- Nov 9, 2013
- 1,273
- 194
- 56
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Others
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
*Errrrrrrrrrrrrr,
*I
*don't
*I'll
*What's
*I
*I'm
*you're
*You're
You haven't read the rules of this forum, have you.
That's nice.
No.
No comment. Are you done with the trolling, then?
I read the complete works some time ago. There is more to life than Google and the internet.
No need to. I already did. Why do you continue to fail to grasp this?
God is evil because, according to christians, he refuses to cure people of cancer because they refuse to stroke his ego. I was flatly told that people are not cured of cancer because they refuse to worship God.
Really? I didn't eat of the Tree of Good and Evil, and yet I am paying for it, supposedly.
Is it moral to throw a child into jail because of something her great-grandfather did? Absolutely not. So why is it moral for God to do the same?
The least fewest number of HIV infections found amongst lesbians. Their rate of HIV infection is lower than heterosexuals. Does this mean that God approves of lesbian sex more than he does heterosexual sex?
Could God stop all HIV infections with a wag of his finger? According to christians, he could. God is omnipotent. So why not do it?
Oh, look -- yet another straw man.
What is cruel, being a robot or having choice?According to the myth, it was obviously a trap that the creator-deity laid as a "gotcha" for his creations to stumble into. The more relevant issue is why a loving creator would so cruelly set up its creations for failure, and then get angry about it.
That just shows how ridiculous you are.*than
I'm sure it doesn't avail you. What even does? Unless something says 'God is evil' it is like Greek to you.That isn't even coherent. That would mean that we would be incapable of making the choices to believe that you would force on us, in order to "save ourselves.
Whatever you say, just know that I knowAND you don't speak for anyone's motivations but your own.
No I didn't, there you go with your STRAW MAN FALLACYBut again, you fail to address the point that was made: You claim that HIV is retribution for your "sin", and yet lesbians have fewer rates of HIV for the same "sin" than heterosexuals do. Your assertion is destroyed.
That's the fifth time you have stated that even though I already responded to it.Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnd I thought you said we weren't even worth your time.
You claiming that doesn't make it so.
And where is this profanity and vulgarity?I think this forum has a strict policy against any profanity and vulgarity. Didn't you know?
You are just making yourself look foolish with all that. One can gather a fallacy from absolutely anything if one wants to be overly technical. You are not convincing anybody with any of that.Ad Hoc Ad Hominem Ho-Hum.
Oh, look -- a False Choice Fallacy, a Fallacy of Many Questions, and a Strawman Fallacy. All in less than ten words. Well done.
You know what's also third grade? Pointing out small grammatical errors just to insult people's intelligence.It's, like, third-grade-level English, man.
I don't see you doing anything about it besides living snugly in your 1st world country using condoms, STILL killing fetuses and getting stds, eating unhealthy food and complaining about how your healthcare doesn't cover mortality.Oh, and of course, babies in Africa who contract AIDS pre-birth because of the catholic church's disinformation campaign regarding use of condoms -- I suppose THEY "touched the flame" too.
Don't mistake my weakness for feeding trolls as you being someone worth a proper discussion. you probably aren't going to make it passed the three digit post line before you are banned.And I pointed out that you had spent a whole hour on me, and now it's a whole day. Rather silly of you to claim we are "not even worth your time" when you spend an entire day on us.
I'm so glad you just said what you just said. It vindicates me on so many levels. You have no idea what the Bible teaches, don't even pretend as if you do.Still waiting on that bible citation for your "He's a big meanie for not making me a god!" Was I perhaps reading the wrong version of your book?
I agree. God played a part. He created man in His own Image and likeness.
All of this is true. I agree.
To give Adam the chance to be a human being and to exercise his unique ability to choose to obey and love God or to disobey Him.
God did not cause Adam to sin. God knowing beforehand that (x) will occur does not mean that God causes (x) to happen anymore than you knowing beforehand that offering someone one million dollars in cold hard cash causes the person to accept it when you do offer it. The person chooses to accept it. You knowing beforehand that they will accept it does not cause them to accept it.
It is silly to say that knowing (x) will happen causes (x) to happen.
God chose to create beings with the ability to choose to obey Him or disobey Him. There are many things God cannot do. Omnipotence =/= ability to do anything.
God placed Adam in a situation where it was possible for him to obey God and live in paradise, or disobey God and die. Sins have consequences. Evil acts have consequences. Surely you agree?
If Adam had not sinned, there would be no death. It is just that simple.
...
It is not unreasonable to say that one reason why God does not heal people is unbelief. Scripture even bears this out. It is recorded that Jesus could not do many miracles in certain places because of their unbelief.
Put up or shut up.
"Reach-around". You can't be that ignorant.
Being a troll, rather.
Not at all. The fact that your own rationales are so sloppy doesn't mean everyone else's are.
....because some yahoo on the interwebz says so?
Your admission, "also third grade", is noted.
OH, and look: ANOTHER strawman. Plus a Mind-reading Fallacy, an Ad Hominem Fallacy. You're racking them up there, sport.
I have seen no evidence to indicate that you would be capable of such a discussion.
I'm not the one walking all over the forum rules.
....except this thread is full of clear examples of unrighteousness attributed to it.
Incoherent:
If that were so, then this free will would have been given to us by that deity, and thus it's the deity's mistake for giving us free will.
Your assertion also fails to address the many examples of unrighteousness attributed to your deity that have been demonstrated in this very thread.
Cool Story, Bro. Doesn't address the issues raised in this thread, though.
You seem to have missed much.
Actually I don't and to say that I'm not impressed would be quite an understatement. But you already know that.
Fine. Now run along, and let the adults speak.
A lot of people try to pawn that off on free will when evil acts are not prevented by god. But what of the free will of the victims, it isn't their will to be raped or murdered, etc. So if god doesn't intervene in such acts, it is viewing the will of the rapists as more valid than that of the victims. Even better, god could arrange it so that these criminals experience some sort of event that changes them and makes them lose the desire to harm others, and even I stills the desire to help prevent future rapes and murders, rather than just dumping these people in hell.
In reality, suffering happens.
Should God, and would God, are irrelevant questions. Should we, and would we, are relevant ones.
Should we rape children?
Should we perpetuate pointless arguments on the merits of omnipotent Gods existent outside time and space and simultanesously within it which we don't believe in having more motive for creating a non-suffering Earth than the suffering one that exists, as if we might be able to understand the motives of whomever that God is we don't believe in?
Or should we accept the suffering Earth and the desire of all people to be free of suffering?
For the christian this is seen in Jesus' quotes 'love your enemies' and 'consider others as yourself'.
For the atheists, in the realization that suffering (rape, murder, death, torture, whatever it may be) is an awful, undeniably violating thing that is best off alleviated and avoided.
We're all after the same purpose here, the same things; to be happy and to be free of suffering. One person here chooses the path of the God they believe in, whose Son taught people empathy and consideration for others.
Another person believes in the inherent value of another's happiness and right not to suffer.
It is important for us as a species to draw these similarities and commonalities and even if we don't agree with one another on the dogma or the back-story, work towards what we all realize is inherently our biggest innate desire - to be free of suffering at no expense to another's freedom from suffering.
If anybody is to speculate further, it may well be a good idea to accept that suffering happens and use the reality of the Earth as some basis for speculating on the existence of God, rather than say 'no God exists because if he did we wouldn't suffer'. That is as much a massive jump in logic as anything else, although it does underpin perhaps a belief in 'something out there' that isn't the christian God, even if that 'something' is just an ideal of ultimate morality. That may be intrinsic, and perhaps instead of using it against the teaching of a morally enlightened character like Jesus who went round healing and giving, you should follow its call and become what you really believe.
The reason the question "Should God have created a universe without suffering?" is important is because it deals with what you can say about the Christian god.
Quite simply, if the definition of the Christian god requires "all-powerful" and "all-loving" as components, and we acknowledge that the universe as it is does not match what an all-powerful and all-loving god would create, then the Christian god as defined cannot exist.
You're left with a few choices. You can argue that the universe is as an all-powerful and all-loving god would create, but so far I'm not seeing any coherent explanations for why suffering exists. In another thread I've shown that a universe where we could but don't cause suffering to each other doesn't violate free will, so that retort by apologists doesn't work. And nothing seems to account for natural suffering without resorting to hand waving or making excuses for a god that quickly become ridiculous.
The more practical solution would be adjusting the definition of a god to eliminate either "all-powerful" or "all-loving". Charles Hartshorne, a prominent religious philosopher called omnipotence a 'mistake' when discussing the attributes of a god.
I think if more theists actually thought about things instead of just throwing out "omni" terms like they've been programmed to do, they'd come to the same conclusions Hartshorne did...
I'm sorry, but that sounds more to me like "Life isn't fair! It's all God's fault! He's a big meanie for not making me a god!"
God came down and sacrificed Himself rather then just waving a wand and making everything good and well.
Are you even aware of what the Tree of Knowledge was? It gave Adam and Eve the ability to know good and evil. They taught their sons and daughters good and evil, and today, you know good and evil as well as everyone else.
Mankind is incapable of doing anything with this knowledge other then to cause perdition. Wherever man does something good, something comes along and destroys it.
This is why you don't live in a perfect world, and blame God for it.
Well that's only because the way sex between men is done makes it extremely easy to infect each other. Also, without fear of pregnancy, condoms are more often neglected.
And lesbians are their own disservice. They have robbed themselves by leaning on another woman rather then a man. There's no good in it, and I'm certain even most women feel the same.
A better question would be to ask why HIV exists at all. Why would God cure it over just never having it exist in the first place?
But you don't want to go to the root of it, you just want to point your finger at God and say He's bad for not making you a god as well.
I already got to the root of it. According to christians, God is punishing granchildren for what their grandparents did. That is immoral.
Having knowledge of good and evil is only fixable by one accepting that they are now a man of perdition and must deal with it.
If God had let them remain in paradise, they would have eventually become like Satan anyway.
You seriously just aren't deep enough of a person, or will refuse to go into such depth, to understand the true meaning and logic of that.
All I see going on in this thread is basically others complaining that life isn't fair, so God is evil *poor me* *tyrannical tyrant from Tyrantville who holds me accountable*. It's not like I have much faith discussing anything deep with your lot.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?