selfinflikted
Under Deck
- Jul 13, 2006
- 11,441
- 786
- 45
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Democrat
I have already explained why the creator = parent analogy doesn't work.
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.
?
State of exactly what ... "everything???"
I believe you are foolishly trying to say that, when we look at the consequences to our behavior as a species, we can complain that the "parent" or creator hasn't taken care of us as well as you would have expected.
This is the same point of view about Uncle Sam, in regard to Americans who might complain on the liberal side of issues.
No, you cannot have a will of your own without freedom. By definition (link) you cannot have a will without being able to make intentional choices. Besides, I would have thought 'free-thinkers' of all people would value free will above all else.Selfinflikted said:Could it be said that one can be perfect and lack free will?
I and several users have already pointed out this is incorrect. It requires giving up all sense of personal responsibility.Slefinflikted said:Because he created it. There's no way around this. None, whatsoever.
Now that's completely unfounded. The Bible frequently talks of helping people (indeed thats one of the main requirements of getting into heaven) and there are hundreds, if not thousands of religious organizations dedicated to helping others because of their belief in God.Slefinflikted said:No, it has nothing to do with us shirking responsibility. It's the Christians who won't admit that their god is stagnant, impotent.
...
Why would we? It's obvious god has no interest in helping people.
By contrast, atheists claim humanitarian causes surpass religious ones because they are doing so to help people, rather than earn a place in heaven ... all the while claiming God should be responsible for everything wrong in the world.
Selfinflikted already made this point and I answered him. It's quite amazing how free-thinkers so eagerly give up free will. Indeed I would even argue it is atheists - not Christians - who wish to be totally dependant on God.begt said:Well assuming god exists he is responsible. But atheists obviously dont think he does...
Who are we to say that God "should" step in or that by not stopping every form of evil or wrong-doing is some sort of proof that He does not exist?
Your if-then argument falls short because you are defining the right action that should be taken. We can not know this, only God does.
No, you cannot have a will of your own without freedom. By definition (link) you cannot have a will without being able to make intentional choices.
Besides, I would have thought 'free-thinkers' of all people would value free will above all else.
I and several users have already pointed out this is incorrect. It requires giving up all sense of personal responsibility.
Now that's completely unfounded. The Bible frequently talks of helping people (indeed thats one of the main requirements of getting into heaven) and there are hundreds, if not thousands of religious organizations dedicated to helping others because of their belief in God.
By contrast, atheists claim humanitarian causes surpass religious ones because they are doing so to help people, rather than earn a place in heaven ... all the while claiming God should be responsible for everything wrong in the world.
Haven't you ever wondered why Christians practically never use this argument?
We can only know right and wrong through our own perspective.
If God doesn't conform to that understanding, that is His own right.
However, an expectation that we conform to things that He doesn't allow us to understand is unreasonable.
Who are we to say that God "should" step in or that by not stopping every form of evil or wrong-doing ...
is some sort of proof that He does not exist?
Your if-then argument falls short because you are defining the right action that should be taken. We can not know this, only God does.
No, we are right or wrong based on God's perspective. He reveals this perspective in His written Word and also through the Holy Spirit that dwells inside each Christian.
What you are saying puts "self" first. That has been the problem with the world since Adam and Eve. That is why the world is in the shape that it is in now. We must put God first.
I only argue that god should step in and at least help out because of the attributes his followers ascribe to him. It is the Christians themselves that repeatedly claim "God is Love", he is benevolent, he is all-powerful, he is omniscient, etc etc.
And yet you think you can have perfection without free will. Obviously it can't be that valuable if you're willing to give it up.Selfinflikted said:I don't agree that perfection precludes free will. Please explain why you think it does.
...
I consider free will valuable, sure.
I'll say to you what I said to Begt: trying to discuss God without using the Bible is like trying to discuss evolution without using fossils. A creationists would day "Those fossils only prove evolution true is you assume evolution is true in the first place". You don't believe God exists, therefore you believe any stories about God are automatically untrue.Selfinflikted said:It's not unfounded. Please point to ONE example, sans Biblical stories, of god doing something to help someone. I've never seen it.
Repeating yourself didn't with with Astridhere and it won't work with you.Selfinflikted said:No, and that's irrelevant. I haven't argued this point at all. All I'm trying to say is, god created it, he screwed it up (twice), and he is responsible.
There. Is. No. Way. Around. This.
None.
However, an expectation that we conform to things that He doesn't allow us to understand is unreasonable.
The impression I get with these posts (I've had similar debates with atheists on many other occasions) is that atheists want a God who...
- Doesn't give His subjects minds of their own
- Doesn't allow them to do anything by themselves in case they do something wrong (or if they do something wrong He immediately fixes it)
- Dictates everything to them - including science and morality - instead of letting them figure it out for themselves.
Ironically that's the very kind of God most of them complain about: a kind of celestial dictator.
I only argue that god should step in and at least help out because of the attributes his followers ascribe to him.
It is the Christians themselves that repeatedly claim "God is Love", he is benevolent, he is all-powerful, he is omniscient, etc etc.
.
Evolution can survive without fossils as genetics has progressed to the point that common ancestry is evident in DNA! Fossils are valuable but I would say not vital for ToE!I'll say to you what I said to Begt: trying to discuss God without using the Bible is like trying to discuss evolution without using fossils. A creationists would day "Those fossils only prove evolution true is you assume evolution is true in the first place". You don't believe God exists, therefore you believe any stories about God are automatically untrue.
I have already explained why the creator = parent analogy doesn't work.
Like I said - the kind of God atheists complain about is the same kind of God they seem to want:CabVet said:Oh, you mean the same type of God that Christians describe?
- Doesn't give His subjects minds of their own - you are free to do whatever you like, as long as it is in the Bible.
- Doesn't allow them to do anything by themselves in case they do something wrong (or if they do something wrong He immediately fixes it) - more than once I have heard Christians say "that went wrong because I didn't listen to God", or "that went wrong because I didn't consult God".
- Dictates everything to them - including science and morality - instead of letting them figure it out for themselves. - This one is good; it reminds me posts like "science can take a hike", or "evidence does not matter"; how many times have creationists here said that all that we figured out by ourselves (evolution, etc) is wrong?
Well assuming god exists he is responsible. But atheists obviously dont think he does...
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?