Story of Job & the contradiciton of a kind & loving god.

Jack_Glass_1903
atheist
Jack_Glass_1903's picture
Posts: 28
Joined: 2011-10-26
User is offlineOffline
Story of Job & the contradiciton of a kind & loving god.

Hi folks, I'm a newb, but a big time atheist and would especially like to know the thoughts of Christians (or anyone really) on what I feel is an example of a god abusing his power for amusement purposes.

In the book of Job, the character Job is a wealthy and religious man, blessed with children, wealth & land etc. One day it appears the devil tempts god into a bet against how faithful Job would be if all his belongings were taken away.

Apparently his kids are killed, 500 yoke of oxen & 500 donkeys carried off by Sabeans, 7000 sheep were burned up by 'The fire of God which fell from the sky,' 3000 camels were stolen by the Chaldeans and the house of the firstborn collapsed, due to a mighty wind. (Note: copied from wikipedia for quickness). Then the devil has a go at him and give him boils and whatever else he sees fit. I fail to see why destroying this mans life has done anything except appeal to a gods vanity.

My questions:

1. Why would a loving & caring god do this to his own creation, someone that has worshiped and loved him? This is beyond a test of faith, it's horrendous.

2. Did the devil tempt god and win? Maybe the devil thought, "i can't believe the big guy fell for that and abused one of his own".

3. Is god just a megalomaniac & bully who enjoys abusing the little people?

 

Scotland The Brave


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
I vote for #3, malignant

I vote for #3, malignant thug.  But then, I'm not a theist.

 


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Look

 

 

I think it's just a metaphor to explain unanswered prayers. I seriously doubt god ever tortured Job or intervened directly in the days of iron any more than he intervenes now. This hitherto unchallenged truth seems irrefutable proof that some jewish priest (do correct me with the actual author anyone who cares to google 'who wrote job') just made this story up to urge all those people out there in Judaism-land to jolly well stop saying that god does not exist every time bad things happened to them.

Instead they should be like Job who happily saw his entire family choked by satan's boil-encrusted frogs but who never stopped believing! Good old Job! No one had it worse than he did! And in the end, after all those trials he was given a brand new family and double the herd of goats! So just because your new baby was taken by a mountain lion and you have a gangrenous leg, stop bloody whining. It was nothing to what happened to Job. Suck it up. Next year you'll have twins! 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Jack_Glass_1903
atheist
Jack_Glass_1903's picture
Posts: 28
Joined: 2011-10-26
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:  I

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

 

I think it's just a metaphor to explain unanswered prayers. I seriously doubt god ever tortured Job or intervened directly in the days of iron any more than he intervenes now. This hitherto unchallenged truth seems irrefutable proof that some jewish priest (do correct me with the actual author anyone who cares to google 'who wrote job') just made this story up to urge all those people out there in Judaism-land to jolly well stop saying that god does not exist every time bad things happened to them.

Instead they should be like job who happily saw his entire family choked by satan's boil-encrusted frogs but who never stopped believing! Good, old Job! No one had it worse than he did. And in the end, after all those trials he was given a brand new family and double the herd of goats! So just because your new baby was taken by a mountain lion, stop bloody whining. It was nothing to what happened to Job. Suck it up. Next year you'll have twins! 

 

It's most likely a story written to get a point across I agree. That's an underlying point I was making. Where does the reality start and the fiction end in the bible and who decides what's real and what's not?

That's worse because it allows christians to cherry pick what they deem as real and what's fable. It's also dependant on the interpreter and reader of course. I'm sure there's many folk who treat the bible as a literal piece of work and many that do not, but each thinking they're interpretation is the right one.

This is why I despair at all religion. They can barely agree on the colour of red.

 

Scotland The Brave


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
As you say Jack

 

 

where does the reality start. My fundy christian mother believes job was a real person, that jonah was inside the whale, that all life was loaded aboard the bundeena ferry by Mr and Mrs Noah and their mighty proactive brood. She believes rainbows are a message from god, finds god in a flower, a sprouting seed. I get it with the sense of awe but for the rest of it I'm quite lost. My elder brother cherry picks. The OT is mostly myth, says he, especially the parts that make no sense. But the NT is Walkley Award winning journalism written by old sweats from the Jerusalem Herald Tribune exactly as it happened. Even the bits where jesus was alone in the desert and they quote him verbatim. 

What is truth. What can be proven to be true. Would we know what was true if we saw it. What is our standard for evidence. Can we agree on the veracity of the scientific method. When it comes to arguments with the godly all the rules are out the window. The supernatural is explained by gaps in neurology, by the subjectivity of personal experience, by philosophy. Somehow the godly manage to cleave to the idea that there's evidence that is not material evidence. As if imaginary evidence has the supernatural stamp of approval. And they elevate this supernatural evidence to a position of precedence over materialism and empiricism. In order to perceive reality, first comes the immaterial, they cry.

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13405
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
The bible is certainly fun

The bible is certainly fun to pick apart. AND Job is certainly an example of WTF? when dealing with the claim of all loving.

It is a bet between God and Lucifer. Trading Places(The movie) would be a modern example of the immorality of the story. Job is basically a lab rat, and a abused lab rat at that too.

But even before you get to that book, the claim "all loving" doesn't jive with all of the history of human reality. There has not been one period in human evolution where there wasn't disease, natural disaster and clan/tribal war.

If a parent stuck their baby in a house full of broken glass, cockroaches, child molesters, ecoli, those parents would be arrested and the child taken away.

The bad in life is not the result of a cosmic villain  or a cosmic super hero. Bad things happen because they do. But when you insert the claim "all loving" and "all powerful" into the mix it makes no sense. When harm comes to a baby SANE parents do everything they can to avoid that harm to their child. But the comic book character god is a selective deadbeat.

When one accepts that bad is not magic, then you can seek to study the bad and come up with solutions to minimize the harm bad can do. There is no magic needed to explain either the good or bad that happen in life.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3132
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
If you read the Book of Job,

If you read the Book of Job, Yahweh gives his answer.

Basically he says your puny little human mind can't understand my ways.

Christians that go along with this explanation are behaving like and abused co-dependant or Stockholm Syndrome victim. Christians behave like the bullied kid that turns over his lunch money because they could never stand up to one so powerful.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13405
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:If you read the

EXC wrote:

If you read the Book of Job, Yahweh gives his answer.

Basically he says your puny little human mind can't understand my ways.

Christians that go along with this explanation are behaving like and abused co-dependant or Stockholm Syndrome victim. Christians behave like the bullied kid that turns over his lunch money because they could never stand up to one so powerful.

This is true for any god claim with the "all" attributes. You cannot reason or question such a being. It has absolute power. It cannot be voted out of office. It cannot be impeached. It cannot be moved. It is the very definition of a dictator.

In name only, but England is still under a dictatorship(in name only) if The Queen tried to pull what her ancestors did in the early kingdoms, the population would revolt today.

The reality is that this is merely a fictional character that people falsely believe to be real. The sad part is that it relies on the person swallowing false promises of utopias that don't exist.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Lion IRC
Theist
Lion IRC's picture
Posts: 158
Joined: 2011-03-16
User is offlineOffline
Book of Job - A story about that egotistical, stupid bully satan

Jack_Glass_1903 wrote:

 

1. Why would a loving & caring god do this to his own creation, someone that has worshiped and loved him? This is beyond a test of faith, it's horrendous.

By the time the story ends Job had twice as much (Job 42:10) as when it started. Gee, thanks God! 

 

Jack_Glass_1903 wrote:

2. Did the devil tempt god and win? Maybe the devil thought, "i can't believe the big guy fell for that and abused one of his own".

Note that everthing was fine at the beginning of the story. Job's happy. God is happy. Then the foolish (hey look everybody, I'm gonna pick a fight with God) satan wanders into the scene. There's a powerful moral here.

 

Jack_Glass_1903 wrote:

3. Is god just a megalomaniac & bully who enjoys abusing the little people?

You will find that satan was the bully in the story (Job 2:7). He was the one who tried to pick a fight with God. God won. Funny that.

 


Lion IRC
Theist
Lion IRC's picture
Posts: 158
Joined: 2011-03-16
User is offlineOffline
Book of Job - a study in Gods' ways.

EXC wrote:

If you read the Book of Job, Yahweh gives his answer.

Basically he says your puny little human mind can't understand my ways.

How do you reason that? The book is a wonderful explanation of God's ways. Job knew a lot more about God by the end of the story. (See Job 42:5)

 

 

EXC wrote:

Christians that go along with this explanation are behaving like and abused co-dependant or Stockholm Syndrome victim. Christians behave like the bullied kid that turns over his lunch money because they could never stand up to one so powerful.

Nope. Wrong. There is no bullying by God in Christian theology. Quite the opposite. He protects people FROM bullies. "Deliver me O Lord form the evil man: preserve me from the violent man" (Psalms 140:1) 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13405
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Lion IRC

Lion IRC wrote:

Jack_Glass_1903 wrote:

 

1. Why would a loving & caring god do this to his own creation, someone that has worshiped and loved him? This is beyond a test of faith, it's horrendous.

By the time the story ends Job had twice as much (Job 42:10) as when it started. Gee, thanks God! 

 

Jack_Glass_1903 wrote:

2. Did the devil tempt god and win? Maybe the devil thought, "i can't believe the big guy fell for that and abused one of his own".

Note that everthing was fine at the beginning of the story. Job's happy. God is happy. Then the foolish (hey look everybody, I'm gonna pick a fight with God) satan wanders into the scene. There's a powerful moral here.

 

Jack_Glass_1903 wrote:

3. Is god just a megalomaniac & bully who enjoys abusing the little people?

You will find that satan was the bully in the story (Job 2:7). He was the one who tried to pick a fight with God. God won. Funny that.

 

BULLSHIT

It was a bet. Why did God take the bet? Because he knew he would win, which makes Job a lab rat.

Neither the God character or his minion Satan are real. The story is about loyalty, as a motif, an idea. But what makes it horrible from a moral standpoint is that the leader ALLOWS it to happen. Satan is not the leader. God allows his loyal fan Job to get the shit kicked out of him over a bet.

It WAS  a sucker bet. If you know God would win, why would he allow an innocent third party, not involved in the bet,  get fucked up by his beef with Satan?

EXAMPLE  using used car salesmen:

Salesman: "Hey owner, I bet I can sell this lemon to this sucker and he'll never buy another car from you."

Dealership owner: "I'm sure you can sell him a car, but he'll buy his next car from us too because I'll fire you after you sell it to him and have some other salesman make more empty promises".

God in this MOTIF as a story, as a character, is a manifesto on how to set up a street side Three Card Monty table in Vegas. But in this story he has a minion scout the streets for customers.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
No there's not

 

Lion IRC wrote:

 

There's a powerful moral here.

 

 

there's a completely arbitrary and inconsistent morality. This is a foolish and contrived tale and your implication that there really was a satan who really picked a fight with a god comes springloaded with so many assertions unsupported by facts you are making my head spin. This is a story penned by priests to encourage the dubious to believe in the religion that fed them in the face of the typical hardships of life before asprin. Interpreting this story literally puts you under a burden of proof. 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3132
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Lion IRC wrote:How do you

Lion IRC wrote:

How do you reason that? The book is a wonderful explanation of God's ways. Job knew a lot more about God by the end of the story. (See Job 42:5)

 

Where does he answer these questions about why he allows suffering? He gives no answer other than you're nothing without me because I'm it. Same as a pimp, kidnapper or wife abuser. They tell their victim they're nothing without them.

 

Lion IRC wrote:

Nope. Wrong. There is no bullying by God in Christian theology. Quite the opposite. He protects people FROM bullies. "Deliver me O Lord form the evil man: preserve me from the violent man" (Psalms 140:1) 

When Yahweh told Jonah to go to Nineveh and deliver a message that he will destroy them if they don't repent and worship him. What was that? Give me your lunch money or I'll beat you up, only 100 times worse. It happened a bunch of time in the OT. And then Jesus gives all the warnings about sending people to hell, please. You're suffering from Stockholm Syndrome, get some help.

 

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5809
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Lion IRC

Lion IRC wrote:

Jack_Glass_1903 wrote:

 

1. Why would a loving & caring god do this to his own creation, someone that has worshiped and loved him? This is beyond a test of faith, it's horrendous.

By the time the story ends Job had twice as much (Job 42:10) as when it started. Gee, thanks God! 

And how did that work out for his family???

Quote:

 

Jack_Glass_1903 wrote:

2. Did the devil tempt god and win? Maybe the devil thought, "i can't believe the big guy fell for that and abused one of his own".

Note that everthing was fine at the beginning of the story. Job's happy. God is happy. Then the foolish (hey look everybody, I'm gonna pick a fight with God) satan wanders into the scene. There's a powerful moral here.

Jack_Glass_1903 wrote:

3. Is god just a megalomaniac & bully who enjoys abusing the little people?

You will find that satan was the bully in the story (Job 2:7). He was the one who tried to pick a fight with God. God won. Funny that.

Satan has plenty of fun, and God does not need to let him fuck with people, so ultimately God is the evil one.

The vast bulk of the evidence is that if there is a super-powerful being involved in this world, he is incompetent or evil. Definitely not 'loving'.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5087
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Again, reading all this

 

 

I feel that discussing the problem of evil is apportioning credence to god's existence in the absence of proof. Mmmm. I don't like the problem of evil as a proof/disproof of god. I think this story reflects the misshapen cultural morality of the people who wrote it. In this distorted reality you can kill a man's loved ones and make amends with a double helping of goats.

This tale reflects the inconsistency of pre-conventional morality, a landscape of reward and punishment and blatant self interest orientation. There's no consideration for those who died. We see no sign of conventional morality either but most importantly, there's no sign of post conventional morality that informs modern social interactions. There's no universal altruism here, no sign of a social contract consistently maintained by the person in authority to all individuals in a group. This is school yard morality at its most arbitrary.  

The lesson of Job is that human morals evolve and that human mythology cannot. 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Jack_Glass_1903
atheist
Jack_Glass_1903's picture
Posts: 28
Joined: 2011-10-26
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:  I

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

 

I feel that discussing the problem of evil is apportioning credence to god's existence in the absence of proof. Mmmm. I don't like the problem of evil as a proof/disproof of god. I think this story reflects the misshapen cultural morality of the people who wrote it. In this distorted reality you can kill a man's loved ones and make amends with a double helping of goats.

This tale reflects the inconsistency of pre-conventional morality, a landscape of reward and punishment and blatant self interest orientation. There's no consideration for those who died. We see no sign of conventional morality either but most importantly, there's no sign of post conventional morality that informs modern social interactions. There's no universal altruism here, no sign of a social contract consistently maintained by the person in authority to all individuals in a group. This is school yard morality at its most arbitrary.  

The lesson of Job is that human morals evolve and that human mythology cannot. 

 

Exactly, could not have worded that better myself. Any morality or any level of kindness in the story is flung right out the window. Basically we're accepting a god who's willing to treat us like lab rats, without compassion.

Using evil to counter religion is a dodgy one because it then sets the theist in full religious mode. Soon as they hear evil the devil get's involved and clogs their irrational thoughts even further.

 

Scotland The Brave


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
My fuzzy recollection is

My fuzzy recollection is that the Book of Job is attributed to Moses and is literary, not historical.  In the Jewish canon, "Job" is neither "Law" nor "Prophets".  It's in the same section as Psalms and Proverbs -- "Writings".

Interpreting Job as a lab experiment or "wager between G-d and Ha'Satan" ignores a key fact of human existence -- why do people who are otherwise "well-off" or "content" or "secure i their existence" experience severe hardship, and what should they do about it?  Should they, as Job's wife suggested, "curse G-d and die", or is there something more going on.

Saying that "this is all a test" ignores the end of the story -- you really haven't a clue what is going on, and that includes claiming human existence is a set of trials we're all supposed to endure to "prove" our faith, or lack thereof, in G-d.  Maybe this is just the way it works?  Maybe kids who fall off balconies at age 9 break their arm (Hi!!!) because without gravity, we'd all float off into space.  I don't think breaking my arm was a "test", I think it was an example of gravity accelerating my body and the ground decelerating it.

I got into an argument with someone who claimed G-d was evil because of disease, but many of the organisms that cause "disease" also aid in recycling organic matter back into something other organisms can use.  How much more overpopulated would the world be if no one ever died?  You think 7 billion is bad, we'd have a lot more people on the planet if no one ever died.  How many more cats and dogs would there be if Fluffy and Spike never died?  What species get to experience physical eternal life -- just us, or is the planet buried under all the animals that ever lived, forever.

If "no one ever dies" is "good", I think we need a new planet.  A much =bigger= and far more massive planet.  With gravity so strong it crushes us.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13405
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:My

FurryCatHerder wrote:

My fuzzy recollection is that the Book of Job is attributed to Moses and is literary, not historical.  In the Jewish canon, "Job" is neither "Law" nor "Prophets".  It's in the same section as Psalms and Proverbs -- "Writings".

Interpreting Job as a lab experiment or "wager between G-d and Ha'Satan" ignores a key fact of human existence -- why do people who are otherwise "well-off" or "content" or "secure i their existence" experience severe hardship, and what should they do about it?  Should they, as Job's wife suggested, "curse G-d and die", or is there something more going on.

Saying that "this is all a test" ignores the end of the story -- you really haven't a clue what is going on, and that includes claiming human existence is a set of trials we're all supposed to endure to "prove" our faith, or lack thereof, in G-d.  Maybe this is just the way it works?  Maybe kids who fall off balconies at age 9 break their arm (Hi!!!) because without gravity, we'd all float off into space.  I don't think breaking my arm was a "test", I think it was an example of gravity accelerating my body and the ground decelerating it.

I got into an argument with someone who claimed G-d was evil because of disease, but many of the organisms that cause "disease" also aid in recycling organic matter back into something other organisms can use.  How much more overpopulated would the world be if no one ever died?  You think 7 billion is bad, we'd have a lot more people on the planet if no one ever died.  How many more cats and dogs would there be if Fluffy and Spike never died?  What species get to experience physical eternal life -- just us, or is the planet buried under all the animals that ever lived, forever.

If "no one ever dies" is "good", I think we need a new planet.  A much =bigger= and far more massive planet.  With gravity so strong it crushes us.

Always the cop out. When it doesn't make sense it is a metaphore, not literally historical. Even if just metaphorical it depicts a sick bet where the third party(Job) is a mere pawn in their dick measuring contest.

Would you write a children's book where two bullies make a bet about the geeky nerd on the block?

Bully one, "I bet I can get Poindexter over there to go on a killing spree"

Bully two, "I bet you you cant, he pays me with his milk money for protection. You can beat the crap out of him all you want, but he is far too loyal to me."

But this is part and parcel of the morality of the Mafia boss called God. He'll protect you, not out of selflessness or consent of the governed, but out of selfish self centeredness. Just like racketeering, he goes from business to business and says "If you don't pay me protection money I wont protect you'.

And as far as Mosses, there is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE at all that Jews were ever slaves under the Egyptians. And just like all cultures back then, it was blasphemy for a slave to touch foot, much less help build monuments or tombs.

Whatever real people mentioned in the bible, does not make magic real. It doesn't make magic babies real. It doesn't make invisible non material brains real.

We know that George Washington existed. But no sane person would claim he could fart a Lamborghini out of his ass.

Your Hebrew books, are no different than the bible. They are a tribal book of myth. And worse, handed down by a cosmic dictator whose only goal for you to kiss his ass.

Now, before you falsely spew" You hate me". Yes, my words are harsh. But it is much like cold water in your face "WAKE UP"!

It all boils down, minus the god label, of any religion, to humans inventing gods and using bad logic to prop up a myth. In this case, The story of Job, is just as sick morally, regardless of claiming it to be true or metaphor. It treats a human as a third party as a pawn over a stupid bet. It demeans humans reducing them to lab rats, as a story. It causes the believer who buys it, even if just as "good morals", to put themselves at risk of getting used by others because of the self inflicted delusion of the false promise of a super hero.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5809
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
So the parasites in Africa

So the parasites in Africa whose life-cycle involves burrowing into the eyes of children, rendering them blind, serve some 'purpose'???

That particular example, referred to by David Attenborough, when quizzed about why he made no reference to God in his nature documentaries, as the 'creator' of all the 'wonders' of the world of life, is just one of many, which are readily explicable by blind evolutionary processes, but are highly questionable as the work of a loving and caring 'God'.

The world in all aspects makes far more sense as the result of emergent complexity than as the work of a being who would in turn require explanation.

There is zero basis for assuming whatever 'caused' the universe was sentient, let alone 'good'.

You cannot derive an absolute standard of morality from an imagined God, since the 'morality' and purpose and motives of such a being would be utterly beyond our comprehension. The 'good' is not judged by its correspondence with the edicts of any authority figure, otherwise we could not condemn the Nazis whose 'defence' would have been 'they were just following orders'.

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian,The story is a story

Brian,

The story is a story because that's where it's put in the Hebrew bible.  The "Tanakh" is divided into three parts --

Torah -- Teachings and Law.

Nevi'im -- Prophecy.

Kethuv'im -- Literature.

 

Job is in the "literature" section.

I can deal with any valid attacks you might want to toss my way, but if you're going to critique texts written by Jews, at least make sure you've got the right Dewey Decimal number going for you before you attack.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level ModeratorSilver Member
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1708
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
Our god is an awesome god

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

 

I feel that discussing the problem of evil is apportioning credence to god's existence in the absence of proof. Mmmm. I don't like the problem of evil as a proof/disproof of god. I think this story reflects the misshapen cultural morality of the people who wrote it. In this distorted reality you can kill a man's loved ones and make amends with a double helping of goats.

This tale reflects the inconsistency of pre-conventional morality, a landscape of reward and punishment and blatant self interest orientation. There's no consideration for those who died. We see no sign of conventional morality either but most importantly, there's no sign of post conventional morality that informs modern social interactions. There's no universal altruism here, no sign of a social contract consistently maintained by the person in authority to all individuals in a group. This is school yard morality at its most arbitrary.  

The lesson of Job is that human morals evolve and that human mythology cannot. 

 

AE, you have mentioned in other threads about looking at these stories through our modern eyes and how that can be problematic. We certainly are far more moral than these primitive people. The book of Job is considered the oldest book in the bible. Also, it has two parts stuck together. You can see/feel it even in the English. The first and last sections are poetry and the middle is prose. Because the styles are quite different they because there were at least two authors and whoever compiled it thought it fit nicely together. 

But anyway, as far as the morals I don't think the primitive Jews would see a problem at all with Job losing his first family, because women & children were equivalent to cattle. It was all property. So from that perspective it wouldn't be such a horror. And anyway since the bible was written by men what a great way to get laid by different women. 

It is quite a sick story and as was said it smacks of the Stockholm Syndrome. But Jehovah has been doing this all along. Telling Abraham to kill his son is simply cruel and unusual "punishment" and the diaspora & forcing His children to eat their children.

 

God takes pleasure in tripping up humans.

1 Kings 22:19-23 wrote:

Micaiah continued, “Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne with all the host of heaven standing around him on his right and on his left.  And the LORD said, ‘Who will entice Ahab into attacking Ramoth Gilead and going to his death there?’ “One suggested this, and another that. Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the LORD and said, ‘I will entice him.’ “‘By what means?’ the LORD asked. “‘I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,’ he said. “‘You will succeed in enticing him,’ said the LORD. ‘Go and do it.’ “So now the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The LORD has decreed disaster for you.”

 

I love this text because god is hung up on his good name. ROTF

Ezekiel 20:21-22 wrote:
But the children [Israel] rebelled against me: They did not follow my decrees, they were not careful to keep my laws—although the man who obeys them will live by them and they desecarated my Sabbaths. So I said I would pour out my wrath on them and spend my anger against them in the desert. But I withheld my hand, and for the sake of my name I did what would keep it from being profaned in the eyes of the nations in whose sight I had brought them out.
 

 

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
ex-minister wrote:There's no

ex-minister wrote:
There's no universal altruism here, no sign of a social contract consistently maintained by the person in authority to all individuals in a group.

Do you have any children that you've raised to adulthood?

When you were busy raising these hypothetical children to adulthood, did you insure that they never had to stand on their own two feet?  Did you insure that they would be as dependent on you for their survival as wild animals are on the G-d that you no longer believe in?

When you were busy raising these hypothetical children to adulthood, did you let them know (as Penn Gillette, Famous Atheist, has said he would do) that if they committed a crime, you would shield them from the penalties of the laws they had violated, going so far as to conceal them from the police, and deny justice to the victims of their crimes?

Because if the G-d you don't believe in has to provide free goodies from heaven, keep us in a constant state of dependence, and prevent us from ever experiencing the consequences of our actions, not only do I =not= believe in that god, I will clearly state that any deity who behaved that way, is evil.

When Katrina, which is in that "Awesome G-d" video, passed a few miles east (close enough that the distance from the eye wall to the eye was a major part of the distance from his house to the eye) of where my father lived at the time, I prayed for his safety, and planned to go find him.  By Thursday, I was heading eastbound at between 100 and 110MPH right into where Katrina had just been less than a week earlier.  Over the next 18 months, I worked with Atheists, Christians, Anarchists, Marxists, Communists, garden variety Hippies, and the rest of the entire spectrum of humanity.  Do you know how many of the Atheists I worked with asked me how G-d allowed Katrina to destroy entire cities and kill hundreds of people?  None.  Not a single one.  I'm not a closet Jew, so it isn't like I wasn't a target to question.

When Atheists start raising their children they way they complain G-d doesn't treat the planet, THEN you'll have a moral leg to stand on.

I've read the Atheism United "mission statement" thread and I can see people who are arguing for what I call "Eat The Poor".  Basically, the poor are poor, f*ck them.  The Torah says "Do not oppress the poor, the widow or the orphan" and Atheism United's mission statement will probably be silent on the issue of Social Justice because a bunch of "libertarians" think the poor should be sh*t on.  So, you complain that G-d doesn't give free goodies from Heaven, and gee, by the way, you can't even decide people need free goodies from whomever.  But if G-d isn't handing out free goodies -- Bad god, no biscuit!

Hypocrites.

When you construct a better world than the world you're complaining G-d hasn't created, you get back to me.  When that day comes, which will be about a week after Ha'Moshiach ben David shows up, we'll talk.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level ModeratorSilver Member
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1708
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
me as G-d

 Furry,

You are attributing a quote to me that belongs to Atheistextremist. He can respond should he choose. I cannot speak for AE nor can I speak for Penn Gillette. I have great respect for Atheistextremist. However, as others know here, I have nearly no respect for Penn. Penn is an entertainer. He says outrageous things, he has got tickets to sell.

But here is my response. I have two kids and they are adults. We have a great relationship today and they were just typical kids. I have not been put into the situation you are trying to parallel. However, let me consider this. Let me be the all-power G-d, who knows all, sees all and is ruler of the universe. He can do anything he wishes. The one who created the vast universe and also the smallest microbe. Nothing gets past his eye, there is nothing he cannot start or stop. I assume another attribute is he loves his children (creation).

Would I put my children in a perfect place and would I create them as innocent, unsuspecting, and very curious about life? Yes.

And would I put right in the middle of the room, so to speak, something that would cause their death and tell them under no circumstance should they touch it? Would I create them such that they would not understand what death and evil mean? Would I leave this "death device" unprotected so they could easily walk right up to it? Would I make it something desirable like food? Would I allow my worst enemy to change himself into something very attractive and let him entice my kids to break my rules? Would I stand and watch? Here I must say no.

Despite this, if somehow they did something truly terrible like eat a piece of fruit which I told them not to eat, would I cast them from my presence and bring about not only their death but the death of generations to come? Would I so disappear from their lives so that they and their children, grandchildren, great-grand children, etc. would become unsure if I even existed? (Do you approve of absentee fathers? Is that a sign of love for you?) Would I only speak to a few select ones through mystery clouds and strange words and miracles? Would I speak to only these few and tell them to go kill other people who I was not speaking to or on occasion just kill them myself? Would I punish some of the generations forcing them to eat their own children? Would I not write to them (well through the few chosen) for thousands of years and expect them to still love & respect me? 

You have brought a very good parallel that you should ponder? Read your scripture as if it was a next door neighbor and his relationship with his children. When I have read them that way, I quickly realize this bastard needs to be locked up.

FCH wrote:

When Katrina, which is in that "Awesome G-d" video, passed a few miles east (close enough that the distance from the eye wall to the eye was a major part of the distance from his house to the eye) of where my father lived at the time, I prayed for his safety, and planned to go find him.  By Thursday, I was heading eastbound at between 100 and 110MPH right into where Katrina had just been less than a week earlier.  Over the next 18 months, I worked with Atheists, Christians, Anarchists, Marxists, Communists, garden variety Hippies, and the rest of the entire spectrum of humanity.  Do you know how many of the Atheists I worked with asked me how G-d allowed Katrina to destroy entire cities and kill hundreds of people?  None.  Not a single one.  I'm not a closet Jew, so it isn't like I wasn't a target to question.

What's the point of an atheist getting all up in your grill when they are helping those in need? That is not a forum for such a thing. This however is. Didn't you notice that when you registered?

 

FurryCatHerder wrote:

When Atheists start raising their children they way they complain G-d doesn't treat the planet, THEN you'll have a moral leg to stand on.

There is something about the construct of this sentence that I am not getting. I think I know what you mean and have addressed it above. I do have a moral leg to stand on. Abusing children is abhorrent. Jehovah (aka G-d) is evil, plain and simple.

 

FCH wrote:

 

I've read the Atheism United "mission statement" thread and I can see people who are arguing for what I call "Eat The Poor".  Basically, the poor are poor, f*ck them.  The Torah says "Do not oppress the poor, the widow or the orphan" and Atheism United's mission statement will probably be silent on the issue of Social Justice because a bunch of "libertarians" think the poor should be sh*t on.  So, you complain that G-d doesn't give free goodies from Heaven, and gee, by the way, you can't even decide people need free goodies from whomever.  But if G-d isn't handing out free goodies -- Bad god, no biscuit!

 

Hypocrites.

Did you miss this part? 

The Atheist United Vision wrote:

To champion goals that serve the people such as making healthcare and a full education affordable or free for all.

Did you not work side by side with atheist to assist those devastated by Katrina? I think you have clear evidence of atheist word & deed that we are caring and moral people.

FCH wrote:

When you construct a better world than the world you're complaining G-d hasn't created, you get back to me.  When that day comes, which will be about a week after Ha'Moshiach ben David shows up, we'll talk.

I see no reason to wait to talk, but perhaps that is what the religious like to do. Their sky daddy has all the answers and those others had just better shut up and take it up where the sun don't shine. I am not G-d Furry. There is no G-d. There is just you and me. I don't have superpowers, but I do what I can to improve my tiny, tiny little corner. I fully believe and practice helping others and doing no harm. I see religion separating us and much harm comes from it. Shall I like your G-d sit by and watch, with an apparent evil twist to the smile?

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
I assume from your 'nym, as

I assume from your 'nym, as well as your interpretation of the text, that you were a former minister in a right-of-center Christian denomination.

This is how I read the text --

Ever notice how once a kid stops being a mass of boogers and poop that they think the world of you and hang on your ever word?

Ever notice how after a while they start to test boundaries and express their own independent way of thinking?

Ever notice how after that happens, they start to ignore and disagree with you and do their own damned thing whether you like it or not?

Ever notice they don't call as often as they once did?

That's what the story is about.

You want to blame G-d for children being like that?  Do you think learning to think on your own, being independent, not being a clone of ones parents, becoming parents with families and problems of their own is a bad idea?  Do you =really= think that?

If you =really= think that, then you can complain about G-d.  Because I read the story as describing reality.  If you don't think that, enjoy the story because it's just a story to move the plot along.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Two-for-one

Two-for-one special!

ex-minister wrote:

Did you miss this part? 

The Atheist United Vision wrote:

To champion goals that serve the people such as making healthcare and a full education affordable or free for all.

Did you not work side by side with atheist to assist those devastated by Katrina? I think you have clear evidence of atheist word & deed that we are caring and moral people.

Yes, I read that part.  And I read the parts by the people who said that was a bad idea because there is no magic pile of money.

Now, I have a question for you.

Have you ever actually read my signature for comprehension?  Because if you had, you'd already have known the answer to your rhetorical question.  I believe that there =are= atheists who not only are caring and moral people, but I will more than gladly tell anyone who asks that I believe there will be atheists in Heaven (not that I believe in Heaven) and Christians in Hell (not that I believe in Hell) because I believe that what matters most is =action=, not =word=.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13405
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:"Obviously I'm

Quote:
"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question.

This is your sig Furry.

If I am reading it correctly, all it is saying is that people who are dicks get what is coming to them, and people whom I merely disagree with will get passed the velvet ropes.

Here is the reality in evolution and human history. Bad things happen to good people and good things happen to bad people. There is no need for comic book super heros to explain this.

Life is not static and fortunes change. And a "hero" to one is an "enemy" to another.

Life is ultimately a crap shoot. It is not to say our species cannot find good in each other. It is to say that religion and political labels far too often get in the way of understanding the common  every day life success and harm all humans endure.

It sucks for every human to get robbed by their neighbor. It sucks when a loved one gets murdered via crime. It sucks if our children(as a species) get harmed.

It's nice when a loved one succeeds in a business, or school, or sports. It's always nice to spend time with loved ones on birthdays or holidays. There is not one country or society that does not circle around these traits. What we falsely do as a species is mistake a label(ideology) as being more important than our collective human condition, that none of us can escape.

Those social things are evolutionary not dependent on a god or political party to understand.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level ModeratorSilver Member
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1708
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
Need to know

FurryCatHerder wrote:

I assume from your 'nym, as well as your interpretation of the text, that you were a former minister in a right-of-center Christian denomination.

This is how I read the text --

Ever notice how once a kid stops being a mass of boogers and poop that they think the world of you and hang on your ever word?

Ever notice how after a while they start to test boundaries and express their own independent way of thinking?

Ever notice how after that happens, they start to ignore and disagree with you and do their own damned thing whether you like it or not?

Ever notice they don't call as often as they once did?

That's what the story is about.

You want to blame G-d for children being like that?  Do you think learning to think on your own, being independent, not being a clone of ones parents, becoming parents with families and problems of their own is a bad idea?  Do you =really= think that?

If you =really= think that, then you can complain about G-d.  Because I read the story as describing reality.  If you don't think that, enjoy the story because it's just a story to move the plot along.

Well, my kids never changed in wanting to be with me or calling me. Frankly, I tend to be more aloof. I fully expected the day to come but it never did. Perhaps I wasn't a prick to them, but loved and cared for them. When they misbehaved I didn't feel a need to strike out them with a vengeance (vengeance is mine saith the Lord),  but instead I would sit them down and talk to them.  I was always honest with them and didn't portray myself as something perfect and all knowing. They respect me and I respect them. We would do anything for each other. See a trend? 

So, from this and what I have read from your other threads I see you are not a literalists. I guess the bible is no more meaningful to you than any other book. Mark Twain is as inspired as Moses right? So G-d is no thing. The stories made up in the bible are like a piece of art. You see what you want from it and take only what you like? I am thinking you believe we have one life and that is it right? No hell below us, above us only sky? Are you just as Jewish as you are Islamic as you are Hindu? 

Is there any point to prayer for you? Does it go anywhere outside the confines of your head? Is G-d a life force? 

Why do you say there is a messiah coming and that you & I should wait to talk then? Is that a real person and a real event in time or something just like a personal awakening?

 

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level ModeratorSilver Member
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1708
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Two-for-one special!

ex-minister wrote:

Did you miss this part? 

The Atheist United Vision wrote:

To champion goals that serve the people such as making healthcare and a full education affordable or free for all.

Did you not work side by side with atheist to assist those devastated by Katrina? I think you have clear evidence of atheist word & deed that we are caring and moral people.

Yes, I read that part.  And I read the parts by the people who said that was a bad idea because there is no magic pile of money.

Now, I have a question for you.

Have you ever actually read my signature for comprehension?  Because if you had, you'd already have known the answer to your rhetorical question.  I believe that there =are= atheists who not only are caring and moral people, but I will more than gladly tell anyone who asks that I believe there will be atheists in Heaven (not that I believe in Heaven) and Christians in Hell (not that I believe in Hell) because I believe that what matters most is =action=, not =word=.

signature wrote:

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."

No. I hadn't read it. No heaven, no hell, but an afterlife. So you believe in conscientiousness after death or perhaps a resurrection? Do you think those sleeping the dust will awake (Daniel 12:2)?

You have identified two places. Please expand on that. 

So G-d isn't a bad guy, just misrepresented in the bible?

 

 

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
ex-minister

ex-minister wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Have you ever actually read my signature for comprehension?  Because if you had, you'd already have known the answer to your rhetorical question.  I believe that there =are= atheists who not only are caring and moral people, but I will more than gladly tell anyone who asks that I believe there will be atheists in Heaven (not that I believe in Heaven) and Christians in Hell (not that I believe in Hell) because I believe that what matters most is =action=, not =word=.

signature wrote:

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."

No. I hadn't read it. No heaven, no hell, but an afterlife. So you believe in conscientiousness after death or perhaps a resurrection? Do you think those sleeping the dust will awake (Daniel 12:2)?

You have identified two places. Please expand on that. 

So G-d isn't a bad guy, just misrepresented in the bible?

1). G-d isn't a "guy".

2). G-d isn't "good".

3). G-d isn't "bad".

There's no clear mention of any "afterlife" in the non-literary parts of the Bible.  Daniel is in the "literature" section of the Hebrew bible, not the "Law" or "Prophecy" sections.  Christians turned him into a prophet, not us.

Do I believe in an afterlife?  No, but if it happens, sure, why not.  My personal thoughts are that the only "afterlife" we experience is the same way I relate to my dead parents and grandparents (people I've known personal) -- I reflect on what I learned from them and what kind of people they were.  They "live" in my memories of them and their contributions to their family, friends and the rest of the world.  There have been times, fewer and fewer because I'm older and older, when I've tried to understand what they would have suggested I do in life whenever I've been in need of their guidance.  They are "dead" only in the sense that I can't ring them up on the phone.

The 13th Principle Maimonides (z"l) mentions is thus --

"I believe with perfect faith that the dead will be brought back to life when G-d wills it to happen."

If G-d wants to reanimate my dead body, I just hope all the broken parts get fixed -- I'm slowly getting older and falling apart.  Otherwise I'm perfectly content to become worm food.  We are made of star stuff.  Some day we'll go back to being star stuff.

The "afterlife" concept seems to have slowly snuck into Judaism, mostly through contact with pagan cults.  By the time Christians got their hands on Judaism, they went full-blown crazy mixing in Roman paganism wherever they could find it.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
ex-minister wrote:Well, my

ex-minister wrote:

Well, my kids never changed in wanting to be with me or calling me. Frankly, I tend to be more aloof. I fully expected the day to come but it never did. Perhaps I wasn't a prick to them, but loved and cared for them. When they misbehaved I didn't feel a need to strike out them with a vengeance (vengeance is mine saith the Lord),  but instead I would sit them down and talk to them.  I was always honest with them and didn't portray myself as something perfect and all knowing. They respect me and I respect them. We would do anything for each other. See a trend?

I'm very glad things worked out that way for you.  There are a lot of parents, including a lot of parents who've treated their children with respect and dignity, who've discovered that children grow up, move out, and get lives of their own that are sometimes in conflict with what they had in mind for them.

Quote:
So, from this and what I have read from your other threads I see you are not a literalists. I guess the bible is no more meaningful to you than any other book. Mark Twain is as inspired as Moses right? So G-d is no thing. The stories made up in the bible are like a piece of art. You see what you want from it and take only what you like? I am thinking you believe we have one life and that is it right? No hell below us, above us only sky? Are you just as Jewish as you are Islamic as you are Hindu?

Heh.  No, I'm not a Literalist in the Christian tradition of Scriptural Literalism.  Where the Torah should be taken literally, I take it extremely literally.  What I don't do, which is more "Jewish" than "Christian" (and I was this way when I =was= a Christian, much to the chagrin of many a pastor ...) is accept something that appears to be a forced and inaccurate interpretation, especially if there is a less forced and more consistent with Science interpretation.

Quote:
Is there any point to prayer for you? Does it go anywhere outside the confines of your head? Is G-d a life force?

I pray because =I= need to pray.  G-d has no need of my prayers because G-d has no need of anything.  Prayer helps to organize my thoughts and re-orient me back to a less frantic state of being.  When I don't pray, I'm the one who suffers.

Quote:
Why do you say there is a messiah coming and that you & I should wait to talk then? Is that a real person and a real event in time or something just like a personal awakening?

The Jewish Messiah is not like Jesus.  As a messiah, Jesus makes a horrible messiah and I hope he stays gone for the rest of eternity.

The Jewish Messiah is simply whatever leader we happen to have whenever things work out the way they should eventually work out -- the whole "Universal Peace and Brotherhood" concept.  He might help us get there, or he might just be hanging around when it works itself out.  I don't know.  If you care to know more, here's a link --

http://www.jewfaq.org/mashiach.htm

Hopefully it sounds completely different from whatever you taught when you were still a minister.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13405
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder

FurryCatHerder wrote:

ex-minister wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Have you ever actually read my signature for comprehension?  Because if you had, you'd already have known the answer to your rhetorical question.  I believe that there =are= atheists who not only are caring and moral people, but I will more than gladly tell anyone who asks that I believe there will be atheists in Heaven (not that I believe in Heaven) and Christians in Hell (not that I believe in Hell) because I believe that what matters most is =action=, not =word=.

signature wrote:

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."

No. I hadn't read it. No heaven, no hell, but an afterlife. So you believe in conscientiousness after death or perhaps a resurrection? Do you think those sleeping the dust will awake (Daniel 12:2)?

You have identified two places. Please expand on that. 

So G-d isn't a bad guy, just misrepresented in the bible?

1). G-d isn't a "guy".

2). G-d isn't "good".

3). G-d isn't "bad".

There's no clear mention of any "afterlife" in the non-literary parts of the Bible.  Daniel is in the "literature" section of the Hebrew bible, not the "Law" or "Prophecy" sections.  Christians turned him into a prophet, not us.

Do I believe in an afterlife?  No, but if it happens, sure, why not.  My personal thoughts are that the only "afterlife" we experience is the same way I relate to my dead parents and grandparents (people I've known personal) -- I reflect on what I learned from them and what kind of people they were.  They "live" in my memories of them and their contributions to their family, friends and the rest of the world.  There have been times, fewer and fewer because I'm older and older, when I've tried to understand what they would have suggested I do in life whenever I've been in need of their guidance.  They are "dead" only in the sense that I can't ring them up on the phone.

The 13th Principle Maimonides (z"l) mentions is thus --

"I believe with perfect faith that the dead will be brought back to life when G-d wills it to happen."

If G-d wants to reanimate my dead body, I just hope all the broken parts get fixed -- I'm slowly getting older and falling apart.  Otherwise I'm perfectly content to become worm food.  We are made of star stuff.  Some day we'll go back to being star stuff.

The "afterlife" concept seems to have slowly snuck into Judaism, mostly through contact with pagan cults.  By the time Christians got their hands on Judaism, they went full-blown crazy mixing in Roman paganism wherever they could find it.

Furry, all you are doing here is back peddling in an attempt to avoid the older standards of climate of belief. I see no point in believing in a god if there is no after life.The OT character tapped the Hebrews as his "chosen people". What would be the point of allowing that to happen or causing that to happen if there wasn't a plan, and end goal?

You are closer to a Jeffersonian type deist. But even I would have a problem with this concept. It merely is a watered down version of a god claim in an attempt to avoid all the nasty stuff written in the bible. The OT God is bloodthirsty, He gives the Hebrews permission to kill off enemies and take  their property and make sex slaves of their women and girls.

Seriously, if you do not believe in an after life, then you should drop the label "Jewish" AND drop the god claim all together. There really isn't any good reason to hold a god belief of any kind. It is merely your wishful thinking and a matter of culture and tradition.

Furry, you accept that Thor does not make lightening. You accept that the sun is not a thinking being. Those were once believed to be real god/s, as real to those people back then as you believe yours is today. Seriously try to understand why you reject those claims, and apply those standards, to your own claims.

I've said it before and I'll keep saying it. All deity/god/super natural claims have the core concept that a non-material brain exists. This is scientifically impossible and has never happened and will never happen.

God belief is merely human's projecting their wishes in the form of a fictional super hero and falsely believing it to be real. This has always been the case in our species evolution. You are not doing anything differently than the polytheists of the religions you reject nor the monotheism today of the other labels you reject. You simply have a different name for your non-material brain fictional friend in the sky.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian37

Brian37 wrote:

Quote:
"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question.

This is your sig Furry.

If I am reading it correctly, all it is saying is that people who are dicks get what is coming to them, and people whom I merely disagree with will get passed the velvet ropes.

Pretty much, though I'd say that whether or not I agree with them is irrelevant.

Quote:
Here is the reality in evolution and human history. Bad things happen to good people and good things happen to bad people. There is no need for comic book super heros to explain this.

Who do you think stands a better chance of being given "social assistance" -- the "bad" person or the "good" person?

Sure, good things happen to bad people, and bad things happen to good people.  Despite being a "good" person, my mother died from cancer at a fairly young age.  Fair?  Who said life is fair?

Quote:
Life is ultimately a crap shoot. It is not to say our species cannot find good in each other. It is to say that religion and political labels far too often get in the way of understanding the common  every day life success and harm all humans endure.

So ... when bad things happen to good people, they are just as likely to be helped by the anonymous "Fellow Man" than when bad things happen to good people?  Because in my experience, life doesn't work out that way, not even for atheists.  In my experience of life, when bad things happen to good people, they are far more likely to find other people willing to help them get back on their feet.

Quote:
Those social things are evolutionary not dependent on a god or political party to understand.

And the difference is that I attribute that "evolution" to G-d.  You attribute it to random chance, like, maybe it would be okay if male people treated the children of competing male people the way that male lions treat the offspring of competing male lions.  Like us, lions =are= an apex predator.  They are pretty good at doing what they do, and if it weren't for people, they'd be a lot more successful at doing what they do.  So it isn't about "evolutionary success".  We =could= be successful with a different set of social rules.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:FurryCatHerder

Brian37 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

1). G-d isn't a "guy".

2). G-d isn't "good".

3). G-d isn't "bad".

There's no clear mention of any "afterlife" in the non-literary parts of the Bible.  Daniel is in the "literature" section of the Hebrew bible, not the "Law" or "Prophecy" sections.  Christians turned him into a prophet, not us.

Do I believe in an afterlife?  No, but if it happens, sure, why not.  My personal thoughts are that the only "afterlife" we experience is the same way I relate to my dead parents and grandparents (people I've known personal) -- I reflect on what I learned from them and what kind of people they were.  They "live" in my memories of them and their contributions to their family, friends and the rest of the world.  There have been times, fewer and fewer because I'm older and older, when I've tried to understand what they would have suggested I do in life whenever I've been in need of their guidance.  They are "dead" only in the sense that I can't ring them up on the phone.

The 13th Principle Maimonides (z"l) mentions is thus --

"I believe with perfect faith that the dead will be brought back to life when G-d wills it to happen."

If G-d wants to reanimate my dead body, I just hope all the broken parts get fixed -- I'm slowly getting older and falling apart.  Otherwise I'm perfectly content to become worm food.  We are made of star stuff.  Some day we'll go back to being star stuff.

The "afterlife" concept seems to have slowly snuck into Judaism, mostly through contact with pagan cults.  By the time Christians got their hands on Judaism, they went full-blown crazy mixing in Roman paganism wherever they could find it.

Furry, all you are doing here is back peddling in an attempt to avoid the older standards of climate of belief. I see no point in believing in a god if there is no after life.The OT character tapped the Hebrews as his "chosen people". What would be the point of allowing that to happen or causing that to happen if there wasn't a plan, and end goal?

Back pedaling?  Uh, Maimonides isn't just some dude, and the belief that there is no clear "afterlife" goes all the way back to ancient times.  Now, Rambam (Rabbi Moshe ben Mamon -- Mamonides, Rambam, take your pick) says that we all get resurrected when G-d wills it, but there is NO statement, ANYWHERE, in either the Torah or the Prophets that "resurrection" or an "afterlife" exists.  If you can find it, good on you, but it ain't in there.

Here's an example -- in the Torah Moses says "You will eat, and you will be satisfied, and you will bless the LORD your G-d."  From this we learn to say grace after meals.  We also learn that =anyone= can be grateful if promised a reward for their gratitude, which is to say that you should judge someones gratitude when there is no reward, and their thankfulness only =after= they have gotten whatever they need.

Quote:
You are closer to a Jeffersonian type deist. But even I would have a problem with this concept. It merely is a watered down version of a god claim in an attempt to avoid all the nasty stuff written in the bible. The OT God is bloodthirsty, He gives the Hebrews permission to kill off enemies and take  their property and make sex slaves of their women and girls.

In the =Christian= bible, G-d is bloodthirsty.  In the Hebrew bible, we have the right of self-defense.  And this "sex slave" stuff is =your= trip, not mine.  In Judaism, women control access to sex.  We're not Christians, and we certainly aren't Muslims.

Quote:
Seriously, if you do not believe in an after life, then you should drop the label "Jewish" AND drop the god claim all together. There really isn't any good reason to hold a god belief of any kind. It is merely your wishful thinking and a matter of culture and tradition.

Sorry, but the Jewish "mission", for which we were "chosen", is making this a better planet -- the whole "Light unto the Nations" thing.  Personally, that seems like a pretty important thing to do, so I think I'll pass on your suggestion that I give up Judaism.

Quote:
I've said it before and I'll keep saying it. All deity/god/super natural claims have the core concept that a non-material brain exists. This is scientifically impossible and has never happened and will never happen.

G-d doesn't have a "brain".  You might want to check out some other religions where their gods have arms and legs and brains and penises.  That wouldn't be Judaism.

HTH.

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13405
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
FurryCatHerder wrote:Brian37

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

1). G-d isn't a "guy".

2). G-d isn't "good".

3). G-d isn't "bad".

There's no clear mention of any "afterlife" in the non-literary parts of the Bible.  Daniel is in the "literature" section of the Hebrew bible, not the "Law" or "Prophecy" sections.  Christians turned him into a prophet, not us.

Do I believe in an afterlife?  No, but if it happens, sure, why not.  My personal thoughts are that the only "afterlife" we experience is the same way I relate to my dead parents and grandparents (people I've known personal) -- I reflect on what I learned from them and what kind of people they were.  They "live" in my memories of them and their contributions to their family, friends and the rest of the world.  There have been times, fewer and fewer because I'm older and older, when I've tried to understand what they would have suggested I do in life whenever I've been in need of their guidance.  They are "dead" only in the sense that I can't ring them up on the phone.

The 13th Principle Maimonides (z"l) mentions is thus --

"I believe with perfect faith that the dead will be brought back to life when G-d wills it to happen."

If G-d wants to reanimate my dead body, I just hope all the broken parts get fixed -- I'm slowly getting older and falling apart.  Otherwise I'm perfectly content to become worm food.  We are made of star stuff.  Some day we'll go back to being star stuff.

The "afterlife" concept seems to have slowly snuck into Judaism, mostly through contact with pagan cults.  By the time Christians got their hands on Judaism, they went full-blown crazy mixing in Roman paganism wherever they could find it.

Furry, all you are doing here is back peddling in an attempt to avoid the older standards of climate of belief. I see no point in believing in a god if there is no after life.The OT character tapped the Hebrews as his "chosen people". What would be the point of allowing that to happen or causing that to happen if there wasn't a plan, and end goal?

Back pedaling?  Uh, Maimonides isn't just some dude, and the belief that there is no clear "afterlife" goes all the way back to ancient times.  Now, Rambam (Rabbi Moshe ben Mamon -- Mamonides, Rambam, take your pick) says that we all get resurrected when G-d wills it, but there is NO statement, ANYWHERE, in either the Torah or the Prophets that "resurrection" or an "afterlife" exists.  If you can find it, good on you, but it ain't in there.

Here's an example -- in the Torah Moses says "You will eat, and you will be satisfied, and you will bless the LORD your G-d."  From this we learn to say grace after meals.  We also learn that =anyone= can be grateful if promised a reward for their gratitude, which is to say that you should judge someones gratitude when there is no reward, and their thankfulness only =after= they have gotten whatever they need.

Quote:
You are closer to a Jeffersonian type deist. But even I would have a problem with this concept. It merely is a watered down version of a god claim in an attempt to avoid all the nasty stuff written in the bible. The OT God is bloodthirsty, He gives the Hebrews permission to kill off enemies and take  their property and make sex slaves of their women and girls.

In the =Christian= bible, G-d is bloodthirsty.  In the Hebrew bible, we have the right of self-defense.  And this "sex slave" stuff is =your= trip, not mine.  In Judaism, women control access to sex.  We're not Christians, and we certainly aren't Muslims.

Quote:
Seriously, if you do not believe in an after life, then you should drop the label "Jewish" AND drop the god claim all together. There really isn't any good reason to hold a god belief of any kind. It is merely your wishful thinking and a matter of culture and tradition.

Sorry, but the Jewish "mission", for which we were "chosen", is making this a better planet -- the whole "Light unto the Nations" thing.  Personally, that seems like a pretty important thing to do, so I think I'll pass on your suggestion that I give up Judaism.

Quote:
I've said it before and I'll keep saying it. All deity/god/super natural claims have the core concept that a non-material brain exists. This is scientifically impossible and has never happened and will never happen.

G-d doesn't have a "brain".  You might want to check out some other religions where their gods have arms and legs and brains and penises.  That wouldn't be Judaism.

HTH.

Furry, thanks for the comic relief. "God doesn't have a brain". I am soooooooo tempted to replace my sig with that. All kidding aside, I know you didn't mean it that way, but that is just too funny to ignore.

I've had my Homer Simpson "Doh!" moments myself. Just makes us human.

But back to the serious debate though.

If God doesn't have a brain, WHAT does it think with? In science everything in biological evolution has a material structure that we can point to when we see some species with a cognition. I merely see humans inventing gods in reality.

There is a reason for this psychological self projection that you call a God/god/entity. All biological life strives to make it to the point of reproduction. In human evolution we lacked the scientific explanations to the realities around us. As a species we too seek patterns. But because we didn't evolve to make rationality our priority, gap filling became part of our evolutionary flaw. It stems from our fight or flight reasoning. Evolution depends on surviving, and we don't always have time to assess what is going on around us. A zebra may default to running first even if the grass isn't being moved by a lion.

In more modern examples the "god of the gaps" is aptly demonstrated by the video illusion of the guy in the hallway that seems scale until he backs up and the reality is that the hallway shrinks. God belief is the mental optical illusion. It is the gap humans fill when they lack answers. It stems from our species lack of history of scientific knowledge of reality and much more so our own psychology that causes us to put bad answers into gaps.

It is WHY the Egyptians falsely believed the sun was a god. It is why you today falsely believe in a god. It is merely your wishful thinking. It is strong to you and feels real to you, but placebo thinking can and does have that real affect, just like that hallway really seems to be scale.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


FurryCatHerder
Theist
FurryCatHerder's picture
Posts: 1253
Joined: 2007-06-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:FurryCatHerder

Brian37 wrote:

FurryCatHerder wrote:

Back pedaling?  Uh, Maimonides isn't just some dude, and the belief that there is no clear "afterlife" goes all the way back to ancient times.  Now, Rambam (Rabbi Moshe ben Mamon -- Mamonides, Rambam, take your pick) says that we all get resurrected when G-d wills it, but there is NO statement, ANYWHERE, in either the Torah or the Prophets that "resurrection" or an "afterlife" exists.  If you can find it, good on you, but it ain't in there.

Here's an example -- in the Torah Moses says "You will eat, and you will be satisfied, and you will bless the LORD your G-d."  From this we learn to say grace after meals.  We also learn that =anyone= can be grateful if promised a reward for their gratitude, which is to say that you should judge someones gratitude when there is no reward, and their thankfulness only =after= they have gotten whatever they need.

Quote:
You are closer to a Jeffersonian type deist. But even I would have a problem with this concept. It merely is a watered down version of a god claim in an attempt to avoid all the nasty stuff written in the bible. The OT God is bloodthirsty, He gives the Hebrews permission to kill off enemies and take  their property and make sex slaves of their women and girls.

In the =Christian= bible, G-d is bloodthirsty.  In the Hebrew bible, we have the right of self-defense.  And this "sex slave" stuff is =your= trip, not mine.  In Judaism, women control access to sex.  We're not Christians, and we certainly aren't Muslims.

Quote:
Seriously, if you do not believe in an after life, then you should drop the label "Jewish" AND drop the god claim all together. There really isn't any good reason to hold a god belief of any kind. It is merely your wishful thinking and a matter of culture and tradition.

Sorry, but the Jewish "mission", for which we were "chosen", is making this a better planet -- the whole "Light unto the Nations" thing.  Personally, that seems like a pretty important thing to do, so I think I'll pass on your suggestion that I give up Judaism.

Quote:
I've said it before and I'll keep saying it. All deity/god/super natural claims have the core concept that a non-material brain exists. This is scientifically impossible and has never happened and will never happen.

G-d doesn't have a "brain".  You might want to check out some other religions where their gods have arms and legs and brains and penises.  That wouldn't be Judaism.

HTH.

Furry, thanks for the comic relief. "God doesn't have a brain". I am soooooooo tempted to replace my sig with that. All kidding aside, I know you didn't mean it that way, but that is just too funny to ignore.

I've had my Homer Simpson "Doh!" moments myself. Just makes us human.

But back to the serious debate though.

If God doesn't have a brain, WHAT does it think with? In science everything in biological evolution has a material structure that we can point to when we see some species with a cognition. I merely see humans inventing gods in reality.

G-d doesn't "think".

You've really never run into a Jew before, have you?

Okay, here are the rules -- whatever human attributes you want to ascribe to G-d, my answer is "No".  So, grab that giant book of human attributes, write "No" on the cover, then toss it in the trash.  So'kay?

Quote:
There is a reason for this psychological self projection that you call a God/god/entity. All biological life strives to make it to the point of reproduction. In human evolution we lacked the scientific explanations to the realities around us. As a species we too seek patterns. But because we didn't evolve to make rationality our priority, gap filling became part of our evolutionary flaw. It stems from our fight or flight reasoning. Evolution depends on surviving, and we don't always have time to assess what is going on around us. A zebra may default to running first even if the grass isn't being moved by a lion.

Do you think I'm stupid?  Serious question, because right now you're responding to me like you think I'm dumb.

Now, you think this is an evolutionary flaw, but we could have evolved the same as any other apex predator, and been just as successful -- as an apex predator.  But instead, we have opposable thumbs, that are only useful for pressing the space bar for me (no joystick to be grabbing on my laptop ...) and we're created "B'tzelem Elokim", in the "Image of G-d".  If I were (l'havdil) G-d, some kind of "belief in G-d" would be part of the wetware.  And science says it is.  Science is plenty good enough for me!

Quote:
In more modern examples the "god of the gaps" is aptly demonstrated by the video illusion of the guy in the hallway that seems scale until he backs up and the reality is that the hallway shrinks. God belief is the mental optical illusion. It is the gap humans fill when they lack answers. It stems from our species lack of history of scientific knowledge of reality and much more so our own psychology that causes us to put bad answers into gaps.

The entire "god of the gaps" thing was invented by Christians so that either the answer is "god" or you need Jesus to fill the Jesus-shaped hole in your heart.

I'm not a "god of the gaps" kinda gal either.

Quote:
It is WHY the Egyptians falsely believed the sun was a god. It is why you today falsely believe in a god. It is merely your wishful thinking. It is strong to you and feels real to you, but placebo thinking can and does have that real affect, just like that hallway really seems to be scale.

Well, when you figure out a way to prove G-d doesn't exist, you get back to me, okay?

"Obviously I'm convinced of the existence of G-d. I'm equally convinced that Atheists who've led good lives will be in Olam HaBa going "How the heck did I wind up in this place?!?" while Christians who've treated people like dirt will be in some other place asking the exact same question."


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13405
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Well, when you figure

Quote:
Well, when you figure out a way to prove G-d doesn't exist,

See if you can spot the pattern.

Well, when you figure out a way to prove that Allah doesn't exist.

Well, when you figure out a way to prove that Vishnu doesn't exist

Well when you figure out a way to prove that God doesn't exist.

Well, when you can figure out a way to prove there isn't a giant invisible teapot orbiting Jupiter.

(end example)

You are stuck on labels, and the point of this is to demonstrate to you that your thought process in is based on bad use of logic.

NO CLAIM, on any subject, is true by proxy of merely being able to utter words. Otherwise every sentence ever spoken or written down by humans in our history would be true by default. That is absurd. Good use of logic does not work like that.

Otherwise, "Prove I cant fart an invisible Lamborghini out of my ass" is true because you can't prove it isn't.

I can show you the same example without even discussing god claims.

"Prove that I don't have a snarfwidget"

"Prove that have never been a president in an alternate universe"

"Prove to me that the Transporter wont be a possibility in the future"

"Prove to me Ouija boards don't work"

"Prove to me my orange juice doesn't taste like squid"

"Prove to me vampires don't exist"

"Prove to me Harry Potter cannot fly around on a broom"

You are focused on labels and we are trying to SHOW you the fallacy of your thought process.

There are tons of things in life, even outside the issue of god claims, that you dismiss on a daily basis without "disproving" them.

For a claim, ON ANY SUBJECT, to gain the status of credible and universal, it isn't given that status of "true" by default. It  becomes "truth" when the claim starts with prior tested data, and then is independently tested and falsified beyond personal bias.

If logic worked the way you falsely wanted it to, then I really could fart an invisible Lamborghini out of my ass. I don't think you are foolish enough to accept that simply because I might say "Prove I cant". Otherwise I am sure I could sell you that invisible Lamborghini, even though I know I'd be lying my ass off.

All blasphemy aside. It really amounts to merely wanting your claim to be true, just like the Egyptians really wanted the sun go be a god, even though it was not.

Good logic works like this.

Prior tested data>plugged into established formula=projected outcome

Bad logic, which is what you are doing.

Naked assertion<=unfounded, untested, unestablished model<=desired outcome.

The bottom line is that things are not true by default, just because someone has the ability to string words together.

Would you buy your own argument if someone else was using "prove it isn't" to make claims about a god you don't believe in?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level ModeratorSilver Member
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1708
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
FCH

FurryCatHerder wrote:
1). G-d isn't a "guy". 2). G-d isn't "good". 3). G-d isn't "bad".

They why do the commandments say to worship Him and no other gods for he is a jealous g-d? Do you think the stories where G-d told the Jews to destroy entire communities, man, woman (unless she was a virgin), child and all livestock is neither good nor bad?

You didn't respond to my other question about is this bible anymore inspired than any other piece of literature? Are there any books you regard on the same level as the bible?

FurryCatHerder wrote:
There's no clear mention of any "afterlife" in the non-literary parts of the Bible. Daniel is in the "literature" section of the Hebrew bible, not the "Law" or "Prophecy" sections. Christians turned him into a prophet, not us.

What about 1 Samuel 28 where the witch of Endor calls up the spirit of the dead Samuel who speaks to Saul? That is a non-literary part. Doesn't that show there are spirits flitting about and they are of dead people?

 

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5809
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Furry,about the opposable

Furry,

about the opposable thumb:

wikipedia wrote:

The opposable thumb has helped the human species develop more accurate fine motor skills. It is also thought to have directly led to the development of tools, not just in humans or their evolutionary ancestors, but other primates as well.

Do you seriously believe what you said??

And unless we found another niche, which the enhanced tool-use of the opposable thumbs allowed us, your suggestion that "we could have evolved the same as any other apex predator" is bullshit. That is a fundamental misunderstanding of evolution. Those niches were already filled.

Neither we or other primates were ever "apex predators", even potentially.

So god has no "brain". It does not think. It follows that It has no will or intent. So WTF do you think "it" is??? And just how does this empty concept "work" in your world-view??

WTF can it possibly then mean to say we are created "in the Image of God"?

Seriously, this is all superfluous crap, IMHO. Unless you can explain yourself a bit more. All you seem to have done is tell us what God is not, to the point that it is hard to see what's left for this thing, this concept, to "be".

No one can "prove" God doesn't exist, any more we can prove Russell's orbiting teapot does not exist.

When you can tell us what "g-d" IS, get back to us...

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


ex-minister
atheistHigh Level ModeratorSilver Member
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1708
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
bump

 FurryCatHerder wrote:

There's no clear mention of any "afterlife" in the non-literary parts of the Bible. Daniel is in the "literature" section of the Hebrew bible, not the "Law" or "Prophecy" sections. Christians turned him into a prophet, not us.

 

What about 1 Samuel 28 where the witch of Endor calls up the spirit of the dead Samuel who speaks to Saul? That is a non-literary part. Doesn't that show there are spirits flitting about and they are of dead people?

 

What about this above FurryCatHerder? How is that literal?

And to extend. You say this G-d is incomprehensible to us and may not even bother to give you an afterlife and I assume not really involved into day to day details of human life.

Doesn't this completely satisfy this statement "The invisible and the non-existent look alike".

Aren't you simply one minor click away from being an atheist? The more I read from you the less I see value add for this G-d. The deluded at least have a long rider added to their contract with god.

 

 

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/


Trinity123
Posts: 15
Joined: 2011-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Response to the questions posed..

Hi,

Jack_Glass_1903 wrote:

 

1. Why would a loving & caring god do this to his own creation, someone that has worshiped and loved him? This is beyond a test of faith, it's horrendous.

2. Did the devil tempt god and win? Maybe the devil thought, "i can't believe the big guy fell for that and abused one of his own".

3. Is god just a megalomaniac & bully who enjoys abusing the little people?

 

1. Christians will respond to this question at times by saying that God's love is not all daisies and rainbows. God disciplines, just as parents discipline (or at least should be, because God would do the same). However, Job here seems to be the perfect little human being that God desires from his people. Was he perfect? No. Job had difficult during this time and definitely complained and had thoughts of cursing God, but he didn't do it. Is there some discipline here? I think there is some, but much of it was to display something more than just some "wager" that Satan puts in God's face. This whole event in history (I believe it was, and we can get into the reasons why I do if someone asks) is a clear picture of someone who believes in God and has to totally trust in God more than he ever had to. After all these "horrendous" things that happened to Job, we see at the end of the book that there is much reflecting and teaching that is from God. If you really are interested in the validity of this book, you have to understand the bible as a whole. In a very concise sentence, the main idea of the biblical canon is that God sent Jesus Christ in the form of a human being and died as a substitutionary atoning sacrifice and resurrected. This finished the work of closing the gap between God and Man. Job experienced all these horrendous events in his life, yet trusted him through it all, and as a result learned much about God. He also continued to worship God after it all. The process of getting all his blessing after it all, wasn't as if he received them in a "poof" so I'm sure it was a time of learning and suffering, yet continuing to trust and worshiping God brought him to prosperity. God was with Job the whole way and Job got back on his feet, becoming even more prosperous. How loving is God that he pushes his people to loving him more, and thereby enjoying life in a fuller way after experiencing the horrible things he did and knowing that God did not abandon him, but was right there with him.

2. Satan didn't tempt God. This wasn't some power struggle. God is greater in power than Satan, so this was not a petty bet; rather it was an avenue for God to reveal his loving and caring self to Job and to those who heard and read the story of Job. Of course, this book must be taught with the understanding of the BIble as a unity. 

3. No, he's not a megalomaniac. I think that what I explained above is enough to give evidence for that. 

I hope that you get to read the actual written text of Job, instead of the Wikipedia condensed version. Check out some resources that write on the unity of SCripture and what it means to understand the texts from the perspective of the biblical canon as a whole.

God bless. 

Thanks for reading.

-jn


TonyZXT
atheist
TonyZXT's picture
Posts: 174
Joined: 2007-09-30
User is offlineOffline
 I know this is old, but

 I know this is old, but since there's not much activity on this sub-forum to speak of I'll throw my own take on this thread into the mix.

 

You have this abhorrent story of Job, and Christians use the tired old tactic of moving the goalpost to explain how everyone is simply misinterpreting it because they can't possibly understand without Gawd's magic decoder glasses.  So as non-believers we maneuver around their bullshit, pin them in a logical corner they can't squirm (lie or appeal) their way out of and kick the damn field goal.  3 points... done, game over.

FCH comes along and says "Not so fast, silly, simple minded Atheists.  Jews wrote the rule-book on goalposts and those were just some spray painted PVC pipes the Christians were leading you around with.  The "real" goalposts are way the hell up there.... see 'em?  Much too high for you Atheists to kick through since you're ignorant of the Jewish religion.  You would need to learn Hebrew, study for years and have God bestow you with a magical understanding of the universe before you even tried.  Oh and BTW, just so you know, that wasn't a football either, only Jews know where the real footballs are kept, and they're not called footballs, they're called blah blah freakin' blah.................!"

Moving the goalposts is at best something to make you roll your eyes while trying to get to some truth in an argument.  At worst it's a maddeningly childish and cheap tactic to throw obstacles at an argument so you can win by attrition because your argument was never good enough to stand on it's own.  This thread though, takes it to a whole new level.   Debates usually get convoluted like this when more than contradicting religion from the same tree get put in the mix, but that doesn't mean they're won by the confounding parties.  

Job, like many other stories in the bible is a very misguided, convoluted example of people from a time when absolute immoral bullshit was acceptable in society, trying to make a moral allegory, and failing MISERABLY!  It may have even made sense to some back then.  The fact is though it says in the Holy books that God's word is unchanging.  For god's word to be unchanging, but his stories and morals not to stand the test of time (to where mere mortals can pick them apart with ease) makes zero sense.  Leaving us with one of two likely possibilities:  Either God exists but his morals are shit.  Or the not-so-wise men of the time wrote the stories and there never was any inspiring deity.

 

"They always say the same thing; 'But evolution is only a theory!!' Which is true, I guess, and it's good they say that I think, it gives you hope that they feel the same about the theory of Gravity and they might just float the f**k away."