Dear friends, Christ is Risen!
I wish all of you a joyful and peaceful Holy Paskha!
Hugs and cheers to all,
The Saker
The Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of Truth, against Which the forces of Hell shall never prevail
Χριστὸς ἀνέστη! Христос Воскресе! Christ is Risen!
Adevarat A Inviat.
Truly He Is Risen.
Войстйну воскресе
Ваистину васкрсе!
Vaistinu vaskrse
I have cooked Borscht and Peruski (filled with apple and chocolate) … you are all welcome :-)
Peace and blessings.
@ Babushka in Oz,
Q; you are all welcome.
R; That’s very kind of you, ma’am.
Happy Orthodox Easter to all Orthodox Christian faithful.Christ has risen.
“Я есмь воскресение и жизнь; верующий в меня, даже если он умирает, будет жить…” Джон 11:25
Воистину воскресе!
Αληθώς ο Κύριος!
Golgotha. What is the Purpose of Christ’s Death on the Cross?
I got this from a friend in Germany, I found it worth a read:
The Cross is the main symbol of Christianity. The Cross is the focus of sorrow. But the Cross is also the protection and the source of joy for a Christian. Why was the Cross necessary? Why were Christ’s sermons and His miracles not enough? Why was it not enough for our salvation and union with God that God, the Creator, became man, a creature? Why, in the words of Saint Gregory the Theologian, did we have a need not only of an incarnated God but also for a sacrificed One?
http://www.pravmir.com/golgotha-what-is-the-purpose-of-christ-s-death-on-the-cross/#ixzz3WtM5x3OM
“Tertullian was born in Carthage somewhere about 160 A.D. He was a pagan, and he abandoned himself to the lascivious life of his city until about his 35th year, when he became a Christian. To him is ascribed the sublime confession: Credo quia absurdum est (I believe because it is absurd).
This does not altogether accord with historical fact, for he merely said: “And the Son of God died, which is immediately credible because it is absurd. And buried he rose again, which is certain because it is impossible.”
Thanks to the acuteness of his mind, he saw through the poverty of philosophical and Gnostic knowledge, and contemptuously rejected it.“
— Carl G. Jung, “Psychological Types”
“… Crucifixus est Dei Filius, non pudet, quia pudendum est;
et mortuus est Dei Filius, prorsus credibile est, quia ineptum est;
et sepultus resurrexit, certum est, quia impossibile. …”
(De Carne Christi V, 4)
Not being a believer, I am still very moved by this moment of the Greek and Russian Paskha that I attended always in Paris, My favourite was on rue de Crimée church.This beautiful moment when the priest announces it and slams the door open, and everybody walks in the garden around the church
with an candle and kisses one another. Christianity’s culture, grace and traditions is really alive
in the Orthodoxe church. Thank you Greece and Russia for keep it alive…even for giving a moment of joy and beauty to a non believer
Truly he is risen!
Vaistinu vaskrese!
Indeed, He has! (turns on a light)
Truly he has risen
Adevarat a inviat
Voistinu voskres
A peaceful Easter to you as well!
although bit late:
Истина воскрес
Воистину воскресе!
love to Saker and his family
ХРИСТОС ВОСКРЕС
Hristos a inviat!
Χριστὸς ἀνέστη!
Isus vaskrsnuo
فصح سعيد
Քրիստոս յառեաւ ի մեռելոց
Хрыстос уваскрос
Христос Воскресе
Indeed he’s risen!
Воистину воскресе!
This is not Europe.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OENqd-K7abM
Воистину Воскресе!
Russian Easter – The St. Petersburg Chamber Choir
Воистину воскресе!
This is not Europe.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OENqd-K7abM
There is a big difference between “Brazil” in the media and the “Brazil” on the floor.
Brazilians are not as Australians, are not submissive.
Brazilians fought in IIWW and did not ugly.
Before that, exterminated two-thirds of the Paraguayan population.
Brazilians are not good guys when they are nervous.
Moreover, even where the security work (which has 4 years of study) know that the “sons of bitches” of Americans tried to destabilize Dilma Rousseff.
Anyone know the importance of the BRICs and MERCOSUR for Brazil and the like.
When a government does not meet the population in Brazil finds a way.
We just reigns (Dom Pedro II), with dictators (Vargas) and dictatorships deployed by the US (which lasted 16 years).
You walk 4600 km from Oiapoque to Chui and not need to know another language other than the Portuguese!
That’s scary in any country that tries to mess with Brazilians.
I’ll put a link, a song that expresses well as the average Brazilian is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fM8cmynfxM
Make no mistake, the first to talk about fiat war was the Minister Mantega.
hehe.
Il est vraiment ressuscité !
En vérité il est ressuscité!
Vaistinu Voskrese!
Thank you Saker.
Those who are religious, cling, whereas those who are spiritual, seek.
Yoga of Devotion – Bhakti Yoga
Yoga of Knowledge – Jnana Yoga
At a higher level, both paths merge. One passes to a realm beyond both.
Easter Sunday is a moveable day, not fixed to a date in the calendar but tied to the Sunday nearest the first Full Moon after the (northern hemisphere’s) spring equinox.
This has tremendous significance for the spiritual world and also for the earth, and is independent of any church.
(Also vexing of course for the annual state sanctioning of unpredictable extra days off…)
What is the relationship of the Orthodox Easter to these dates, is it the same, i.e in some manner a moveable day?
This year, the Easter dates fell at the same time as the original dates of the Easter of the Passion week.
Christ is risen and goes before us in the spirit.
Agus an Spiorad Naofa chomh maith!
http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/reasonable-faith-is-oxymoron.html
A Reasonable Faith is an Oxymoron
What is faith? Let me define it as an attitude or feeling whereby someone attributes a higher probability to the evidence than what the evidence calls for. Christians will bristle at this definition, sure, but who cares? I see no reason why I must accept their definition of faith.
…[]…
Skeptics and believers have disputed definitions of faith for centuries. In my opinion Christians define words in such a way as to favor their faith even though those words do not make much sense. I call this strategy Definitional Apologetics, and they do a lot to obfuscate and hinder a clear-headed understanding of what words mean in deference to their faith. They claim not to know what an extraordinary claim is in the face of a supposed virgin birth or a resurrection. They claim not to know what the scientific method is even though science continues to progress presumably without one (how’s that possible?). They claim atheism is a religion even though atheists do not believe in any supernatural forces or beings. They claim atheists have faith because nothing can be known with certainty. They also claim critics of their religion cannot say what is evil even though there is massive and ubiquitous suffering in our world, and even though Muslims would say Christians don’t know what evil is because for them the Koran should tell us what it is.
Christian philosopher Randal Rauser says I have merely established that I know “next to nothing about what Christians actually say about faith.” He asks, “How do you spend that much time on a topic and yet still remain that ignorant about it? Presumably you really have to work at it.”
Nope. I know what Christians believe.
…[]…
My claim once again is that there is no such thing as a reasonable faith because faith is an irrational leap over the probabilities. We must only go with the probabilities when assessing whether something is the case or not. Probability is all that matters.
Why would anyone disagree against the probabilities?
Not exactly in the spirit of the occasion, Anonymous!
Atheists are believers by default, since they are making assertions about the Unknowable, a logically unsustainable position. By denying the existence of God, they are de facto claiming a knowledge of the nature of the Unknowable. This belief is every bit as ‘irrational’ as belief in God.
The rational position is agnostic, since it doesn’t make any assertions about the nature of the Unknowable.
Probability belongs to estimates of events in the material plane. Using it to estimate the likelihood of events on the non-material plane is like using a knife to drink soup – functionally pointless.
Events on the quantum level are qualitatively different to events in the particle realm. Probability theory collapsed with this discovery.
No more media atheism please. It’s dumb as rocks.
I am agnostic.
“No more media atheism please. It’s dumb as rocks
True.
The point was to show how ridiculous belief in a particular god is. Your comment helps with that.
I agree that, in principle, agnosticism is the most rational position. However:
“I would rather live my life as if there is a God and die to find out there isn’t, than live as if there isn’t and to die to find out that there is.” (A. Camus)
So, in fact the most rational position is to believe in God, and in my opinion the teaching, and the life, of Jesus are by far the most convincing ideas among all the religions I know.
So, Christ is risen – Happy Easter to all !
@Michelle
You took Pascale’s Wager.
Clever girl!
Why? your answer to the same question I directed to Michelle above, please?
oops – I mean below (please).
Camus is actually proposing Pascal’s wager. And Pascal won the wager. He wrote of his experience, and sewed it into the liner of his coat. It wasn’t until after his death that people learned of this and realized everywhere he went Pascal carried this experience with him. This encounter has become known as “Pascal’s Night of Fire.”
“The year of grace 1654
Monday, November 23, day of Saint Clement, pope and martyr,
and others in the martyrology.
Vigil of Saint Chrysogonus, martyr, and others.
From about ten-thirty in the evening to about half an hour after midnight.
Fire.
God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob, not of the philosophers and savants.
Certitude, certitude; feeling, joy, peace.
God of Jesus Christ. Deum meum et Deum vestrum.
“Thy God shall be my God.”
Forgetting the world and everything, except God.
He is only found by the paths taught in the Gospel.
Grandeur of the human soul.
“Just Father, the world has not known you, but I have known you.”
Joy, joy, joy, tears of joy.
I separated myself from him: Dereliquerunt me lantern aquae vivae.
“My God, will you abandon me?”
May I not be eternally separated from him.
“This is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and him whom you have sent, Jesus Christ.”
Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ.
I separated myself from him; I fled him, renounced him, crucified him.
May I never be separated from him!
He is only kept by the paths taught in the Gospel.
Total and sweet renunciation.
Total submission to Jesus Christ and to my director.
Eternally in joy for a day of trial on earth.
Non obliviscar sermones tuos. Amen.
Michele,
I provided the original quote and am the agnostic.
I wondered about Pascal’s wager for a number of years.
My own answer to the following question solved my quandary.
I’d appreciate your answer:
If you were omniscient and omnipotent and pure of heart would you continue to allow evil to exist?
Michelle, mine was the first quote here and I am the agnostic – I thought of Pascal’s wager for years.
Gradually, the answer to the following question determined my position (to the detriment of the wager):
If I was (i) omniscient (ii) omnipotent and (iii) pure of heart allow evil to continue?
I’d like to know what your answer would be – and if it would influence your wager?
Precisely. The origin of atheism is not the result of any rational deliberation by people who are cleverer than others. It was the deliberate denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ and rejection of His Church. The atheists have been induced to believe that they are cleverer than the hoi polloi and relieved of any moral restraints. They became the Storm troopers of the fight against the Church and Christian States, murdering priests, burning churches, persecuting the believers. And they believed that they were doing good.
@WizOz
“…The origin of atheism {..} was the deliberate denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ …”
Seriously??? Jews are atheist? Muslims are? Buddhists are? Hindus? “Atheism” is not the rejection of Christianity, it is the belief that there IS NO GOD. Not no christian God but no God at all.
There is no “the atheists”. They are not a united group. Being atheist is a personal point of view and does not involve joining any existing organisation, unlike the named religions (although being Buddhist does not involve belief in a creator God). Followers of any religion share a wide variety of other beliefs, as no religion’s belief consists entirely of “there is a God”. Atheists, on the other hand, need share no other belief than that there is no God. So attributing any common cause to them is very mistaken.
“…murdering priests, burning churches, persecuting the believers. …,” throughout history has been done in the name of one religion or another, to a much larger extent than in the name of atheism….precisely because atheism is not organised.
Wars are about economic power. The attacker wants the land for his own use OR wants to subjugate the existing population to profit from taxing it (in money or in kind). Different peoples are often of different religions, as part of their being DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Allowing the subjugated to keep their religious leaders (and meeting places) would be allowing an organised continuation of their culture, and an organised opposition to the invader.
Killing priests and burning churches is an easy and obvious way to do this, especially when outside of church the people might look identical (or even speak the same language). So the church is an easily recognizable point of differentiation. Let’s not forget that until quite recent times there was no radio or TV, and the priest would be the only person in a village who could read and write, therefore all “facts” about the outside world were filtered through him.
Most priest-killing and church-burning in Ukraine today is being done by the Nazi battalions….. who are either Uniate (Greek Catholic) or Orthodox (Kyiv Patriarchate). The motivation is not religious but cultural — they are burning the churches of the “hated Russians” most of whom happen to be Orthodox (Moscow Patriarchate).
@There is no “the atheists”. They are not a united group
What about “The League of Militant Atheists (Russian: Союз воинствующих безбожников Soyuz voinstvuyushchikh bezbozhnikov); Society of the Godless (Общество безбожников Obshchestvo bezbozhnikov); Union of the Godless (Союз безбожников Soyuz bezbozhnikov), was an atheistic and antireligious organization of workers and intelligentsia that developed in Soviet Russia under the influence of the ideological and cultural views and policies of the Soviet Communist Party from 1925 to 1947. It consisted of Party members, members of the Komsomol youth movement, those without specific political affiliation, workers and military veterans.”
Atheism was a condition for joining any Communist Party.
And the “Atheist Alliance International (AAI) is a global federation of atheist organisations and individuals, committed to educating the public about atheism, secularism and related issues. AAI was founded in 1991… In 2013, the AAI was granted special consultative status by the United Nations. In this role the AAI will be able to better serve non-believers facing persecution from their governments (Russia’s Putin’s government, I presume).
Oh? all these organisations (all but one from Soviet times and no longer in existence) represent how many people? what proportion of theists in the world? and they are all storm troopers who burn churches are they?
Do you have any evidence of non-believers being persecuted anywhere for being non-believers ?? by their government? how would they be identified?
Don’t try to blame everyone, chosen on one characteristic, for the alleged actions of a small number who may share that characteristic.
@Do you have any evidence of non-believers being persecuted anywhere for being non-believers?
No, I don’t. It was my mistake on not quoting carefully. I missed the quotation marks at the end of the sentence. You would have seen that it was a quotation and not my affirmation. It is how it defines itself its objectives in Wikipedia. You burn the straw man.
Do you have any evidence of non-believers being persecuted anywhere for being non-believers ??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_against_atheists
Kat Kan on April 13, 2015 · at 2:40 am UTC
“The motivation is not religious but cultural — they are burning the churches of the “hated Russians” most of whom happen to be Orthodox (Moscow Patriarchate).”
Say what?
https://intercontinentalcry.org/church-state-part-2/
“Culture is a complex entity of political, economic and spiritual dimensions. The language, beliefs and values of a culture find expression in such things as music, song and dance, as well as in arts and crafts, fashion and style. As cultural properties, these attributes join governance and religion in distinguishing one particular culture from another.”
“Atheism” is not the rejection of Christianity, it is the belief that there IS NO GOD. Not no christian God but no God at all…..”
Wonderful, you’ve nailed it truly, i.e. atheism is also a “belief”. So it is; the system of the believers of the non – God.
One may of course, also spend more time thinking about such things deeply, and researching historically in the same manner, before offering comments…
Countless stories and testimonies from concentration camps for instance, have revealed that those with a belief in Christ have been a strength and an inspiration to many, and have survived the greatest of tribulations.
Do believers in the non-God, also evince the power of their faith under great duress?
I believe it’s almost dinner time.
I believe you need to check the moderation rules about misrepresenting what is said.
I believe there will never be 300 million people in Canada.
All are legitimate uses of the word “believe”, none of which imply or require any kind of deep investment of lasting faith. In fact it could be said that atheism is an absence of faith in the existence of God.
As for concentration camps? some had strength, some possibly did not; we have testimonies only from (some of) the survivors. Are you suggesting non-Christians were never an inspiration to any others? maybe their testimonies are less mentioned in Christian circles, and you have no access to, say, Muslim testimonies?
None of which would prove anything one way or the other about atheists, anyway. Please refer back to my second belief, above.
One can of course make any points, or argue for and against anything under the sun, but faith is a matter of the heart and not the intellect. I am sorry if I am seem to have misrepresented what you have written, and if I have offended you, but I stand by what I have written nonetheless.
I certainly always admire your incredible input, knowledge and opinion on the political front, and have much to learn from that; I read and check the links, as I do for all the other amazing and intelligent comments on this blog.
All this helps me to learn and keeps me informed; I am only one of millions who are grateful for this.
If I was to make pronouncements on politics, European or global, I would, believe me, be more than prepared for you, or anyone, to challenge me on my knowledge, and which I presume would be done without fear of moderation.
Anonymous on April 13, 2015 · at 12:04 pm UTC said:
“but faith is a matter of the heart and not the intellect.”
not according to this:
Michele on April 12, 2015 · at 9:15 pm UTC said:
“I agree that, in principle, agnosticism is the most rational position. However:
“I would rather live my life as if there is a God and die to find out there isn’t, than live as if there isn’t and to die to find out that there is.” (A. Camus)
So, in fact the most rational position is to believe in God, and in my opinion the teaching, and the life, of Jesus are by far the most convincing ideas among all the religions I know.”
In that view it is, to a greater or lesser degree, a methodical insurance policy to cover a very uncertain future event.
Insurance security policies, whether of health, life, or religion, are the greatest curse of our time.. There is no true insurance policy for the unknown, for the uncertain, which we must face every day, every moment. The “compliance” health and safety industry would like to take away all our freedom, but spiritual freedom and belief they may never take away.
I have no insurance, neither for a house, I don’t own one, neither for a car, I don’t have one, neither for health, neither for God or my beliefs. Once more: they are a question of the heart only.
For some reason, atheists seem to hate Christianity more than any other religion. They are always to be found in great numbers all over the media negating the existence of Jesus Christ and the belief in a God of the Christians.
Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, etc don’t bother them nearly as much. But wherever there’s an article written from a Christian p.o.v. there comes the atheist, trying to ‘debunk the myth of a God’; sometimes just to show off his ‘superior’ understanding of the world, and sometimes from the desire to ‘liberate’ the people ‘enslaved by a false belief’.
And their persistence resembles very much that of the teachers of dialectical materialism, which force-fed generations of children in the communist countries with their politically-correct marxist hatred of God.
FLOR solitaria on April 13, 2015 · at 5:57 pm UTC said:
“For some reason, atheists seem to hate Christianity more than any other religion. They are always to be found in great numbers all over the media negating the existence of Jesus Christ and the belief in a God of the Christians.
Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, etc don’t bother them nearly as much. But wherever there’s an article written from a Christian p.o.v. there comes the atheist, trying to ‘debunk the myth of a God’;”
I’m agnostic. I tend to think of the Abrahamic religions as control mechanisms. I have very little knowledge of other religions.
I am unable to accept Pascal’s wager and since nobody seems interested to answer my question – here’s why:
My understanding is that the Christian god is considered the designer of creation and also both omniscient & omnipotent. If the nature of such a god was pure then that god would never have designed a creation knowing that it was going to do/be evil.
(I don’t describe evil as sin being transgression of the law of god / rebellion against god since that definition assumes god to be good.)
Designing a creation that needs to be “saved” is not loving, merciful or good – it’s crazy.
If your partner developed such a personality – divorce it would be. Wishing to spend eternity with such a personality is crazy also.
If god exists, I truly hope it is not the Christian one.
@ agnostic (unable to accept Pascal’s wager) Anonymous
Your agnostic understanding and objections resemble very much the old gnostic beliefs and objections. Ironically, the gnostics also weren’t able to solve the problems they objected to. The Christian understanding is that God allows all people free will to accept His laws or not.
To hate one god more than the others, without knowing what belief in all of them entails, and what are the practical results of those beliefs, is just prejudice. All religions can become control mechanisms, and even atheism/lack of religion, as the communist experiment has demonstrated.
One’s personal belief in (a) Divinity is sometimes a complex process, sustained (or not) by a series of factors. For some it can be just “credibile est, quia ineptum est” and “certum est, quia impossibile”. Others try to get at it philosophically, or even mathematically. Others by contorting their bodies, or by emptying their minds. All of which proves the Christian theory that God gave us all free will to believe (and how, and if).
My comment was about letting people believe in what they want, even if it seems old-fashioned or irrational to those who don’t believe in the same thing.
FLOR solitaria on April 14, 2015 · at 2:28 am UTC said:
“The Christian understanding is that God allows all people free will to accept His laws or not.”
You have commented on something else – not my objection.
My objection is that a good god would not, with perfect foreknowledge, design/create a creature that, not only had the ability to sin (do/be evil), but was pre-known, by god, to do so.
Free will of the creature has nothing to do with my objection. My objection begins before creation.
“To hate one god more than the others, without knowing what belief in all of them entails, and what are the practical results of those beliefs, is just prejudice.”
I didn’t say I hated one god more than any other. If I had said that then it would have been prejudicial – but the case doesn’t arise.
Now, if the Christian god does not have omniscience the debate changes – Is your Christian god omniscient?
So you yourself wouldn’t have children if you knew they going to sin when they got older (ie. become a parent)? And would your love for your child change if you knew that they were going to sin?
James Bond on April 14, 2015 · at 12:29 pm UTC said:
“So you yourself wouldn’t have children if you knew they going to sin when they got older (ie. become a parent)?”
I have children in the hope that the Christian god is a fable and that my children will not suffer eternal damnation on their death.
My children will, at times, cause harm to others, that bothers me. I harm others on occasion, that bothers me too. If I had a choice never to have been born I may have chosen that option.
I was concerned about creating my children because of the possibility of damnation on their death. At that time I didn’t concern myself with the affront they would cause other people. My partner made the final decision, I acquiesced.
James Bond on April 14, 2015 · at 12:29 pm UTC said:
“And would your love for your child change if you knew that they were going to sin?
If I was perfect I would have chosen not to have the children (because they would be humanly imperfect and cause harm to others).
My objection surrounds god and the supposed perfection/goodness of god’s nature. The imperfections of man are well documented and understood – we do not need to discuss those. It is the nature of god that must be questioned.
Do you think the Christian god is perfect and omniscient?
@ (unable) Anonymous
I’ve commented exactly on what you said, but you didn’t like my answer because it was not what you expected.
There are only two reasons why you ask these questions:
1. you expect to be proved wrong – and in this case you need to engage in a debate with somebody more qualified to answer your objections, like a priest or a theologian perhaps
2. you expect to be proved right – in which case you already have all the answers you are prepared to accept, so it would truly be a waste of time for anybody to try and convince you of the contrary
And yes, you do have a prejudice against the Christian God. You wouldn’t be here if you didn’t.
FLOR solitaria on April 14, 2015 · at 10:14 pm UTC
your obfuscation aside – god cannot be both omniscient and omnipotent (in the face of man’s free will) as they are mutually contradictory. See comment on the next page for that.
You believe in man’s free will. Do you believe in the Christian god’s omniscience and omnipotentcy?
Prejudice? you are incorrect – the nature of the Muslim god in respect of omnipotence /omniscience appears equivalent to the Christian god.
@ (unable) Anonymous
All your posts clearly show your prejudice against the Christian God. You mention Him several times. And the link you posted is “debunking Christianity”, not “debunking Judaism” or “debunking Islam” or debunking anything else.
And you chose an article about the Christian religion written on a date most holy to a great many Christians to launch your challenge. So that says it all.
FLOR solitaria on April 15, 2015 · at 8:49 pm UTC said:
“@ (unable) Anonymous
All your posts clearly show your prejudice against the Christian God. You mention Him several times. And the link you posted is “debunking Christianity”, not “debunking Judaism” or “debunking Islam” or debunking anything else.
And you chose an article about the Christian religion written on a date most holy to a great many Christians to launch your challenge. So that says it all.”
I was raised in a Reformed Presbyterian family (Bondage of the will/predestination – the works, but i’ve made no ref to any of that) – so, I know some of the protestant version of the Christian Bible. Familiarity is the only reason why I refer to the Christian god.
I’m almost sure all of my argument could be directed at the Muslim faith as well. In my opinion they are both ridiculous religions.
Maybe you could now address point – which I copy again here:
My objection is that a good god (Christian/Muslim) would not, with perfect foreknowledge, design/create a creature that, not only had the ability to sin (do/be evil), but was pre-known, by god, to do so.
Free will of the creature has nothing to do with my objection. My objection begins before creation.
Now, if the Christian/Muslim god does not have omniscience the debate changes – Is your Christian god omniscient?
@ (unable) Anonymous
“the Christian/Muslim god”
You left out one important component of the triad you yourself called Abrahamic – namely the Hebrew god, who was in fact the first one on the block. All the issues stem from there.
“is your Christian god omniscient ?”
I suggest you ask the Jews. They have an answer for everything.
FLOR solitaria on April 16, 2015 · at 6:11 pm UTC said:
“All the issues stem from there.”
True
“is your Christian god omniscient ?”
I suggest you ask the Jews. They have an answer for everything.”
Since i’m currently in conversation with you, and the jews do not believe in Christ as a deity, I really prefer to know what you think:
“is your Christian god omniscient ?”
Yes.
FLOR solitaria on April 17, 2015 · at 1:31 am UTC said:
“Yes.”
Phew.
My objection is that a good god (Christian/Muslim) would not, with perfect foreknowledge, design/create a creature that, not only had the ability to sin (do/be evil), but was pre-known, by god, to do so.
Do you think a god that designs a creation that was already known to subsequently require being “saved” is loving, merciful and good?
I’ve answered that question in my second and third comments in this thread. You need to read more to understand a complex issue like the good, the bad and the omnipotent.
FLOR solitaria on April 14, 2015 · at 2:28 am UTC said:
“One’s personal belief in (a) Divinity is sometimes a complex process, sustained (or not) by a series of factors. For some it can be just “credibile est, quia ineptum est” and “certum est, quia impossibile”. Others try to get at it philosophically, or even mathematically. Others by contorting their bodies, or by emptying their minds. All of which proves the Christian theory that God gave us all free will to believe (and how, and if).
My comment was about letting people believe in what they want, even if it seems old-fashioned or irrational to those who don’t believe in the same thing.”
is not an answer to my question – are you referring to something else?
FLOR solitaria on April 17, 2015 · at 7:47 pm UTC said:
“You need to read more to understand a complex issue like the good, the bad and the omnipotent.”
My objection does not mention omnipotency – why do you mention it?
Again, the implication of omniscience: prior to creating man, god foreknew all that would result from such creation, including the subsequent rebellion of the first human pair in Eden (Gen. 3:1-6; John 8:44), and all the bad consequences of such rebellion down to and beyond this present day. This would necessarily mean that all the wickedness that history has recorded (the crime and immorality, oppression and resultant suffering, lying and, hypocrisy, false worship and idolatry) once existed, before creation’s beginning, only in the mind of god, in the form of his foreknowledge of the future.
If the Creator of mankind foreknew all that history has seen since man’s creation, then the full force of all the wickedness thereafter resulting was deliberately set in motion by god when he spoke the words: “Let us make man.” (Gen. 1:26)
It would seem that the devil really is in the details.
Your objections included omnipotence in several of your answers both to me and to Michelle:
“Do you believe in the Christian god’s omniscience and omnipotence ?”
“My understanding is that the Christian god is considered the designer of creation and also both omnipotent and omniscient.”
“god cannot be both omniscient and omnipotent” [that is BS, by the way]
Feeding the trolls is amusing up to a point, so now I will tell you goodbye.
Anonymous on April 15, 2015 · at 9:50 pm UTC said
“FLOR solitaria on April 15, 2015 · at 8:49 pm UTC said:
“@ (unable) Anonymous
…[]…
My objection is that a good god (Christian/Muslim) would not, with perfect foreknowledge, design/create a creature that, not only had the ability to sin (do/be evil), but was pre-known, by god, to do so.”
then
FLOR solitaria on April 18, 2015 · at 3:36 am UTC said:
“It would seem that the devil really is in the details.
Your objections included omnipotence in several of your answers both to me and to Michelle:
“Do you believe in the Christian god’s omniscience and omnipotence ?”
“My understanding is that the Christian god is considered the designer of creation and also both omnipotent and omniscient.”
“god cannot be both omniscient and omnipotent” [that is BS, by the way]
Feeding the trolls is amusing up to a point, so now I will tell you goodbye.”
As you can see, the latest statement of the objection did not reference to omnipotence. I was attempting to help you focus so as to distil the absolute essence of the apparent contradiction of a loving, merciful/good god so that you could refute that.
Now, I have no idea why this would be amusing to you. Your faith is apparently very important to you but i’m interested to understand why you believe the nature of the god you have faith in is loving, merciful and good in light of the contradiction I have suggested.
So, you can refer to troll feeding or attempt to drag a “sinner” into the light – but I need to understand that your god is loving, merciful/good before that can even be contemplated.
Can you do that?
@ Anonymous on april 18, 2015 – 6:49 am UTC
An illustration of our dialogue, where you keep asking questions about things you do not (or do not want to) understand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mdqv5xIsFLM
Yes, you are correct, events on the quantum level are qualitatively different from events in the particle realm.
But _probability theory_ never “collapsed” (!!!) – with or without quantum physics… You are comparing apples and oranges, so to speak. The rules of quantum physics (subject: physics) are in fact _very simple to describe_ (although *not* at all intuitively comprehensible) – and probability theory (subject: mathematics) is the _correct language_ used for that description!
Replace that “in particle realm” by in macroscopic realm.
VAISTINU VOSKRESE !!
ΑΛΗΘΩΣ ΑΝΕΣΤΗ
and
ΧΡΟΝΙΑ ΠΟΛΛΑ
from Greece
Christ is Risen Indeed!
A Blessing Saker on You and Your Family.
Alexander Mercouris
Let God arise, let His enemies be scattered; let those who hate Him flee from before His face
As smoke vanishes, so let them vanish; as wax melts before the fire,
So the sinners will perish before the face of God; but let the righteous be glad,
This is the day which the Lord hath made, let us rejoice and be glad in it.
Christ is risen from the dead,
Trampling down death by death,
And upon those in the tombs
Bestowing life!
And who is that turban wearing little fellow in the jaws of the dragon?
Happy Orthodox Easter to all Orthodox Christians. May God bless you and your family.
And who is that turban wearing little fellow in the jaws of the dragon?
…calm yourself, my good fellow, ’tis but the flames of fire in the dragons mouth, ‘An’ it harm none, do what ye will’.
Le Lézard et l’Ubu rois peuvent n’importe quoi…
Aληθώς ανέστη!
Καλό Πάσχα!
Χρόνια Πολλά Saker!
Aληθώς ανέστη!
Καλό Πάσχα!
Χρόνια Πολλά Saker!
from Greece
После умирал Христос хотел он, что Мир в Мире… Пусть так и как воскресение !
And some cheering indicators for the day, for those of you who didn’t enjoy your lamb and chocolate eggs last Sunday
http://en.voicesevas.ru/news/4133-europe-ready-to-build-new-relations-with-russia-belgian-foreign-minister.html
Православный мир отмечает Пасху. В Москве в храме Христа Спасителя торжественное богослужение: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JA1I1-Dwt0
Out of topic but linked to the BRICS.
Another paid Soros/Koch ‘orange false revolution’second try today in Brazil:
Soros and Kochs team up in Latin American staged protests.
http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/15521
http://www.romandie.com/news/BresilCorruption-debut-dune-nouvelle-journee-de-manifestations-antiRousseff/583491.rom
Christos ist auferstanden !!!
He is truly risen !
Frohe Ostern !
Blessings on this holy day to the entire saker community, and to all who labor for truth.
Lysander
Ваистину васкрсе!!!
Christos ist auferstanden !!!
He is truly risen !
Joy to the Saker family.
Here is something that should concern all: believers, unbelievers, agnostics, skeptics, nihilists, ….
Seems to me author is raising few valid points:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-large-hadron-collider-ultimate-weapon-of-mass-destruction/5442232
Regards, Spiral
Dear The Saker,
Christ is risen.
All the best to you and your family. I hope you and the family had a joyful and peaceful Holy Paskha.
Rgds,
Veritas
Holy Paskha to you Saker!
Thanks for this wonderful blog; you are the voice of truth and reason for so many of us. God Bless!
dlomshek
Saker & Everybody Else
Hope you had a pleasant Holy Paskha, or a pleasant sunday if not a practitioner. :)
I just posted a comment here and after I clicked the “post a comment” button, got a “404 page does not exist” page. So I returned to “latest articles”, then this entry (it apparently does exist), and pasted the same comment again and got the “duplicate message” response.
Hope there isn’t a problem with the site.
Hi
We did implement a performance enhancement today. So this may be related. I will pass your comment on to the implementor to review.
thanks for the info
HS
Thanks H.S. I see all the comments were posted, so whatever caused the 404 error result was not preventing comments from being posted.
it seems to be from trying to return you to the original article after posting the comment. It is affecting this one, with the cyrillic in the title
Hi KK,
You’re right, this happens with articles whose titles contain unicode characters.
Kind regards,
La Luciole
except it only just started today, even this article was fine yesterday, and it seems to be the initial character causing the trouble
I’m going to guess your ISP or DNS cut out for a time. This happens to me when my internet connection is intermittent (which happens to me a few times a month): the post may be transmitted but when trying to reload the page the connection has failed. Last week there were a few days when my connection was up and down all through the time. I listen and shout through the can but the string broke and I have to wait for them to knot it together again; don’t always believe the error message you get is correct — it should read ‘page not found’, not ‘page doesn’t exist’.
I’ve become more or less resigned to the fact to a lot of things just don’t work well, and it’s worse than in the past. General system breakdown: computers, email, cigarette lighters, coffee pots, food, cell phones, media and press, educational system, politics and government, my back and knees…
Propaganda isn’t even remotely credible any more.
I suppose if the current empire tried to crucify someone now the cross would fall apart because they would make it from cheap chipboard with wood-grained plastic veneer. Look at all the botched executions in the prisons from substandard lethal drugs even — and six cops have to empty their guns into some innocent fellow to murder him. The empire seems to be losing even the war on Yemen, to hear the reports.
Maybe this is the way the empire collapses — not with a bang but with a whimper.
But I just now got a 404 trying to post this — page doesn’t exist or was moved, so maybe something with the site, or the server? Or the string broke off the can?
seems the system can’t handle Cyrillic headings. Word Press is clearly not a Russian program. I’ve removed the duplicate so don’t panic about yet another error.
K.K.
Just posted a comment after Dagmar Henn’s entry and things went as normal. The Cyrillic heading may be part of it, but this is something new since previous titles with Cyrillic headings didn’t have the 404 error page problem.
Привет, Вот Так,
The problem is related to wordpress comments code which strips unicode characters (to be very sure it is secure?) from the URL to redirect to, which is the page from which the comment originates.
I’ve asked the webmaster to look into that.
Kind regards, and thanks for your comprehension.
La Luciole
La Luciole radioactive
Thanks for the info. I just noticed that when I went from page 2 of the comments back to page 1, in this entry, I got that same 404 error page.
Truly He is risen!
Greetings from an Indian Orthodox Christian.
Best wishes to all Orthodox Christians.
(our small but growing OCA Colorado parish was filled with worshipers
last night into early hours. Some as i converted from Protestant confusion
but many are Orthodox immigrants from Russia, Greece, Ukraine.)
Thank You Saker for your selfless commitment to truth and hard work.
Christ is Risen!
OK — I see two copies of my comment from earlier on page one, but when I hit the ‘1’ at the bottom just before I got a 404, but when reloading it from the ‘all articles’ link I saw it. Maybe the browser cache is confused. It’s seems to be connected with splitting the thread fro 1 into 2 posts, yielding a different URL, and some other software not getting updated right, and trying to find the old 1-page URL which no longer exists?
If you get a 404 error after posting a comment, go back to
http://thesaker.is/latest-articles/
choose the article again, and you will see your comment did post.
This is a new error. What’s happening is, after posting a comment the program is supposed to return you to the page. At this level it has somehow forgotten how to understand Cyrillic, so thinks the article title is an error. It does not give 404 error from any other title, nor from the main menu, only when returning after a comment submission (even also from the internal moderator view).
I’ve removed all the multiple posting attempts by everyone.
If you get “posting too fast. Slow down” that is an overload on the server. In this case the post did NOT go through. Back up with the browser to find your post still sitting there, and submit it again.
Returning to the main page and starting again is the first step for any 404. Refreshing the same page will only keep refreshing the error page, even if the URL has not changed to indicate an error. .
Indeed, Christ is Risen! Blessings to you and yours, Saker, and to the entire Saker community.
Hristos Anesti!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7tKexc4wSM
ВАИСТИНУ ВАСКРСЕ!!!
Anonymous on April 13, 2015 · at 2:59 pm UTC said:
“Insurance security policies, whether of health, life, or religion, are the greatest curse of our time.. There is no true insurance policy for the unknown, for the uncertain, which we must face every day, every moment. The “compliance” health and safety industry would like to take away all our freedom, but spiritual freedom and belief they may never take away.
I have no insurance, neither for a house, I don’t own one, neither for a car, I don’t have one, neither for health, neither for God or my beliefs. Once more: they are a question of the heart only.”
which would you prefer:
(i) certainty of going to heaven (but with no freedom to sin)
or
(ii) freedom to lead your life (including sin) leading to uncertainty (heaven/hell) in afterlife
?
I would prefer — and I think it likely — utter oblivion of non-existence. The universe and consciousness might go on in someway, but I think my personal identity will vanish like a wave in the ocean. That would be fine — “I” would not exist to notice it. I think an afterlife is like eating a too-big bowl of poor quality chilli and then waking up at night with an upset stomach and heartburn.
http://shakespeare.mit.edu/hamlet/hamlet.3.1.html
”
To die, to sleep—
No more—and by a sleep to say we end
The heartache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to—’tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wished!
To die, to sleep.
To sleep, perchance to dream—ay, there’s the rub, For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause. There’s the respect
That makes calamity of so long life.
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor’s wrong …
”
But yet such pain and unpleasing tumult is not simply the slings and arrows of external strife and oppression, but lies within: the assimilated damage of years of oppression, and the inherent flawed and foolish nature of the self. Let there be an end to it.
Others’ mileage may vary, of course, but as for me, give me death and oblivion.
My question was obviously posed to Anonymous on April 13, 2015 · at 2:59 pm UTC
but
blue on April 14, 2015 · at 8:01 am UTC said:
“I would prefer — and I think it likely — utter oblivion of non-existence. The universe and consciousness might go on in someway”
This was an interesting reply.
You say “The universe and consciousness might go on in someway”
Do you therefore think that your current “reality” may have no physical reality?
i.e. there is the possibility your reality is, for example, like this http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html
Being trapped inside this existential paper bag, blind and stupid, I must speculate, of course, but I think the distinction between physical and spiritual or non-physical (dualism) is likely wrong — not as ‘simulation’ but as reality itself (something like the ‘mind of god’ but without necessarily the god part).
Reality is judged by three criteria: persistence, intensity of experience, or some arbitrary system, such as philosophical or religious doctrine.
As such, ‘physical’ reality is likely a meaningless term, and an artifact of the brain and mind which is so limited in perception, and by the space and time based perceptions we have. I think consciousness, and relationships between elements or forces, is likely the stuff of reality, and may work something like how a wave forms in a medium or bits in a computer are related, and can be perceived as gestalts. I suppose if the ancients experienced a radio transmission they would have thought it was ‘spiritual’, and we don’t experience quantum level things, or whatever else underlies those. Gasses, wind, light, etc., were perceived as ghosts and such — non-physical. Physical reality is just what we perceive as relationships within our limited perceptual range, and according to our very limited notions of space, time and causality, and the mythical ‘energy’, all of which just relate on object to another withing a reference frame.
Chimps don’t understand physics or trigonometry hardly at all, and we are not much smarter than they are, actually, so I could guess that there are flying saucer people who zip through higher dimensions think about us in the same way we think of chimps: sort of interesting but pretty dim — and yet about as ignorant as we are about the ultimate nature of existence.
Thanks blue. A most interesting and thoughtful reply.
I must now return to my much more tedious conversation about the omniscience of god and hope someone will reply with insight such as yours ;-)
Perhaps I can add a thought, from a thesis I constructed many years ago, what I recall of it.
God cannot be both omniscient and omnipotent as they are mutually contradictory. Action, and especially omnipotence, imply free will, but if one already knows what one will do then there is no consideration or decision to make as one is bound to do what is foreordained. Free will implies on can change one’s mind before acting — hence one cannot know beforehand how one will act.
If one posits a many worlds universe in which all possible actions are taken, then to say one knows the outcome is as meaningless as making all possible drawings by filling a sheet of white paper completely with black lines; yes all drawings are there but a drawing is meaningful as much by the empty space as the lines and masses of tone. One may imagine all possible drawings, but each line actually drawn reduces freedom of action until at completion there is no choice of lines to draw left at all.
blu,
I appreciate your comment again (some defs http://www.thebridgeonline.net/sermons/the-god-of-the-bible-is-omnipresent-omnipotent-and-omniscient/ )
For folk who want this all powerful god AND free will the contradiction often affronts them. The Christian god (of omniscience, omnipotency & free will) does not pass the logic test and is not worth Pascal’s wager (Catholic / Orthodox?).
I’ll maybe comment further on the Christian god (of omniscience, omnipotency & bondage of the will – Protestant) later.
In any case Pascal’s wager isn’t worth it for any flavour of Christian god.
pascal’s wager is a bad joke anyway — as if one can truly believe something (and not just say it) to be true just because one wants to get something out of it (unless one is a highly skilled in chaos magick).
As for immanence (one of the confusing words: http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/eminent.html ) this is not like water in a sponge as described in your link, but more like water in ice, or air (or liquid or solid) and sound where sound can’t exist without a medium (as the world can’t exist without god).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanence
“Immanence refers to those philosophical and metaphysical theories of divine presence in which the divine encompasses or is manifested in the material world.”
Water is not manifested in a sponge. A lot of ‘religious’ sites get the concepts and theology wrong for lack of philosophical rigor, or just makes stuff up. The guy running that site is ignorant — his other job from pastor is cleaning windows and gutters, and probably never studied theology at all. People like this give religion a bad name. One should at least consult with a Jesuit or someone like that, who at least has the intellect and knowledge to talk about it. Whether one agrees with Catholic dogma or not the Catholics have at least thoroughly beaten the theology to death — and they know something of hermeneutics and Biblical historicity and apologetics. Other major religions also have their high level and quality thinking, and to understand them requires more than listening to some clown who was ‘born again’ at age 19.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07682a.htm
” Immanence is the quality of any action which begins and ends within the agent. Thus, vital action, as well in the physiological as in the intellectual and moral order, is called immanent, because it proceeds from that spontaneity which is essential to the living subject and has for its term the unfolding of the subject’s constituent energies. ”
Good philosophy and theology is a tough subject. CF that material by Harry Frankfurt on bullshit.
Войстйну воскресе
Ещё какой-то тест, который пойдёт на корзину….
Αληθώς ανέστη!
Наистина възкресе!
ΧΡΗΣΤΟΣ ΑΝΕΣΤΗ
TO YOU SAKER
And all the Community in here.
May we avoid War and Destruction.