It depends. If you get stuck in hell forever, yeah I'd agree that sucks big monkey nuts and God would probably be a giant douchebag. If he uses it as a tool to teach, different scenario. I can think of a couple possibilities involving hell that don't make God such a bad guy in my book.

Look at it this way. God gives (most people) around 80 years to live. If they live perfect lives, or become Christians, they are rewarded with heaven. If they don't, even after 80 years of being told and told and told to repent or go to hell, don't you think it is right that they are punished for their sins that they refuse to repent of?

Indeed, and as medical technology keeps getting better and better, God becomes increasingly kinder without even having to do anything. What a swell guy...

What makes you think God isn't controlling medical technology? (Assuming there is a God).

It is possible that a god has major influence over such things, but the probability of it being the christian god is zero.

Got any proof or logic backing that up? Plus, your initial statement appears to be talking about God, as in the Christian God.

Yeah, I'll talk about any of the gods in the same manner, I'm not trying to single yours out or anything it's just that he was the current focus of the conversation it seemed. I dunno my logic is that gods obviously exist and my proof is the billions of people who worship them. I'm indifferent to it though, in my opinion, only one's perceived gods are worthy of worship, and no one really has any say regarding who perceives what.

Well then I guess it boils down to what someone before me said: Gods may or may not exist depending on how you define them. But most of us knew that already, so I don't know why you ask me to repeat it > >.

Ok we've finally made the distinction, we're talking about the Christian God. This is much easier to shoot down.

I like to postulate this one as well. If yes, then he isn't omnibenevolent; if no, then he isn't omnipotent. Problem of evil.

If you were brought up in Islam you'd believe in Allah, if you'd been brought up in India you'd be believing in Krishna, if you'd been brought up in Ancient Greece you'd be believing in Zeus, if you'd been brought up in Ancient Egypt you'd be believing in the pantheon, if you'd been brought up with the vikings you'd believe in Baldur... etc. etc. etc. There are many Gods, and they are all a product of the human imagination. You only think your God is the right one because that's the one you were brought up to believe. We are all skeptical about most Gods, atheists just go one God further. When you can tell me why you don't believe in the other God's, you'll see why I don't believe in yours.

His argument was God has trait X, Y and Z because if He didn't he wouldn't be God. He claimed this information was acquired outside of a holy book. I am aggravated I have to spell this out.

Ugh, you are looking at this backwards. I have already posted the quote that completely explained why evolution DOES NOT break the second law. HE is the one that is saying "you're wrong, you're wrong you're wrong".

No, it doesn't depend. When you're sent to Hell you're sent there for eternity. Daniel 12:2,3; Matthew 25:46.
Hell is not a place of teaching, it is a place of torture. Matthew 13:50; Mark 9:48; Revelation 14:10.
If God is a loving God, he only loves those who believe in his existence. I guess that's too bad for the huge numbers of people who don't believe in the Christian God, or never even knew that a Christian God existed - they will burn in fire for eternity.
I'm happy to say though that there is no evidence that God exists, so rest easy guys. And if he did, I'd be ashamed to be his creation.

Christian arrogance at its best. Multiple religions tell people that they will go to hell if they don't believe in their God, and there are plenty of people who never even get a chance to believe, either they die to early or they just never hear a preacher. I wonder what happens to them.

There are a fuckload of proofs that completely and utterly smash Christianity into the dirt from which it so proudly claims to have been made of. Here's a nice little website that collates them for us:
http://godisimaginary.com/i1.htm

I highly doubt that you'll even click the link, knowing how the religious mind works. But if you do end up clicking it and reading through the massive list; I'll question your sanity if you still cling to your belief afterward.

If your not posting to try and work toward the conclusion to the question, then I think you should fudge off...

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on May 28 2010, 4:40 am by Pinky.

I asked Pinky in the shoutbox: "What would be the downside in believing in a religion that was not correct?"

He said:

I asked him then: "If it makes you happy or makes you feel safer about passing on to the afterlife then how is that wasted time?"

And he didn't reply, so I figured I'd post it to hear his answer.

I did reply you must not have seen it:

My main point is you can easily be happy and easily lead a good life without having to use religion as a crutch.

9/11 wasn't really about religion; it was about Israel (according to Osama Bin Laden).

On topic, and not directed at anyone in particular, the title didn't imply the Christian "God" (i.e. the god of the Abrahamic religions), and it seems rather redundant to "pick a god" in the context of this thread. Even if a god existed, why would it be the Christian one? Why not Zeus or Shiva or any number of other gods worshipped by others around the world as creators?

Really this topic can only entertain meaningful discussion on one question (and even then somewhat tenuously) - that of whether or not a "god" exists or can exist. I don't see any evidence for one and I don't think I will believe unless I see some.

Just so we're clear.

I wish you hadn't ignored my bee string example in relation to this. If nothing else, it's more fun to actually analyze something than spit out the same stuff over and over.

You may be interested to know that in (I believe it is) Plato's The Republic, Socrates discusses with his peers the nature of the gods briefly, and comes to some conclusions which, if he had been more outspoken, probably would have been blasphemous. One of the main points though, is that he arrived at the conclusion that you cannot have multiple perfect deities, but only a single one. The point is that philosophic enquiry doesn't need to consult the bible to be interesting. He may get his definition from the bible but it doesn't matter, we all hold the traits "omnipotent, omniscient, omni-w/e" to be traits of the Supreme Being we are discussing.

So be the bigger man. Explain something.

Now this is where things get interesting. The bible. Word of God or conspiracy to rule by man? I'm no bible scholar, I've only read the first few pages. If people are sent to hell for eternity, then yeah I'd find that a pretty dickish move on God's part. Not something I'd expect of a benevolent God.

You familiar with the pot and the kettle?

Those aren't proofs, they're God-hate-junk. There could be some good stuff in there, someone clearly took the time to compile it all and link everything and make the website, but instead of doing anything productive they lather every proof in rhetoric and decide that they've "proved" stuff. If they really want to do something, they should rewrite it from a less biased point of view. People can tell when someone hates something. Hell, even atheists shouldn't read that page. It's a disgrace to atheists everywhere.

Maybe some folks can't though.

From the man himself:
This statement begins by quoting the Koran as saying, "slay the pagans wherever ye find them" and extrapolates this to conclude that it is the "duty of every Muslim" to "kill Americans anywhere". Bin Laden elaborated on this theme in his "Letter to America" of October 2002: "You are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind: You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator."

I think we all decided on page 13 to start talking about the Christian God in particular.

Well God means many different things to many different people. You really can't have any productive conversation unless you specific a certain God. Hence why we started talking about Yahweh.

You do realise that bin Laden's original tape was censored by the media on the advice of the US Government?

Specifically (if one ignores the religious verbiage, more a "feature" of Middle-Eastern diplomatic conventions rather than a mark of zealotry), he cited the occupation of Palestine as the reason for the attacks. As late as 2008 he was saying the same thing. This is usually picked up in the UK news, but until recently US media outlets appeared reluctant to report the political reasons behind the bombings. Far easier to blame it on Islam, especially with Huntington's Clash of Civilizations hypothesis doing the rounds. Osama bin Laden is not much of a religious figure - he's rather more pragmatic than that and his motives are primarily political. However he does realise the value of appeals to religion (in much the same way as appeals to nationalism) to mobilise support. The thing is, in the Middle-East nationalism is not a strong force, whereas most people do share a common religion (and some would say, culture) in Islam. That makes it more convenient for him to appeal to it in his attacks on the West. In the Cold War, people saw conflict in terms of Communism vs Capitalism; during the Second World War nationalism was the motivating factor. The reasons for people entering states of conflict with one another change all the time, and it seems that conflict will always find a way.

In this sense, how is religion any worse than, say, nationalism?

A link to a recent article about Osama from CBS which highlights the political motives: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/16/terror/main4102367.shtml

From my experience in life, in most cases, huge suffering will not make a person kinder. It may make him stronger, but strength (Jesus, for example, was possibly the strongest person in history; fictional or real) without a kind heart accomplishes nothing. Which is why I don't agree with the idea of hell: a lot of our character is pre-determined by genetics and early upbringing which are things we have no control over. Does God create our souls when we are born/conceived? If he does, then it is clear that either not all souls are created equally good or we simply have no choice about the influences made on our souls in our early years of life and some souls get corrupted more than others. Then is it really fair to throw us in hell just to frighten others that are still alive of the pain they will be subject to if they don't obey God's rules?

The typical biblical version of hell, as a fiery painful torturous place, does present quite a dilemma to anyone who wants to believe in both the exact word of the bible and a benevolent God. I agree that such a place would have purpose to be utilized as teaching in few or perhaps almost no cases, but if we disregard the typical notion of hell, I think there could be useful applications for it. If you've ever read The Dark Tower series by Stephen King, we find that as the protagonist finally reaches his goal, the top of the dark tower, and opens the final door, he is overcome with a sudden, enormous dread at the realization of his doom: he hasn't completed his quest to God's moral satisfaction and must repeat his quest, and at that moment he knows he is doomed to repeat it until he gets it right (or possibly forever, knowing King). God then sends him to the beginning of his quest. That may very well be a version of Hell. For a being as powerful as God would be, I'm sure he could custom tailor any Hell to the person in question.

Now this is quite the interesting idea. I certainly agree that it wouldn't be fair to hold someone responsible for actions that they had no control over, but perhaps the scale isn't "how many lives have you saved" or "how many prayers have you said", but rather "how well have you done with what you were given." Parable of the Talents, if you're familiar with it.

I don't think the point of being thrown in hell is to frighten others, but rather to be punished ourselves for the actions we've made. The frightening others part is more likely to be a man-made problem, at least of what I see (fire-and-brimstone type preachers).

I think events play out in a very cause-effect way, down to our own choices. If I am a person with X personality with Y environmental circumstances, behavior Z is the only correct output in this reality. Like if a separate universe was created with the same exact arrangements of atoms down to the very last building blocks of matter/energy itself in the same exact places, every event would play out exactly the same in this universe as in ours.

@VRAEL

I ignored it because it was a blatantly obvious false analogy. Yahweh is touted as omnibenevolent and omnipotent. Regardless of how small 100 years of suffering is compared to eternity in paradise, its still 100 years of suffering that a supposedly omnibenevolent and omnipotent being has allowed to exist. This is clearly a contradiction.

Many then use the "free will" argument in defence of this. What they don't realise is that this says that God is not omnipotent, free will is something that God cannot create without suffering. There is a limit to his power. Sorry theists, you can't have your cake and eat it too with this one.

In addition, this ridiculous premise is what drives the suicide bombers to fly planes into buildings, the pain of their death is just a "bee-sting" compared to eternity with their 72 virgins.

But it does matter, because that it was exactly what we were arguing over. I said that the only reason we say that a God is omni-w/e is because thats what the holy books tell us. That is the original source of the information. I am surprised that we are still arguing over this. Let me raise the challenge then, if not from the holy books, then where does this information come from?

I'll just copy paste what I said previously, since you obviously didn't read it. "I have already posted the quote that completely explained why evolution DOES NOT break the second law." He hasn't refuted that since, instead he jumped to the separate topic that the universe is an isolated system.

I've read the Bible cover to cover. I've done a bible study course at my university as well. Hell exists, you are there for eternity, and it is a place of torture, nowhere in the bible does it say hell is a place of teaching - I don't know how you've come to that assumption, unless your putting words into God's mouth.

Any literal view of the Bible utterly fails, as there are so many contradictions within the Bible, not just between books - but within books, hell (pun lol), even within a single page. In order to make any sense of the Bible you have to "reinterpret" it, which is a slippery slope as you can then just pretend the Bible is telling you whatever matches your own beliefs. You would think that an omniscient being would be able to write something that is a little more intelligible and didn't require so much "interpretation" from his readers.

Yeah, so maybe I am arrogant, argumentum ad hominem is useless in discussion - don't even know why you bothered typing it, unless you enjoy weakening your own statements.

Rewrite it from a less biased point of view? That's the whole point of the site for fudge sake! They come across as bias to any believer because that's exactly what they are doing - challenging your beliefs. And I think you are rather exaggerating when you say they "lather" every proof in rhetoric. It's rhetoric is mild compared to most of the literature I read. God-hate-junk is just another silly extravagant phrase, they don't hate God because they don't believe God exists. I also like how you managed to type that whole paragraph without specifically refuting anything on the site, no doubt you only gave it a brief glimpse and jumped to a false conclusion. I will give you another challenge, refute just one of their 50 proofs, just one.

Groundless statement.




@CAPTWILL
Didn't know that, now I do, thanks.

And if religion didn't exist he would have had one less dogmatic concept to use to motivate the people.
This is also starting to look like the "no true scotsman fallacy". Bin Laden identified himself as religious, he extensively studied the Koran, specifically, the Jihad; and he used religious arguments in his speeches. On what grounds do we say that he wasn't religiously motivated? To say his motives were purely political seems to me a thinly veiled attempt at excusing his religious motivations. Same goes for Hitler.

Nationalism has the potential to become dogma. Religion is dogma by definition.




@JAFF
The Incredible Hulk would disagree. And dare I mention Chuck Norris?





@VRAEL SECOND POST
This is the typical cherry picking you see from theists. You say the Bible is the true word of God yet you discard all the parts you disagree with (misogyny, sadism, sacrifices, torture, genocide etc.) and keep the rest.

Well this is the interesting philosophical debate about free will. Determinism, Libertarianism, Compatibilism, take your pick. I pose a third challenge toward you Vrael, or anyone else who thinks they have the answer please go ahead. If we are to accept the notion of a Divine Plan, how can we possibly argue that we free? And a follow up question - if we are not free, then what is so just about punishing us for the actions that our Divine Plan entails we carry out. A third and final follow up question, if there is an unchangeable Divine Plan, then why pray to God for this or for that? I will be impressed if you come up with satisfactory answers.

Until next time,
Pinky.

The 100 years of suffering are because God is a JUST God. A lot of people forget this, and focus on the love aspect of God. Sure, God is a loving God, but just as a loving father punishes his children for wrongdoing, so God punishes us for OUR wrongdoing.

God allows suffering to exist. I doubt anyone will try and refute that.

The information about God or a god/gods comes from the dictionary.

And @ your final point:

Free will is fairly complicated, but I'll do my best.
God foreknew what is going to happen. He foreknew that I would write these words. Yet who is writing them? Is God writing them? No, I am writing them. I have free will in that sense.

We pray to God because He commands it. We also pray to God because it can make things happen. Sort of. Here's example.

Billy prays that it will rain tomorrow, and it does. But then Billy gets thinking. He decides it would have rained regardless of his prayer. So he doesn't pray for it again, and it doesn't happen. Now, God foreknew that Billy would pray for rain, so He caused it to rain. He also foreknew that Billy wouldn't pray for rain again, so He didn't make it rain again.

That's a fairly simple explanation, but I think it gets the point across as to why we pray.

AAAAARRRRGH!!!!! WHERE DO YOU THINK THE DICTIONARY GETS IT FROM?? THINK!

If you believe in God, and as we all know there is suffering in the world - then of course you cannot refute it. But you then have to wonder, is God allowing suffering to exist because he is malevolent or uncaring (which refutes benevolence), or is he incapable of creating free will without suffering (which refutes omnipotence).

Surely you must see how this is wrong. Look at all the people who suffered in this world who were God-loving people. Look at all the people who the theists say are going to hell simply because they don't "believe" a God exists. How can your God be a jealous God, a just God, and a omnibenevolent God. The answer? There is none - because God is made-up.

You make a good point. So God's Divine Plan isn't so much a Plan as it is a Foretelling? Please elaborate on what exactly a Divine Plan is.

He's telling you to do something and you are obeying. Hmmm, that doesn't sound like free will to me, that sounds like slavery.

This is conformation bias. Your forgetting all the time's people prayers go unanswered. If you take off your God-lenses, you quickly see that prayer has no statistical significance whatsoever.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on May 29 2010, 12:01 pm by Pinky.