused a shock to my system. It’s even funnier because I’m pretty sure I used to talk like that.

Ah those were the days.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 April 2007 06:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5404
Joined  2006-09-27

I think Patriots is probably not MPL. He or she may have something to do with Rodents of Unusual Size (RUS’s) (see The Princess Bride for details.)

 Signature 

INVEST in cynicism!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 April 2007 02:58 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]  
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  501
Joined  2005-02-22

[quote author=“PatriotsRU.S.”]Does Creation have a beginning and an end?

Just thought I would ask.

That’s cool. I voted “undecided”. I’m going to wait and see.

 Signature 

Delude responsibly.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 April 2007 06:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  99
Joined  2007-04-17

Response is posted at main forum, Letter to a Christian Nation:

Posted as;  Perhaps, this is misunderstood:

Possibly, Jefe and Sam Harris will point out the logical falsehoods in this post so that I may gain knowledge from someone that knows.

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed