Down to the Rapture

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(airportkid @ Mar 28 2007, 10:13 PM) [snapback]414006[/snapback]</div>

There are a number of ways to approach this without a Bible verse (which I take is the purpose of the challenge, right?)

Faith Approach: You choose the single box, because God cannot make a mistake. If you are disappointed in your faith with an empty box, you are in the same position you were before the decision, so you really haven't lost anything except your understanding of God and His nature. And if God DID make a mistake, the $10,000 could be fake anyway.

But I realize you may not have meant the "mistake" to be part of the challenge. God's ways are sometimes hard to understand, and giving me riches is evidently not His first priority, so I'll assume that there's a possibility that God will have nothing in the box for a purpose and not because of an impossible "mistake". So with that caveat ...

Higher Church Approach: You decide to take both boxes because a 100% chance of getting $10,000 is a better deal than the unknown chance that God will want to keep you at your present economic position ... after all, God may be wanting to teach you a lesson about greed with the promise of a million dollars and unknown odds. You promise to feed some homeless people this weekend with a portion of the $10,000.

Fundamentalist Approach: You pray that, in Jesus' name, you get the million bucks and you take the single box. If it doesn't have money in it, you look for hidden sin in your life.

Calvinist Approach: No matter which you choose, it was God's decision and its right, so get used to it.

Evangelical Approach: Do you think that pretty girl holding the box is saved?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Mar 29 2007, 02:24 AM) [snapback]414027[/snapback]</div>

:lol: I did not think of that!!!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Mar 28 2007, 02:06 PM) [snapback]413661[/snapback]</div>

Nope, not that way at all.

That coworker praying to allah is just another lost sinner just like you are or used to be. There's nothing funny about that for me and that's why that guy deserves to hear the truth about the God of the universe at whatever point he and I have a conversation relating to spiritual things.

If I tell him that Father God of the Bible, creator of the universe, is the same as allah that he's praying to, then he'll probably figure he's got things on track for eternity when the reality is, he's going to end up in hell if things don't change.

How do I know allah is not equal same to God of the universe, creator of everything, maker of my soul? There is only one God. Ask a muslim about allah, you find allah is distant, you can't know allah or expect allah to hear your prayer or answer it. God of the universe, God of the bible want's closeness, wants to hear what's on your heart and does answer prayer. That's just one of many diometric differences.

They're not the same God, so when you get all politically correct and start hamming it up about everyone's viewpoint being equally as valid, then in my opinnion, you're tolerating people into an eternity in hell when you've just had the opportunity to say "I have something more, you should hear my story about my God, you'll be amazed at how He saved me and transformed my life."

"Brother, God loves you, but He hates that sin in your life. Let me tell you what God has done for me and what He can do for you, you don't have to die in that sinful lifestyle."

But... no need to convey the truth... just make sure everyone is happy in what they are already doing... It's more tolerant, and you'd never want to convey eternity changing, life saving truth when tolerance has a chance to rise above for that fleeting moment here on Earth.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(airportkid @ Mar 29 2007, 01:13 AM) [snapback]414006[/snapback]</div>

If I understood that by the 3rd reading, the premise is:

If I pick both boxes, God knew I would and therefore put 0 in the 2nd box.
If I pick just the 2nd box, God knew I'd do that and it has 1 million inside...
I am not allowed to pick only box 1, so no easy grabbing of a sure 10k.

The lure is to possibly pick both boxes so I can have at least 10k, but maybe 1010k rather than somehow finding out that I picked #2 and got skunked... If I understand the ground rules then....

Why is this a hard decision then... pick box 2 and it will have 1 million inside...

Why are you waiting around to pick box number 2 and find out God lied to you and it's empty? Isn't this whole thing at least worth taking your own time to do your own study on who God is and see if you can finally understand what we're all yapping about and why your life can be changed for this life and secure into eternity?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Mar 29 2007, 02:58 PM) [snapback]414354[/snapback]</div>

Well, then, here's my opportunity to say you're wasting your life with delusional fantasies. You exist for only a short time, and whatever it is you decide to do with your life, you'd better get at it. "Eternal life" is wishful thinking, and you're going to die. No heaven, no hell, and no big guy in the sky with his controlling eye on every cell and particle. Oh, and Santa Claus isn't real either, and bunnies don't lay eggs.

So, which do you prefer, tolerance or truth?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Mar 29 2007, 01:58 PM) [snapback]414354[/snapback]</div>

Amen, brother!


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hyo silver @ Mar 29 2007, 03:38 PM) [snapback]414422[/snapback]</div>

So what if I am right, and you are wrong? DEAD Spiritually wrong.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Mar 29 2007, 11:58 AM) [snapback]414354[/snapback]</div>

I honestly thought you were making these statements as a sort of sarcastic parody - then I read the rest of your paragraph and discovered you meant them straight up, with no sense of irony. Yours is a frame of mind I find impossible to comprehend, let alone agree with.

I believe many things. We all do, we can't help it. Virtually the whole of our knowledge is one belief stacked atop another, if you get rigorously technical on what differentiates belief from irrefutable fact.

But the difference between you and me is that I can tell you, for every single belief I hold, exactly what sort of evidence it would take to compel me to change my mind. Someone having a discussion with me CAN be persuasive, if their argument is sound.

You, on the other hand, cannot tell me what would change your mind, because you've decided that NOTHING can change your mind. No fact, no evidence, no argument will alter your belief.

Yet you blithely cruise life expecting to persuade others while you yourself remain unpersuadable. It is EXACTLY that attitude that makes you hopelessly UNPERSUASIVE. And, as your sentences above so resoundingly prove, you don't see it.

Mark Baird
Alameda CA

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Mar 28 2007, 11:46 PM) [snapback]414021[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Mar 29 2007, 12:24 PM) [snapback]414374[/snapback]</div>

I see the logicians who contrived this puzzle put the wrong thing in the boxes: money. What the boxes should contain is a cure for the common cold in the clear box, and cures for EVERY other affliction in the opaque box (not to sell, but as instantly bestowed "gifts" to all living and future humanity). Well, whaddaya expect from logicians hungry for their next grant?

So, knowing that, TJ, would you reconsider your answer?

I stated the answer couldn't be found in the bible, not to challenge the bible per se, but because the problem the puzzle brings to bear isn't discussed in the bible.

The problem is the problem of self-determination. If we go with Daronspicher's "easy" decision to take "god" at his word, we abdicate any hope of self-determination - the ability to ALTER the future to our best benefit. Securing BOTH the cure for the cold and all other afflictions is forever out of our reach, because our future is clamped to a predestined outcome with welded closed vicegrips.

In a universe where self-determination IS possible, getting away with $1,010,000 IS possible, or getting away with cures for BOTH the cold and all other afflicitions IS possible - you choose both boxes with the hope that "god" didn't know how to use an arc-welder very well and the vicegrips of predestiny might pop loose.

It's not an easy decision because (within the franework of the puzzle) all the empirical evidence so far indicates that self-determination isn't possible - nobody has yet beaten the game and come away with BOTH boxes full.

From a raw probabilities standpoint, the odds favor taking both boxes. You are assured of SOMETHING, and perhaps the MOST POSSIBLE when you take both boxes. Taking only the opaque box leaves you with either NOTHING or MUCH SOMETHING. In the arithmetic of probability, SOMETHING + MOST POSSIBLE is greater than NOTHING + MUCH SOMETHING.

What complicates the equation is: What's the probability that "god" was wrong?

Or, taking the issue out of the puzzle and into life itself: What's the probability that you can ALTER your own future (that "god" hasn't already decided it for you)?

Or, what's the probability that, in "choosing" to believe, using that "free will" the evangelists are so fond of trotting out, you're actually doing something "god" hadn't already figured out, surprising him?

Mark Baird
Alameda CA

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Mar 29 2007, 12:24 AM) [snapback]414027[/snapback]</div>

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Ten for ten, Fshagan! - I like your mind - it's MUCH more fun than the logicians'!

Mark Baird
Alameda CA

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hill @ Feb 1 2007, 01:42 PM) [snapback]383950[/snapback]</div>

ROFL ... this looks like Matrix surface world

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(airportkid @ Mar 29 2007, 06:39 PM) [snapback]414545[/snapback]</div>

Is everything in your life up for grabs? Are there no absolute truths where you in no way could be talked out of your current answer?

2 + 3 = 5 and only 5... Always has, always will, you'll never be convinced otherwise... as one example...

this simple math equation is probably so foundational that you think I'm being an idiot by suggesting it as an example, but I just wanted to show a very clear example of something that is fact and truth beyond time, eternity and argueability.

From here, we head into things where you may believe or know that may not be quite so obviously foundational to every person on the planet. Do you have anything like this in your life?

I do...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(airportkid @ Mar 29 2007, 07:30 PM) [snapback]414563[/snapback]</div>

I think you need to make the puzzle more difficult if you want self determiniation to work into the equation. Here's one example...

Let's say that before the beginning of time, God designed something super complex, like my body. He wrote the rule book and gave me a good mama who read it to me.

When I got to be 13, I knew that in the area of sex, God wanted me to wait until I was married before doing it. In fact, don't run up to the edge of doing it.... save your body until you are married, wholy. No taste testing, no almosts... If I save it all for the confines of marriage, I will have a certain experience at a certain level. If I don't save it for marriage, I will have a different experience at a lesser level..... It's up to me... Not predetermined... God already knows how it will all go, but He's not going to force me to go have sex with some girl at some high school dance. He's not going to put up a force field that I can't get through. I have free will to do it, and I can choose that I pick God's path in this matter and will walk away from this potential situation tonight.

If I have sex that night, God is saddened by my sin and is waiting for me to come back to Him to ask for forgiveness and walk with me through my future where things will be lesser than what might have been had I chosen better.

If I walk away from that scene and don't do it because God is on my heart and I want to honor His wishes for my life, then God will smile with me and walk with me through a future where better and greater things are ahead for me.

Did God know ahead of time what my choice would be... Yeah... that's really clear in the "all knowing" attribute God has. He knew you'd be here reading this message today and is hoping you will one day see that He is standing there with open arms waiting for you to choose Him over the other things in your life that you hold closer. He knows if you will choose Him and He knows if you won't, but it's not Him that's going to make that choice in your life. You are welcome to be one of the Whomsoever will people if you want to be one of them.

He probably also knew how "Intollerant" you'd think it was if I told you this. It does you no good to hear that your current position in life is ok and you should stay with it. If you don't change your choice in life, things are going to be tough in death.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(airportkid @ Mar 29 2007, 07:30 PM) [snapback]414563[/snapback]</div>

Of course. But, I was indeed, answering based on your challenge, of finding a Bible verse to support my decision.

I noticed that Windy and loveit et all, did not answer. I wonder why.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Mar 29 2007, 08:41 PM) [snapback]414571[/snapback]</div>

I'm not going to argue that 2 plus 3 isn't 5, but I will suggest that it's only one way of looking at things. We use Base 10 as a manner of convention, but Base 2 (binary) is also prevalent, and is what makes computers possible. Base 12 is used in the Imperial System of measurement, now mostly replaced by the more logical metric system using Base 10. The number 'zero' was invented only about a thousand years ago, and much of our knowledge has progressed rapidly with its use since then. There are also cultures for whom anything more than two is simply 'many', yet they have hundreds of names for what we call 'snow'.

So, you can sit there all righteous and smug, thinking you have THE answer and everyone else is a hell-bound idiot, or you can be tolerant. Besides, you'll never learn anything at all if you insist that you already know everything.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hyo silver @ Mar 29 2007, 09:28 PM) [snapback]414615[/snapback]</div>

I knew you would say that!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Mar 29 2007, 05:41 PM) [snapback]414571[/snapback]</div>

Well, sir, I'm frankly too ignornant about the universe to point to ANYTHING and declare with finality that I know ALL there is to know about it, or even that what knowledge I have is sufficient to declare with finality that what little I DO know cannot be changed, enlarged, revised or overturned. I've only been on the planet a shade over half a century; how the hell could ANYONE pretend to much knowledge in any field in so brief a time? One thing I've learned over and over and over is there's usually more to the story. So, no, there is NO belief I have (including my atheism) that I regard as immune to change, because I cannot predict what new fact or evidence may arise that makes today's belief a load of nonsense. It's a BIG universe, FULL of surprises.

Does that make me wishy-washy, full of uncertainty? No; I have strong confidence that many of my beliefs are accurate understandings of how nature works, all supported by empirical evidence and robust syllogism. They enable me to make my way in the world without stubbing my toes too much, and even exploit what I know to improve my enjoyment and longevity of life. And they enable me to live my life largely without fear. But strong as I hold them, I'll drop any of them like a hot stone if new discoveries prove them unfounded. I've done it before; I'll do it again in the future, as science keeps prying open nature's hidden clockworks.

I do not need in my life anything of absolute rigidity, nor would I want it: it'd be oppressively confining, limiting the bounds of possibility, weakening hope. And there are plenty of times when hope is the last thread of attachment to a situation: no, sir, I will NOT trade hope for absolutism.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Mar 29 2007, 05:41 PM) [snapback]414571[/snapback]</div>

While Hyo Silver's got a point, I'll take your example in the spirit of your intent; certainly, so elementary an equation is something beyond refutation (particularly since we DEFINED mathematics so that 2 + 3 = 5, and saying so is simply giving an example of that definition). But I'll make two points.
First, I'm not enough a mathematician to say with finality that some variant of 2 + 3 = ? isn't possible. I had to drop one of those hot stones of personal belief in high school when we got introduced to i and the square root of negative one. Some PhD in Cornell or Berkeley or MIT is probably at this moment defining a 48th mathematical dimension where 2 + 3 = 87,433,897,411.00086. Such a definition may have no application to conventional arithmetic, but it would undo the notion that 2 + 3 ALWAYS = 5.
Second, and of FAR more importance, it's one thing to believe 2 + 3 = 5 is absolute, and quite another to believe something so amphorous no two human beings can even agree on how to define it is absolute. And there's NO denying that the definition of what "god" is is FAR from resolved. If you're gonna pin some of your beliefs as close to absolute as you can, THAT's the WORST place to start; there's NOTHING to pin them ON but sheer guesswork. You can believe 2 + 3 = 5 is an absolute with fair justification; NOTHING (except wishful thinking) justifies declaring some version of "god" is absolute.

Mark Baird
Alameda CA

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(airportkid @ Mar 30 2007, 12:15 AM) [snapback]414692[/snapback]</div>

I see "unnecessary laws" as rigidity and excess form and ritual which were never commanded by Jesus or is not applicable to the dispensation we are now in as rigidity.

Sometimes those "rituals" are good to remind us of the spiritual principles they represent "providing" they are explained for the newcommer, but to stop the service every time to do them at a specific time and never allow room for God to take the service instead is bad.

The definition of "tolerant" too is in question.

To say we are "toleratant" of everybody can be the same as saying there is no right and wrong and everybodies lifestyle is ok as long as they like it.

For instance... where do you draw your line?

If God doesn't change, but we do.... what was allowable 100 years ago, may not be now or most likely, vice versa.

Man has invented lots of laws God never invented... so its ok when those change to meet the changing times.. but Gods laws only change as he changed dispensations of how he deals with mankind.

For instance, we are no longer required to bring offerings of flesh and blood to sacrific as he has made a better way by the entrance of Jesus.

To "tolerate" peoples weaknesses, shortcomings, lack of vision is all good when they are seeking the best way they can.. "even if its irritating at times".... even as the arrogance of an upcoming teenager can be irritating.

But when someone knows the issues and has chosen evil as thier course..... they should not be embraced as a "brother" in the Lord.

If you say "of course not".. thats what I mean as being intolerant "of sin".

We tolerate each others place in God or the world, but we "don't" tolerate and accept thier sin as an ok alternative lifestyle "the new phrase now" to live as they want outside the laws of Gods universe.

As children.. we ususally don't see the "reasons" for our parents laws and as teenagers and even young adults, we cannot appreciate the real need for many laws of the land, but as we grow more mature... the laws which we "made ourselves" abide by.. make more sense and we then do them and even endorse those who make those laws as one with them.

God is not into "ridigity and intolerance".. he is into freedom and grace.

No one ever has a problem with laws as long as they can do what ever pops in thier imagination.. but if that offends another human being or humanity its wrong... that why God have us guideliness in the first place in order for us and for others to live well in this life and the life to come.

The bible talks about those that "oppose themselves".. meaning they do things that are not so much bad for others, but damage themselves.. that in turn also affects others.


But even as we have to give our own children boundaries because of the pitfalls and evils in the world.. even so the Lord gives us boundaries so that our fellowship with him is not severed and we do well on the earth.

Maybe when we get to heaven there will be no boundaries????

Good question.. without tempation to cause us to want to stray from what is created in us to do anyway naturally by God, we can go to and fro as we please?.. maybe.. but I expect even then, we will have "assignments" to do... otherwise he would not have talked about us ruling and reigning with him and giving us authority over things.

What if I didn't like the ridgity of not being able to sit and have dinner on the train track while a train was coming?

Whether we want to admit it or not... there are rules... some are unbending and rigid, while others can bend if were're willing to pay the price for bending them.

Like its been said "Its good to be the King"....

I would like to alter that and say "Its good to know the King!"

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(airportkid @ Mar 30 2007, 12:15 AM) [snapback]414692[/snapback]</div>

I think we have a breakthrough for you here.

The one thing that you seem willing to stand 100% firm on is: That you are not certain about anything 100%. Seems even to contridict itself just in that statement alone, but we'll just take this as your first statement of faith.

You keep working that, and pretty soon you'll find something else that you are absolutly sure of. Of course if you only find one new thing you are absolutly sure of, then you'll still be at 1 because this statement of faith will need to give way to your new thing at whatever point you come up with it.

It's sad that you can have 1 rock in one hand and 2 rocks in the other hand and not be sure that you have a combined total of 3 rocks in your hands. You can't be sure that they are really rocks and you can't be confident in the total number. Where are you suggesting the mental disorder is here?

I pity you for having no truths in your life except for the truth that there are no truths. Bummer...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Mar 30 2007, 07:50 AM) [snapback]414789[/snapback]</div>

Daron, Mark has forgotten how to be "a little kid."

Mark, please hear me out. If you have the opportunity, do something fun in the out of doors when the weather is really nice, just the way you like it.

Take a couple of really deep breaths and enjoy the day. Look at the beautiful scenery around you and just take the time to just sit and look at the beauty of the earth.

Do something for just yourself. That's really important.

Enjoy flying your "airplane" if you have one or whatever floats your boat.

Then when you "come back down to earth" just think about the great day you had.

Recently I just bought a new bike and I am looking forward to riding! I can't wait! It's fun to be a kid every so often, more than not!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(loveit @ Mar 30 2007, 08:21 AM) [snapback]414841[/snapback]</div>

Go Loveit! I just got back from a 9 day ride down the east coast of Tasmania - lovely country! Did you get a road bike or a mountan bike? I'm a touring cyclist myself.

I'm fascinated that my writing style conveys an image of some stodgy stick in the mud - that ain't who I am. I guess I do get pretty didactic when I'm trying to make a point.

Enjoy your cycling!! Maybe I'll meet you out on some ride somewhere - I'd look forward to it!

Mark

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Mar 30 2007, 05:50 AM) [snapback]414789[/snapback]</div>

Yeah, language is full of oddities like that. "This statement is false" seems an irresolvable paradox until you recognize that it's a statement that LACKS the attribute of being either true or false. "We will not tolerate intolerance!" is another apparent oxymoron, but such constructs are mere artifacts of a system that contains internal logical inconsistencies, and language, like mathematics, is full of them. They don't mean anything; you should be arguing the idea, not the inevitable chipped paint in the scaffolding of language that carries the idea.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Mar 30 2007, 05:50 AM) [snapback]414789[/snapback]</div>

You're either being deliberately disingenuous or you didn't read my post. Go back and read it again.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Mar 30 2007, 05:50 AM) [snapback]414789[/snapback]</div>

Yeah, I live each day in abject misery that "truth" is unattainable. Pshaw! That statement shows how starkly different our two minds are, each unable to comprehend the other. I'm reminded of how I feel when out riding my bicycle on a seldom traveled road and motorcyclists go blasting by - I think "those poor sods don't know what they're missing" and laugh at the fact they look at me as they rocket by and think exactly the same thing!

Mark Baird
Alameda CA