The joy of religion - part xxxxxxxxx

[buckshot24]

I'm hesitant at getting involved as this thread seems to be spiraling down now but...

Isn't every version of god essentially a straw man? Everyone constructs it differently.

That assumes there is no God.

 

[buckshot24]

You're pretty much on page 43 of what has kind of developed into a bit of a train wreck thread by now.

Situational awareness is a good thing to learn also.

I definitely haven't read 43 pages of posts.

 

[FelixDeCat]

Someone here *is* being childish.

To Omar, his god is the one true god.

I am not Omar, I am not your next door neighbor.

I am FelixDeCat.

 

[WelshBloke]

That assumes there is no God.

Not really. It would only not apply if a God physically appeared in person and set out its position.

 

[bshole]

No, but when you assume knowledge of is the same thing as causing events you can't come to a good conclusion.
Saying it doesn't make it so especially given the complete lack of information that you have. I don't ask 2 year olds if mommy is mean because she put them to bed. Except in this case you're infinitely less able to make a valid conclusion than the 2 year old.

In case you were not aware, the question of evil predates Christianity by hundreds of years. It is perhaps the most powerful argument against the existence of a benevolent omnipotent God. You have raised the strongest argument for a benevolent omnipotent God, namely we can't know the mind of God and therefor perhaps it is for our ultimate good. That could be plausible, however, that argument loses it's strength with the introduction of an eternal hell in which nearly all of humanity will be tortured without mercy.

Epicurus (341–270 BC) wrote:

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then He is not omnipotent. Is He able, but not willing? Then He is malevolent. Is He both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is He neither able nor willing? Then why call Him God?

 

[MongGrel]

I definitely haven't read 43 pages of posts.

What's your point ?

 

[MagickMan]

This puts a disbelief in God at the same level as a disbelief in climate change or a disbelief in the theory of evolution. Do you really think of your position as that shaky?

I have much more skepticism WRT some things than I do for others, it's not like it's a set sum.

 

[WelshBloke]

I am not Omar, I am not your next door neighbor.

I am FelixDeCat...

...YouTube stalker extraordinaire.

 

[MagickMan]

Nothing goes against Yahweh's will.

Moses went against God's will and Israel was allegedly punished to wander the desert for 40 years. The bible says that mankind has free will, supposedly the only one of God's creations that does.

 

[buckshot24]

Not really. It would only not apply if a God physically appeared in person and set out its position.

No, it assumes no God.

 

[buckshot24]

Moses went against God's will and Israel was allegedly punished to wander the desert for 40 years. The bible says that mankind has free will, supposedly the only one of God's creations that does.

He won't listen.

 

[WelshBloke]

No, it assumes no God.

Why?

 

[buckshot24]

In case you were not aware, the question of evil predates Christianity by hundreds of years. It is perhaps the most powerful argument against the existence of a benevolent omnipotent God. You have raised the strongest argument for a benevolent omnipotent God, namely we can't know the mind of God and therefor perhaps it is for our ultimate good. That could be plausible, however, that argument loses it's strength with the introduction of an eternal hell in which nearly all of humanity will be tortured without mercy.

Epicurus (341–270 BC) wrote:

You've stated multiple times that there is no objective morality and therefore there can't be any true evil. It's all opinion. You can't have it both ways. If you have to have it both ways to make sense of your worldview then it is false.

 

[buckshot24]

Why?

We don't need to know who is right, that's why.

 

[WelshBloke]

We don't need to know who is right, that's why.

Wut?

I never said that we did.

 

[buckshot24]

Wut?

I never said that we did.

You said the only way it would not apply is if God came down and told us.

But look, I really don't care about this point so I'm not going to talk about it further.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Creating a universe with full and inerrant foreknowledge of the totality of events that will necessarily transpire within it is not "allowing" those things to happen. It is forcing those things to happen.

Just because you have foreknowledge does indicate that you are directly meddling to achieve your goals......

In fact what you said was just foolish and said very well!@!

 

[JEDIYoda]

Humans and chimps aren't apes? You can't be that stupid.

This what was said -- Originally Posted by WelshBloke View Post

Humans and chimps are still apes.You have to be terribly stupid to honestly believe that humans and chimps are apes!!

 

[Victorian Gray]

This what was said -- Originally Posted by WelshBloke View Post

Humans and chimps are still apes.You have to be terribly stupid to honestly believe that humans and chimps are apes!!

What else are we, cats?

Humans are apes – ‘Great Apes’

"Humans are classified in the sub-group of primates known as the Great Apes.

Humans are primates, but the primates that we most closely resemble are the apes. We are therefore classified along with all other apes in a primate sub-group known as the hominoids (Superfamily Hominoidea).
This ape group can be further subdivided into the Great Apes and Lesser Apes. Humans have bodies that are genetically and structurally very similar to those of the Great Apes and so we are classified in the Great Apes sub-group which is also known as the hominids (Family Hominidae)."

http://australianmuseum.net.au/humans-are-apes-great-apes

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Repeat after me, knowing and causing are not the same thing so no.
Again, repeat after me. Knowing and causing are not the same thing.

Except you're completely wrong since knowing and causing are completely different.

Creating with knowledge is causing.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Just because you have foreknowledge does indicate that you are directly meddling to achieve your goals......

In fact what you said was just foolish and said very well!@!

My kingdom for a rational -- hell, even a literate -- theist.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

You've stated multiple times that there is no objective morality and therefore there can't be any true evil.

Question begging. Since there is no objective morality, then the only "true evil" is subjective evil.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Moses went against God's will and Israel was allegedly punished to wander the desert for 40 years. The bible says that mankind has free will, supposedly the only one of God's creations that does.

So fucking what? The alleged inerrancy of the bible is not a stipulation. Pointing out where it conflicts with itself or other necessary truths only highlights its errors.

 

[WelshBloke]

This what was said -- Originally Posted by WelshBloke View Post

Humans and chimps are still apes.You have to be terribly stupid to honestly believe that humans and chimps are apes!!

A) learn to quote
B) WTF!

 

[disappoint]

If there is no God and we are just evolved animals there is ultimately nothing wrong with rape and murder.

Atheists can act morally, they can't ultimately justify acting morally within a purely naturalistic worldview.

Ummm. The bad thing about raping or murdering someone is that you're raping or murdering them. Not that you're offending god by doing it.

It's bad because you're causing extreme suffering to a fellow human being not because a book says that it's bad.

See now, you're starting to see a little glimpse of reality here. I wonder if you can spot it before I show it to you.

There are some people that perhaps should not be convinced to become atheists. They'd use that knowledge irresponsibly. Maybe they should be left to find out for themselves lest they run around raping and/or murdering.

I think I understand why theists are so afraid of atheism. They are afraid of what might happen if "the wrong people" thought that no one will punish them if they are smart enough to evade law enforcement.

I wonder if they know that while this fear makes sense, they are really fearing the unknown.

What they are fearing, is an increase in knowledge of reality by everyone.

What they fail to see is that the universe is on an unstoppable collision course with knowledge of reality.

The God they love, an omniscient thing, is the universe having reached infinite knowledge. That hasn't happened yet. It's on it's way to that end, and by it I mean us. We are how the universe achieves that omniscience.
Living beings increasing their knowledge of reality.

It shouldn't be feared, only understood. But how could they have known that? I don't blame them for their fear.

Of course, I have no evidence this God will ever exist. I can make a great case for it. Enough to fill volumes of books. This post is only a glimpse. To have evidence, I'd have to be omniscient myself. An obviously impossible achievement by anyone at this time in the universe's infancy.

So am I a theist or an atheist? Both? Neither? Does it even matter?

These are not rhetorical questions. Feel free to answer them if you can.