How does an athiest explain something such as this:

JesusLovesYou
Theist
Posts: 295
Joined: 2006-12-09
User is offlineOffline
How does an athiest explain something such as this:

TESTIMONY #1
A young boy was in a bedroom with his sister and her friend. The girls found their father's gun and started playing with it. The gun went off and went right through the young boys head. The boys grandmother called the pastor. Rev. David Shatwell (although the man doesn't matter). Bro. Shatwell prayed about this, went to the hospital and saw this boy. The doctors were saying that certain parts of the brain that were used for certain motor functions were damaged and the boy would not be able to do certain things anymore. Bro. Shatwell went in that hospital room and did just what he was moved through prayer to do. He pointed his finger at the boy and exclaimed. "I COMMAND YOU IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST TO LIVE, LIVE I SAY LIVE, LIVE AND DO NOT DIE! IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST". The mother is on the other side of the bed holding her son's hand. She starts screaming saying "HE SQUEEZED MY HAND!". the boy had been unconscious. Before this point the doctors were not going to operate, but they decided to, still claiming that the boy would have disabilities. That young boy very shortly afterwards was completely recovered, 100% healthy no disabilities.

TESTIMONY #2
A man felt moved though prayer and fasting that he was to take a bus all the way to California, he had been living in Mississippi. He went to the bus station and asked for a ticket. The amount of money the lady told him, he did not have, and the bus was going to leave soon. So he sat down and he prayed. 5 minutes before the bus left, a stranger walked into the station and called on his name (stanger meaning these men have never met before), handed him an envelope with his name on it, and it just happened to have the exact amount of money that he needed in it. So he gets on the bus, and a good while later they cross the state line to california. They are in the middle of the desert, and the man feels he needs to get off the bus right there in the middle of nowhere. So he does, and he is standing in the middle of nowhere on the highway. Shortly afterwards a vehicle drives up, a man opens the passenger side door, and asks "are you the man im lookin for?" and the driver explains how he had been praying about a preacher, and God told him to start driving down the highway and he will find the man to preach on sunday.

TESTIMONY #3
A man, through prayer and fasting felt that he was supposed to go stand out on I-10 and start preaching. He did so. He stood on the side of the road and preached into the darkess. 2 years later a man comes into his church. This man testifies that 2 years ago he was a homeless bum living on the highway, then one night he heard a man preach from the Bible on the highway and it changed his life forever.

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


Voided
Posts: 1195
Joined: 2006-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Stories

Stories

No evidence of the events, not too many names, no source cited.

note to self: proof read when its late...


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
"How does an athiest explain

"How does an athiest explain something such as this?"

The same way we explain worthless accounts about Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster and alien abductions. Worthless, sourceless, completely unscientific and unempirical bullshit accounts.

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou, Why do you

JesusLovesYou,
Why do you think it's an atheists responsibility to provide an answer to urban legends?

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


Ivan_Ivanov
Ivan_Ivanov's picture
Posts: 126
Joined: 2006-09-10
User is offlineOffline
The question is, how do

The question is, how do theists explain stuff like this:


gregfl
Posts: 170
Joined: 2006-04-29
User is offlineOffline
seriously funny. I mean the

seriously funny.

I mean the original post.

Also, the video link.


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou

JesusLovesYou wrote:
TESTIMONY #1

TESTIMONY #2

TESTIMONY #3

What about the other 999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999 times coincidences do not occur?

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Zhwazi
Zhwazi's picture
Posts: 459
Joined: 2006-10-06
User is offlineOffline
TESTIMONY #1 The parents

TESTIMONY #1
The parents obviously didn't teach their kids how to use the guns, how dangerous they are, or anything like that, as they could have learned by going shooting.

TESTIMONY #2
Insane preachers tell stories and get taken seriously by insane believers. He might just have been testing to see what stupid crap he could get you to believe.

TESTIMONY #3
A convert just so happens to find the preacher that converted him, from anonymity. Unlikely but not impossible. Stranger shit has happened which hasn't been credited to god.


JesusLovesYou
Theist
Posts: 295
Joined: 2006-12-09
User is offlineOffline
i forgot one testimony #4:

i forgot one

testimony #4:

What about a man who doesn't speak a word of english, nor does he understand the english language, when praising God with all of his heart begins to speak in the english language, with no accent at all

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Easy explanation: IT NEVER

Easy explanation:

IT NEVER FUCKING HAPPENED!

Seriously, if something like this happened it would be a major news story, not something passed along in e mails. Please check out http://www.snopes.com

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


JesusLovesYou
Theist
Posts: 295
Joined: 2006-12-09
User is offlineOffline
you realize that miracles of

you realize that miracles of God never make the news because stupid people that build those Charismatic mega churches always are in the spotlight. PLUS i know at least the denomination i belong to UPC DOES NOT EVEN AGREE WITH TELEVISION, SO NOTHING THAT OCCURS WITHIN THE BODY WOULD APPEAR IN THE NEWS.

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou wrote:i forgot

JesusLovesYou wrote:
i forgot one

testimony #4:

What about a man who doesn't speak a word of english, nor does he understand the english language, when praising God with all of his heart begins to speak in the english language, with no accent at all

Unless you can prove that this occured I am not going to waste any time even duscussing such a obviously silly story.

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


Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou wrote:you

JesusLovesYou wrote:
you realize that miracles of God never make the news because stupid people that build those Charismatic mega churches always are in the spotlight. PLUS i know at least the denomination i belong to UPC DOES NOT EVEN AGREE WITH TELEVISION, SO NOTHING THAT OCCURS WITHIN THE BODY WOULD APPEAR IN THE NEWS.

God must want it to remain his little secret, so stop blabbing about it.

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


melchisedec
melchisedec's picture
Posts: 145
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
I have to agree with

I have to agree with everyone, you have claims but nothing to back them up. I hope you see the problem with doing this. I would love to believe bigfoot, lochness, chupacabrae exist. Aside from the claims of these people we have nothing else to go by.


Symok
Symok's picture
Posts: 63
Joined: 2006-12-09
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou wrote:you

JesusLovesYou wrote:
you realize that miracles of God never make the news because stupid people that build those Charismatic mega churches always are in the spotlight. PLUS i know at least the denomination i belong to UPC DOES NOT EVEN AGREE WITH TELEVISION, SO NOTHING THAT OCCURS WITHIN THE BODY WOULD APPEAR IN THE NEWS.

They disapprove of television, but have no problem with computers and the internet.

Is anyone else puzzled by this?


qbg
Posts: 298
Joined: 2006-11-22
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou wrote:i forgot

JesusLovesYou wrote:
i forgot one

testimony #4:

What about a man who doesn't speak a word of english, nor does he understand the english language, when praising God with all of his heart begins to speak in the english language, with no accent at all


Apply duck typing to the testimonies and you get "testimonies = bullshit".

To overcome this, we would need to see some evidence that they happened.

"What right have you to condemn a murderer if you assume him necessary to "God's plan"? What logic can command the return of stolen property, or the branding of a thief, if the Almighty decreed it?"
-- The Economic Tendency of Freethought


ImmaculateDeception
ImmaculateDeception's picture
Posts: 280
Joined: 2006-11-08
User is offlineOffline
I don't know about everyone

I don't know about everyone else here, but I'm totally convinced by these stories and see no reason to question their authenticity whatsoever. Anyways, I'm going to church now, so I'll pray for you guys. Because I pray now or something. See you in hell, sinners! Wait...I mean I *won't* see you in hell....you know, because I'll be in heaven. Okay. Just want to make that clear...

(Turns off sarcasm generator)

Jesus died for somebody's sins, but not mine


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou wrote:you

JesusLovesYou wrote:
you realize that miracles of God never make the news because stupid people that build those Charismatic mega churches always are in the spotlight. PLUS i know at least the denomination i belong to UPC DOES NOT EVEN AGREE WITH TELEVISION, SO NOTHING THAT OCCURS WITHIN THE BODY WOULD APPEAR IN THE NEWS.

Are you saying that televangelists wouldn't jump on the bandwagon if given the chance with anything that would further their cause? I truly doubt that.

Symok wrote:

They disapprove of television, but have no problem with computers and the internet.

Is anyone else puzzled by this?

I have to agree with Symok on this. If his/her religion does not agree with the television news, I cannot imagine the religion would approve of the internet and web forums such as this.

Please note that JesusLovesYou has not addressed this issue.

Please note that JesusLovesYou does not address the issue of all the tragic events that his/her god did not correct. I have no doubt that there were plenty of prayers from the faithful in New Orleans which didn't help one bit.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Sybarite
Posts: 20
Joined: 2006-12-10
User is offlineOffline
I once watched this guy get

I once watched this guy get crushed by a truck whose handbrakes didn't work. Loads of people gathered around to see if he was ok, which he obviously wasn't. Some people decided to try move the truck, but then he walked out from behind the truck, looking at us as though something amazing just happened.

Either that happened, or I am lying. Figure out which one is more likely.


jmack
Posts: 3
Joined: 2006-12-10
User is offlineOffline
Whoa Whoa Whoa, wait just a

Whoa Whoa Whoa, wait just a second.

ASSUMING that "Testimony" #1 is true (which I highly doubt),
consider the following.

Christians are taught to believe that people die for a reason. This reason being that God wants said peoples in heaven with him. Now, if this child was going to die, by God's will, would this preacher not have been overruling God? Is that not the greatest sin of all?

Commanding someone to live is no different than commanding someone to die.


carpetfeller
Posts: 10
Joined: 2006-09-10
User is offlineOffline
easy explanation

Someone has tricked you into believing these stories are true.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
No theist ever asks why a

No theist ever asks why a loving god creates a world where such things are possible in the first place..... I like to ask theists: If you were 'god', would you create a world where any of these things could even potentially happen to your own children?

Before you answer, consider this: Take a look at how parents actually care for their children: We do everything we can to create a safe haven, a safe world for our children. We spend hours, days searching for ways to create a safe place, free from the dangers of electricity or poison or sharp objects or even swallowable objects that could cause choking.

We devote time to finding the right foods, the right clothing, the right diapers (even something as minor as a rash is defended against) the right blankets, crib, pillow..... we purchase baby monitors, or make frequent examinations of the baby for safety.

We defend our child against disease, against crib death, against any possible danger that we can imagine.

Now a theist wants to tell me that someone who loves me infinitely more than I love my own child, is willing to place me, and the world's children in the midst of every single solitary imaginable harm in existence: poison, disease, natural disaster.....

The mistake theists usually make here is that they believe that these things are all 'givens', that there must be things like poison or disease, but if there is a loving, omnipotent god this is not the case.

So I ask you: why is it that while no caring parent would go so far as to put their child in danger of getting a diaper rash, that an infinite loving god not only creates diaper rash, but disease and death?

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
todangst wrote: So I ask

todangst wrote:

So I ask you: why is it that while no caring parent would go so far as to put their child in danger of getting a diaper rash, that an infinite loving god not only creates diaper rash, but disease and death?

Excellent icing for the cake!

clapping

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


JeremiahSmith
Posts: 361
Joined: 2006-11-25
User is offlineOffline
todangst wrote:So I ask you:

todangst wrote:
So I ask you: why is it that while no caring parent would go so far as to put their child in danger of getting a diaper rash, that an infinite loving god not only creates diaper rash, but disease and death?

Obviously Christians who prevent their child from getting sick and safeguard it from injury are actually terrible parents. They need to follow in God's footsteps and get into the biochemical weapons industry, so they can make all kinds of fun diseases, just like God!

Götter sind für Arten, die sich selbst verraten -- in den Glauben flüchten um sich hinzurichten. Menschen brauchen Götter um sich zu verletzen, um sich zu vernichten -- das sind wir.


JesusLovesYou
Theist
Posts: 295
Joined: 2006-12-09
User is offlineOffline
jmack wrote:Whoa Whoa Whoa,

jmack wrote:
Whoa Whoa Whoa, wait just a second.

ASSUMING that "Testimony" #1 is true (which I highly doubt),
consider the following.

Christians are taught to believe that people die for a reason. This reason being that God wants said peoples in heaven with him. Now, if this child was going to die, by God's will, would this preacher not have been overruling God? Is that not the greatest sin of all?

Commanding someone to live is no different than commanding someone to die.

would it occur to you that its not about man at all? its about Jesus. This man prayed through once he heard this plea. He didn't go there and do what HE thought would help, he went there doing what God told him to do through prayer. It took me a long time to realize this, but man cannot do anything, NO THING without Jesus. It wasn't Rev. Shatwell that healed the boy, it was God working through him that did it. Jesus said:
Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Not by the power of man, but only by the power and grace of God do these things happen.

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


GlamourKat
GlamourKat's picture
Posts: 461
Joined: 2006-08-17
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou wrote: It

JesusLovesYou wrote:
It wasn't Rev. Shatwell that healed the boy, it was God working through him that did it. Jesus said:
Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Not by the power of man, but only by the power and grace of God do these things happen.

Why did your god make the boy sick in the first place then? If he was just going to heal him? And if the reverend HADN'T decided to help or had never heard of him, would the boy have died?
It just strikes me as odd. It doesn't make any sense.
"Take up serpents."
What about when religious snake handlers die from snake poison? Did they not pray hard enough?
What about this man?

KIEV (Reuters) - A man shouting that God would keep him safe was mauled to death by a lioness in Kiev zoo after he crept into the animal’s enclosure, a zoo official said on Monday.
“The man shouted ‘God will save me, if he exists’, lowered himself by a rope into the enclosure, took his shoes off and went up to the lions,” the official said.
“A lioness went straight for him, knocked him down and severed his carotid artery.”

Pretty faithful to jump into a lion's den. He obviously thought he'd be fine. Pretty much wasn't. O_O

I think a better question is how does a theist explain this?
(My no-true-scotsman sense is tingling...)


JesusLovesYou
Theist
Posts: 295
Joined: 2006-12-09
User is offlineOffline
GlamourKat

GlamourKat wrote:
JesusLovesYou wrote:
It wasn't Rev. Shatwell that healed the boy, it was God working through him that did it. Jesus said:
Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Not by the power of man, but only by the power and grace of God do these things happen.

Why did your god make the boy sick in the first place then? If he was just going to heal him? And if the reverend HADN'T decided to help or had never heard of him, would the boy have died?
It just strikes me as odd. It doesn't make any sense.
"Take up serpents."
What about when religious snake handlers die from snake poison? Did they not pray hard enough?
What about this man?

KIEV (Reuters) - A man shouting that God would keep him safe was mauled to death by a lioness in Kiev zoo after he crept into the animal’s enclosure, a zoo official said on Monday.
“The man shouted ‘God will save me, if he exists’, lowered himself by a rope into the enclosure, took his shoes off and went up to the lions,” the official said.
“A lioness went straight for him, knocked him down and severed his carotid artery.”

Pretty faithful to jump into a lion's den. He obviously thought he'd be fine. Pretty much wasn't. O_O

I think a better question is how does a theist explain this?
(My no-true-scotsman sense is tingling...)

What makes you think that God made this boy get shot. Those girls were playing with the gun in the same room that the boy was in. God gave man free will, God did not make us PUPPETS.
The grandmother that attends David Shatwell's church was obviously praying for a miracle, so when she asked the man to do a hospital visit (thats a normal thing for preacher to do) Rev. Shatwell felt in the Holy Ghost to do what he did. He did what he was told of God to do.

The man that was mauled? He was either a) putting on a show
or b) did not truely trust in God to save him.

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


JesusLovesYou
Theist
Posts: 295
Joined: 2006-12-09
User is offlineOffline
GlamourKat

GlamourKat wrote:
JesusLovesYou wrote:
It wasn't Rev. Shatwell that healed the boy, it was God working through him that did it. Jesus said:
Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Not by the power of man, but only by the power and grace of God do these things happen.

Why did your god make the boy sick in the first place then? If he was just going to heal him? And if the reverend HADN'T decided to help or had never heard of him, would the boy have died?
It just strikes me as odd. It doesn't make any sense.
"Take up serpents."
What about when religious snake handlers die from snake poison? Did they not pray hard enough?
What about this man?

KIEV (Reuters) - A man shouting that God would keep him safe was mauled to death by a lioness in Kiev zoo after he crept into the animal’s enclosure, a zoo official said on Monday.
“The man shouted ‘God will save me, if he exists’, lowered himself by a rope into the enclosure, took his shoes off and went up to the lions,” the official said.
“A lioness went straight for him, knocked him down and severed his carotid artery.”

Pretty faithful to jump into a lion's den. He obviously thought he'd be fine. Pretty much wasn't. O_O

I think a better question is how does a theist explain this?
(My no-true-scotsman sense is tingling...)

What makes you think that God made this boy get shot. Those girls were playing with the gun in the same room that the boy was in. God gave man free will, God did not make us PUPPETS.
The grandmother that attends David Shatwell's church was obviously praying for a miracle, so when she asked the man to do a hospital visit (thats a normal thing for preacher to do) Rev. Shatwell felt in the Holy Ghost to do what he did. He did what he was told of God to do.

The man that was mauled? He was either a) putting on a show
or b) did not truely trust in God to save him.

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


ImmaculateDeception
ImmaculateDeception's picture
Posts: 280
Joined: 2006-11-08
User is offlineOffline
Quote:What makes you think

Quote:
What makes you think that God made this boy get shot.

What makes you think it was god who saved him? You see, you can very easily turn that string of thought around. If it was chance that the boy was shot and divine will that saved him, then you could also say that it was chance that saved him and god's will that he was shot. What exactly constitutes defining something as divine will rather than coincidence?

Jesus died for somebody's sins, but not mine


ShaunPhilly
High Level ModeratorSilver Member
ShaunPhilly's picture
Posts: 473
Joined: 2006-03-15
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou wrote: It

JesusLovesYou wrote:

It took me a long time to realize this, but man cannot do anything, NO THING without Jesus.

Really?

Does that mean that when I am tyoing the following words...

Jesus Christ did not exist, does not exist, and probably never will exist. The while persona of Jesus Christ was made up and is utterly stupid

...Jesus is the one who is responsible?

perhaps you should either re-think or re-word your statement.

Shaun

I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.


LeftofLarry
RRS local affiliateScientist
LeftofLarry's picture
Posts: 1199
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Yellow_Number_Five

Yellow_Number_Five wrote:
"How does an athiest explain something such as this?"

The same way we explain worthless accounts about Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster and alien abductions. Worthless, sourceless, completely unscientific and unempirical bullshit accounts.

YELLOW STOLE THE WORDS RIGHT OUT OF MY TYPING HANDS!!!!!!

hahaha...you are kidding right....do you believe that there is a demon that rests within your soul at night when you have nightmares? What other explanation would there be right? hahahahahaha.....

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou wrote: What

JesusLovesYou wrote:
What makes you think that God made this boy get shot.

Isn't your god the omnipotent, omniscient creator of the universe? Isn't he perfectly responsible for his own creation?

Didn't he create the very possibility of pain, bloodshed, of being 'shot'

Quote:

Those girls were playing with the gun in the same room that the boy was in. God gave man free will, God did not make us PUPPETS.

Actually, if this god is omnipotent and omniscient and the creator of the universe, then he god must be perfectly responsible for whatever happens in his own creation. A universe governed by an omnipotent, omniscient god obviates free will

However, you'll deny that away... so consider:

This god choose to gave free will knowing, when he didn't have to, even knowing the ramifications of doing so.

This god shapes the limits of free will. What is possible and what isn't. This god also creates the possibility of every possible option... we can't choose A or B until this god creates the options.

So even if you want to insist that there can be free will in a universe created and governed by a necessarily perfectly responsible being, then you have to concede that this god chooses to give us free will, shapes the free will and its limits, completely controls both the environment and the character of the person making the 'free choice" and finally, this chooses which options exist for us to 'choose'!

This god could have done away with the concepts of pain, or damage or death, he could have done away with concepts like weapons.... or, this god could have created free will differently with a different set of options....

So there's no way to deny the culpability of an omnipotent, omniscient creator... such a being must be perfectly responsible for whatever it creates.

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


JesusLovesYou
Theist
Posts: 295
Joined: 2006-12-09
User is offlineOffline
todangst wrote:JesusLovesYou

todangst wrote:
JesusLovesYou wrote:
What makes you think that God made this boy get shot.

Isn't your god the omnipotent, omniscient creator of the universe? Isn't he perfectly responsible for his own creation?

Didn't he create the very possibility of pain, bloodshed, of being 'shot'

Quote:

Those girls were playing with the gun in the same room that the boy was in. God gave man free will, God did not make us PUPPETS.

Actually, if this god is omnipotent and omniscient and the creator of the universe, then he god must be perfectly responsible for whatever happens in his own creation. A universe governed by an omnipotent, omniscient god obviates free will

However, you'll deny that away... so consider:

This god choose to gave free will knowing, when he didn't have to, even knowing the ramifications of doing so.

This god shapes the limits of free will. What is possible and what isn't. This god also creates the possibility of every possible option... we can't choose A or B until this god creates the options.

So even if you want to insist that there can be free will in a universe created and governed by a necessarily perfectly responsible being, then you have to concede that this god chooses to give us free will, shapes the free will and its limits, completely controls both the environment and the character of the person making the 'free choice" and finally, this chooses which options exist for us to 'choose'!

This god could have done away with the concepts of pain, or damage or death, he could have done away with concepts like weapons.... or, this god could have created free will differently with a different set of options....

So there's no way to deny the culpability of an omnipotent, omniscient creator... such a being must be perfectly responsible for whatever it creates.


Id like you to show me WHERE Go created pain, bloodshed, etc. Not until the fall of man was any of this evident. God is a Spirit. God does not pain, sin, etc. This is why God chose to rope HIMSELF in flesh and dwell on earth. Jesus was FINALLY able to find Adam. In Genesis God said "Adam, where art thou". He knew where Adam physically was, but He lost him spiritually. When Jesus was tempted in the desert(remember Jesus was 100% man as well as He is 100% God, as a man He felt all that we feel, but without being tempted because He was born with grace), when He took the cross, He finally found where Adam got lost. God was able to make a way for us to step out of that "painful" realm. God did not create any hurt or pain, it was all created from man's envy towards Him.
Yes you are right, God could have just done away with all that, BUT God wants to get to know us, and us to Him. Just as the Bible says, the church is the BRIDE OF CHRIST. God doesn't want to run a puppet show, He wants a personal relationship with His creation

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


JeremiahSmith
Posts: 361
Joined: 2006-11-25
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou wrote: Id like

JesusLovesYou wrote:
Id like you to show me WHERE Go created pain, bloodshed, etc.

Probably sometime around when he created nerve endings and blood. Just brainstorming here. Or are you saying that humans can create things God can't? That would be an interesting admission, to be sure. Are you saying that at the moment of creation, God didn't see what was coming? Or that he did see it coming, but was powerless to stop it? Or perhaps he saw it, and could stop it, but didn't want to stop it. But if that's the case, it's a pretty stupid move on his part to blame humans for something he could have fixed but chose not to.

By blaming pain and hurt and such on humanity, you're basically saying that God was outperformed by his own limited creation. We're like little mini-gods! Except no one worships me. Yet.

Quote:
Not until the fall of man was any of this evident. God is a Spirit. God does not pain, sin, etc.

Does that mean humans can create things like pain and sin that God can't create? Also, if that's the case, why did God bother creating humans who can create pain and bloodshed? God, at the moment of creation, knew exactly what sort of shenanigans humanity would get up to. He'd have to, after all, what with being omniscient. He could have made humanity any way he liked. He'd have to be able to, after all, what with being omnipotent. But he chose the way that leads to sin and bloodshed. The end result is that God is still ultimately responsible for whatever humans create, and that includes pain and bloodshed. Saying that the way things are is not the way God wants them is basically an admission that God screwed up, that God got lazy, that an unlimited being, with all power and all knowledge, couldn't figure out how to get what he wanted. Sad, isn't it?

Quote:
This is why God chose to rope HIMSELF in flesh and dwell on earth. Jesus was FINALLY able to find Adam. In Genesis God said "Adam, where art thou". He knew where Adam physically was, but He lost him spiritually.

"God lost Adam spiritually"? What, God's omniscience and omnipotence only applies to the fleshy world? That sounds kind of limited, especially for a spiritual being. How does an all-knowing being "lose" someone spiritually? It's not like Adam fell behind the couch or something.

Quote:
When Jesus was tempted in the desert(remember Jesus was 100% man as well as He is 100% God, as a man He felt all that we feel, but without being tempted because He was born with grace)

So he feels all that we feel. Except the feeling of being tempted, because he was born with grace. Contradictions abound! Was Jesus able to feel temptation like a real boy, or not? If he could, then I guess being born with grace didn't cover it. If he couldn't, then he couldn't feel all that we feel. I guess when one of your axioms is something ridiculous, contradictory, and basically undefined like "Jesus was 100% man as well as He is 100% God", you're bound to come out with some totally irrational conclusions.

Quote:
when He took the cross, He finally found where Adam got lost.

Adam took a left turn at Albekoikie.

Quote:
God was able to make a way for us to step out of that "painful" realm. God did not create any hurt or pain, it was all created from man's envy towards Him.

Man's envy created hurt and pain? Wow, we're better at this creation thing than God is. Ah, but I forget: who created the human capacity for envy in the first place? Did humans create their own envy? Did this happen before or after the Fall? If the Fall was caused by man's envy, I guess humans had envy before the Fall. But that would make God the creator of envy... But if envy was created after the Fall, how could the Fall be caused by something that hadn't been created yet? The mind boggles and reels! Blaming hurt and pain on humans is just putting another link on the chain which ultimately must lead back to the creator God. If you know that doing Action X will result in Bad Thing Y, and do Action X anyway, if Bad Thing Y happens, you're responsible. That's a pretty basic part of the concept of responsibility. God created the capacity for human faults and human error and did nothing to correct those errors, while knowing full well what would come about as a result of those errors. He must ultimately be responsible for anything arising from those errors.

Quote:
Yes you are right, God could have just done away with all that, BUT God wants to get to know us, and us to Him.

God wants to get to know us? An omniscient, all-knowing, all-seeing God wants to get to know us? You mean he doesn't know us through and through already? An omnipotent, all-mighty, all-powerful being can't get what he wants? God is being outwitted and outmanuevered by his own limited creation, apparently.

Quote:
God doesn't want to run a puppet show

Too late. God already knows everything about us. He knows how the brains work, he knows what's in our minds, he knows the environment we were raised in, he knows every little factor that has influenced, is influencing, or will influence every human being ever. How can God not know who's going to love him and who's not? If God can influence every aspect of creation at any time to achieve any result he wants, how can you say that it's not a puppet show? God knows who will love him and who won't and is apparently happy with the situation as is, because if he weren't happy with it he could change it.

If I don't believe in God, God must have wanted it that way, because if he didn't, he could have changed something. He could have made me born with a different sperm that had different genes that influenced my behavior in some new way. He could have altered some environmental factor in my upbringing, five or ten or fifteen years ago, that would have a subtle effect at the time, a but very definite effect here in the future. If you say that God really wants me to believe in him, but wants to respect my free will, then you've misstated God's priorities, because you're implying that God wants people to exercise their free will first and believe in him second -- not to mention implying that he couldn't accomplish both at the same time, a total impossibility for a big omnipotent stud like God. And if God's first priority is that I believe in him? Then I have beaten God at his own game, because I don't. Are you saying I'm more powerful than God?

Quote:
He wants a personal relationship with His creation

Which is funny, because he's not a person. He's an unlimited superbeing living in some supernatural spirit realm. Kind of hard to relate to, you know? He doesn't come over to my house to watch House, he doesn't post on any of the forums I post at, we don't have long talks that keep me up past when I want to go to bed. How do you have a personal relationship with someone who doesn't talk or have conversations? Is magic involved? And, really, what would God be getting out of this relationship? He's supposed to be the creator of the entire freaking universe. He can watch galaxies collide and supernovas explode and stars coalesce out of dust and black holes tearing things apart and quasars pouring massive amounts of energy into the cosmos and cryovolcanoes spewing ice millions of miles from moons. I can't imagine listening to some guy in church ask for a new car is really going to compare.

Götter sind für Arten, die sich selbst verraten -- in den Glauben flüchten um sich hinzurichten. Menschen brauchen Götter um sich zu verletzen, um sich zu vernichten -- das sind wir.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou wrote: Id

JesusLovesYou wrote:
Id like you to show me WHERE Go created pain, bloodshed, etc.

Don't you believe that he's the creator of the universe?!

Quote:

Not until the fall of man was any of this evident.

You can't blame man for this.

2 reasons why

1) Your god is the omnipotent, omniscient creator of the universe. He creates every possiblity.

He knows that he is going to blame 'adam and eve' for sin, and he knows the outcome.

Yet he created the universe anyway.

So he must be perfectly responsible for whatever happens to his own creation.

2) If you are trying to avoid having 'god' be responsible by putting the blame on the 'sin' of adam, this already fails because of reason 1. However, there is an additional thing to consider.

To sin requires intent.
According to genesis, Adam and Eve were created without knowledge of good and evil

Ergo, adam and eve could not sin, because they could not understand the moral ramifications of disobeying.

So there are two reasons why your argument fails.

Quote:

God doesn't want to run a puppet show, He wants a personal relationship with His creation

1) Please cite the bible where it says that god didn't want puppets. I just want to see if you can do it.

2) Why is it so bad to be a blissful robot? Isn't this precisely what your god created in genesis? Adam and eve were created without knowledge of good and evil, and even forbidden to learn it! If they listened, wouldn't they be puppets? Just following along without knowing why?

3)) Who creates this free will, and who decides its parameters?

If it is your omnipotent creator, then he renders free will moot, because it is he that shapes every parameter of existence including you and your enviroment, which means that he is the ultimate decider

Whoever does this obviates free will. Which means that, again, you're argument is wrong for multiple reasons.

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


melchisedec
melchisedec's picture
Posts: 145
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
todangst wrote:

todangst wrote:

2) Why is it so bad to be a blissful robot? Isn't this precisely what your god created in genesis? Adam and eve were created without knowledge of good and evil, and even forbidden to learn it! If they listened, wouldn't they be puppets? Just following along without knowing why?

Brilliant observation! Your too good! I've never in my life seen anyone ask this to a theist. I can't imagine how they can get around this one.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
JeremiahSmith

JeremiahSmith wrote:
JesusLovesYou wrote:
Id like you to show me WHERE Go created pain, bloodshed, etc.

Probably sometime around when he created nerve endings and blood. Just brainstorming here. Or are you saying that humans can create things God can't? That would be an interesting admission, to be sure. Are you saying that at the moment of creation, God didn't see what was coming? Or that he did see it coming, but was powerless to stop it? Or perhaps he saw it, and could stop it, but didn't want to stop it. But if that's the case, it's a pretty stupid move on his part to blame humans for something he could have fixed but chose not to.

Bingo. This 'god' created the situation. He created every parameter that would influence 'adam and eve' including their very character. He had perfect control over every aspect of their actions, hence, perfect responsibility.

In short, the theist is attempting to argue that this 'god' does not have perfect responsibility over his own creation. And he must, because the alternative is to concede that 'god' is responsible for all evil. But the argument cannot work because it must contradict 'god's' omnipotence/omniscience somewhere.

Quote:
Not until the fall of man was any of this evident. God is a Spirit. God does not pain, sin, etc.

Quote:

Does that mean humans can create things like pain and sin that God can't create? Also, if that's the case, why did God bother creating humans who can create pain and bloodshed? God, at the moment of creation, knew exactly what sort of shenanigans humanity would get up to. He'd have to, after all, what with being omniscient. He could have made humanity any way he liked. He'd have to be able to, after all, what with being omnipotent. But he chose the way that leads to sin and bloodshed. The end result is that God is still ultimately responsible for whatever humans create, and that includes pain and bloodshed. Saying that the way things are is not the way God wants them is basically an admission that God screwed up, that God got lazy, that an unlimited being, with all power and all knowledge, couldn't figure out how to get what he wanted. Sad, isn't it?

Yes. Excellent analysis.

Quote:
When Jesus was tempted in the desert(remember Jesus was 100% man as well as He is 100% God, as a man He felt all that we feel, but without being tempted because He was born with grace)

Quote:

So he feels all that we feel. Except the feeling of being tempted, because he was born with grace. Contradictions abound! Was Jesus able to feel temptation like a real boy, or not? If he could, then I guess being born with grace didn't cover it. If he couldn't, then he couldn't feel all that we feel. I guess when one of your axioms is something ridiculous, contradictory, and basically undefined like "Jesus was 100% man as well as He is 100% God", you're bound to come out with some totally irrational conclusions.

Quite.

Quote:
God was able to make a way for us to step out of that "painful" realm. God did not create any hurt or pain, it was all created from man's envy towards Him.

Quote:

Man's envy created hurt and pain? Wow, we're better at this creation thing than God is. Ah, but I forget: who created the human capacity for envy in the first place? Did humans create their own envy?

Bingo! That's the point here... and it's a point that theists will always miss.

The reason they miss it is because they make what I call the "Panglossian error" They assume two very contradictory things

1) There is an omnipotent, omniscient creator
2) The universe must be precisely as it is.

Example:

atheist: why is it that we get hungry?
theist: otherwise, we'd starve?
atheist: then why not get rid of the need to eat?
theist: ?????? How... we have to eat or we will die!

Most theists haven't gotten to the point or really examining the logical ramifications of their beliefs. If they did, they'd realize that everything that exists is contingent upon an omnipotent/omniscient creator. There can be no necessary facts, no necessary elements of existence.

This means that everything that does happen is due to this god. This god must have perfect respnsibility over his own creation.

Quote:

Did this happen before or after the Fall? If the Fall was caused by man's envy, I guess humans had envy before the Fall. But that would make God the creator of envy... But if envy was created after the Fall, how could the Fall be caused by something that hadn't been created yet? The mind boggles and reels! Blaming hurt and pain on humans is just putting another link on the chain which ultimately must lead back to the creator God.

This god creates existence, the existence of every concept, and the insubstantiation of these concepts. He controls the environment which influences your decisions, and every aspect of you and your character. Whatever happens happens by origin of this omniscient god, which makes him responsible for all actions in his creation.

Quote:

If you know that doing Action X will result in Bad Thing Y, and do Action X anyway, if Bad Thing Y happens, you're responsible. That's a pretty basic part of the concept of responsibility.

Which just shows why theists cannot afford to examine this situation too carefully.

Quote:

God created the capacity for human faults and human error and did nothing to correct those errors, while knowing full well what would come about as a result of those errors. He must ultimately be responsible for anything arising from those errors.

It would be like putting an infant in a locked room filled with poisonous snakes, and saying "hey, he had free will"

Quote:
Yes you are right, God could have just done away with all that, BUT God wants to get to know us, and us to Him.

Quote:

God wants to get to know us? An omniscient, all-knowing, all-seeing God wants to get to know us?

Fucking lol!

Quote:
God doesn't want to run a puppet show

Quote:

Too late. God already knows everything about us. He knows how the brains work, he knows what's in our minds, he knows the environment we were raised in, he knows every little factor that has influenced, is influencing, or will influence every human being ever. How can God not know who's going to love him and who's not? If God can influence every aspect of creation at any time to achieve any result he wants, how can you say that it's not a puppet show? God knows who will love him and who won't and is apparently happy with the situation as is, because if he weren't happy with it he could change it.

And furthemore, god made these 'requirements" when he need not have...

What's really bothersome about it is that ther have been millions, perhaps billions of humans who would have done it in a more merciful, loving way. If I were omnipotent and omniscient, I don't think I'd have the need to bring harm or pain to my own creation. I don't see myself ever torturing my own children, yet theists have no problem imagining a god who does precisely that.

Quote:

If I don't believe in God, God must have wanted it that way, because if he didn't, he could have changed something. He could have made me born with a different sperm that had different genes that influenced my behavior in some new way. He could have altered some environmental factor in my upbringing, five or ten or fifteen years ago, that would have a subtle effect at the time, a but very definite effect here in the future. If you say that God really wants me to believe in him, but wants to respect my free will, then you've misstated God's priorities, because you're implying that God wants people to exercise their free will first and believe in him second -- not to mention implying that he couldn't accomplish both at the same time, a total impossibility for a big omnipotent stud like God. And if God's first priority is that I believe in him? Then I have beaten God at his own game, because I don't. Are you saying I'm more powerful than God?

Excellent points...

Quote:
He wants a personal relationship with His creation

Quote:

Which is funny, because he's not a person. He's an unlimited superbeing living in some supernatural spirit realm. Kind of hard to relate to, you know? He doesn't come over to my house to watch House, he doesn't post on any of the forums I post at, we don't have long talks that keep me up past when I want to go to bed. How do you have a personal relationship with someone who doesn't talk or have conversations? Is magic involved? And, really, what would God be getting out of this relationship? He's supposed to be the creator of the entire freaking universe. He can watch galaxies collide and supernovas explode and stars coalesce out of dust and black holes tearing things apart and quasars pouring massive amounts of energy into the cosmos and cryovolcanoes spewing ice millions of miles from moons. I can't imagine listening to some guy in church ask for a new car is really going to compare.

Great points. If an unlimited superbeing wants to have a relationship, he can come over right now.

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
melchisedec wrote:todangst

melchisedec wrote:
todangst wrote:

2) Why is it so bad to be a blissful robot? Isn't this precisely what your god created in genesis? Adam and eve were created without knowledge of good and evil, and even forbidden to learn it! If they listened, wouldn't they be puppets? Just following along without knowing why?

Brilliant observation! Your too good! I've never in my life seen anyone ask this to a theist. I can't imagine how they can get around this one.

They don't even try... they just insist that being a blissful robot is bad, without ever knowing why.

Sorta like a kid who closes his mouth, frowns, and insists he doesn't like a food he's never tried. The alternative for both of them is too unappetizing....

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


ShaunPhilly
High Level ModeratorSilver Member
ShaunPhilly's picture
Posts: 473
Joined: 2006-03-15
User is offlineOffline
melchisedec wrote:todangst

melchisedec wrote:
todangst wrote:

2) Why is it so bad to be a blissful robot? Isn't this precisely what your god created in genesis? Adam and eve were created without knowledge of good and evil, and even forbidden to learn it! If they listened, wouldn't they be puppets? Just following along without knowing why?

Brilliant observation! Your too good! I've never in my life seen anyone ask this to a theist. I can't imagine how they can get around this one.

I've heard this point before, and you can take it further;

If you don't yet have any knowledge of good or evil, and are essentially a robot, imagine yourself listening to th serpent in the Genesis story.

First of all, everything the serpent says is true. Second of all, without the experience or ability to determine if the serpent is lying, Eve could only ignore the claims made by the serpent or try it out and see what happens. All she has are two commands; 1) Don't eat the fruit or you will die 2) Eat the fruit and you will not die. They are mutually exclusive, so all one can do is try and evaluate which is true based on her own existence where she has no sense of right or wrong and has no reason to dis-believe either command.

How can you blame Eve (and subsequently, Adam) for this sin if the information they had was contradictory? How were they supposed to know the serpent was "evil"?

I mean, we have a similar situation here, don't we?

The Bible says one thing, science and other methods of learning say something else. God tells you to do his will and you'll never die. We're telling you that if you drop Christianity, your life will not suffer and you will not burn in Hell. You go with the Bible because the Bible tells you that if you ditch it you are essentially doing the same "sin" as Adam and Eve. But the only evidence you have to believe this is the Bible itself. That's cicular logic.

Person 1: Give the RRS all of your money or Elves will beat you with lead pipes.
Person 2: No wait, if you don't give them money, elves won't beat you with anything. Elves don't even exist. But you can give the RRS some money, if you like.

You better give your money, just in case person 2 is wrong, right?

...

Shaun

I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
ShaunPhilly

ShaunPhilly wrote:
melchisedec wrote:

Brilliant observation! Your too good! I've never in my life seen anyone ask this to a theist. I can't imagine how they can get around this one.

I've heard this point before,

Hey! Maybe you heard it from me!

Quote:

and you can take it further; If you don't yet have any knowledge of good or evil, and are essentially a robot, imagine yourself listening to th serpent in the Genesis story.

First of all, everything the serpent says is true. Second of all, without the experience or ability to determine if the serpent is lying, Eve could only ignore the claims made by the serpent or try it out and see what happens. All she has are two commands; 1) Don't eat the fruit or you will die 2) Eat the fruit and you will not die. They are mutually exclusive, so all one can do is try and evaluate which is true based on her own existence where she has no sense of right or wrong and has no reason to dis-believe either command.

How can you blame Eve (and subsequently, Adam) for this sin if the information they had was contradictory? How were they supposed to know the serpent was "evil"?

I've expressed my feelings on this before, and my feel is this: Theists who read genesis already know the difference between good and evil, so they can't help but automatically impute their knowledge of good and evil onto adam and eve, while forgetting that adam and eve cannot have this knowledge. That's how it 'makes sense' to them.

Therefore, correcting their error is difficult, because you're trying to bring something unconscious to light.

To add to what you've said, adam and eve couldn't know what 'death' is either, seeing tha they had no experience of it, which makes their dilemma even more perplexing. Oddly enough, fundamentalists make matters worse for themselves here, because they insist that 'death' didn't exist prior to the fall! So how can you threaten someone with something that 1) didn't exist and 2) they know nothing about?

Again, it makes sense simply because theists know what death is, and they know full well it's a bad thing. They know that dying is the worst punishment. So they again confuse their knowledge for what adam and eve could know.

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


ShaunPhilly
High Level ModeratorSilver Member
ShaunPhilly's picture
Posts: 473
Joined: 2006-03-15
User is offlineOffline
I'd love to stroke your ego,

I'd love to stroke your ego, but I did not here it from you, but rather from a friend of mine IRL. We went to grad school together, fellow master philosophers, as it were. He's the first person I heard it from.

You may know of him...

There are some who call him...Staks?

He's also a friend of the RRS, as his show follows their's as you may know.

Shaun

I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
ShaunPhilly wrote:I'd love

ShaunPhilly wrote:
I'd love to stroke your ego

There's no need, I wasn't serious....

Quote:

, but I did not here it from you, but rather from a friend of mine IRL. We went to grad school together, fellow master philosophers, as it were. He's the first person I heard it from.

You may know of him...

There are some who call him...Staks?

He's also a friend of the RRS, as his show follows their's as you may know.

Shaun

I bet the argument goes back well before either of us.... I first started using it on infidelguy.

Who wants to be a blissful robot?

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


JesusLovesYou
Theist
Posts: 295
Joined: 2006-12-09
User is offlineOffline
JeremiahSmith

JeremiahSmith wrote:
JesusLovesYou wrote:
Id like you to show me WHERE Go created pain, bloodshed, etc.

Probably sometime around when he created nerve endings and blood. Just brainstorming here. Or are you saying that humans can create things God can't? That would be an interesting admission, to be sure. Are you saying that at the moment of creation, God didn't see what was coming? Or that he did see it coming, but was powerless to stop it? Or perhaps he saw it, and could stop it, but didn't want to stop it. But if that's the case, it's a pretty stupid move on his part to blame humans for something he could have fixed but chose not to.

By blaming pain and hurt and such on humanity, you're basically saying that God was outperformed by his own limited creation. We're like little mini-gods! Except no one worships me. Yet.

Quote:
Not until the fall of man was any of this evident. God is a Spirit. God does not pain, sin, etc.

Does that mean humans can create things like pain and sin that God can't create? Also, if that's the case, why did God bother creating humans who can create pain and bloodshed? God, at the moment of creation, knew exactly what sort of shenanigans humanity would get up to. He'd have to, after all, what with being omniscient. He could have made humanity any way he liked. He'd have to be able to, after all, what with being omnipotent. But he chose the way that leads to sin and bloodshed. The end result is that God is still ultimately responsible for whatever humans create, and that includes pain and bloodshed. Saying that the way things are is not the way God wants them is basically an admission that God screwed up, that God got lazy, that an unlimited being, with all power and all knowledge, couldn't figure out how to get what he wanted. Sad, isn't it?

Quote:
This is why God chose to rope HIMSELF in flesh and dwell on earth. Jesus was FINALLY able to find Adam. In Genesis God said "Adam, where art thou". He knew where Adam physically was, but He lost him spiritually.

"God lost Adam spiritually"? What, God's omniscience and omnipotence only applies to the fleshy world? That sounds kind of limited, especially for a spiritual being. How does an all-knowing being "lose" someone spiritually? It's not like Adam fell behind the couch or something.

Quote:
When Jesus was tempted in the desert(remember Jesus was 100% man as well as He is 100% God, as a man He felt all that we feel, but without being tempted because He was born with grace)

So he feels all that we feel. Except the feeling of being tempted, because he was born with grace. Contradictions abound! Was Jesus able to feel temptation like a real boy, or not? If he could, then I guess being born with grace didn't cover it. If he couldn't, then he couldn't feel all that we feel. I guess when one of your axioms is something ridiculous, contradictory, and basically undefined like "Jesus was 100% man as well as He is 100% God", you're bound to come out with some totally irrational conclusions.

Quote:
when He took the cross, He finally found where Adam got lost.

Adam took a left turn at Albekoikie.

Quote:
God was able to make a way for us to step out of that "painful" realm. God did not create any hurt or pain, it was all created from man's envy towards Him.

Man's envy created hurt and pain? Wow, we're better at this creation thing than God is. Ah, but I forget: who created the human capacity for envy in the first place? Did humans create their own envy? Did this happen before or after the Fall? If the Fall was caused by man's envy, I guess humans had envy before the Fall. But that would make God the creator of envy... But if envy was created after the Fall, how could the Fall be caused by something that hadn't been created yet? The mind boggles and reels! Blaming hurt and pain on humans is just putting another link on the chain which ultimately must lead back to the creator God. If you know that doing Action X will result in Bad Thing Y, and do Action X anyway, if Bad Thing Y happens, you're responsible. That's a pretty basic part of the concept of responsibility. God created the capacity for human faults and human error and did nothing to correct those errors, while knowing full well what would come about as a result of those errors. He must ultimately be responsible for anything arising from those errors.

Quote:
Yes you are right, God could have just done away with all that, BUT God wants to get to know us, and us to Him.

God wants to get to know us? An omniscient, all-knowing, all-seeing God wants to get to know us? You mean he doesn't know us through and through already? An omnipotent, all-mighty, all-powerful being can't get what he wants? God is being outwitted and outmanuevered by his own limited creation, apparently.

Quote:
God doesn't want to run a puppet show

Too late. God already knows everything about us. He knows how the brains work, he knows what's in our minds, he knows the environment we were raised in, he knows every little factor that has influenced, is influencing, or will influence every human being ever. How can God not know who's going to love him and who's not? If God can influence every aspect of creation at any time to achieve any result he wants, how can you say that it's not a puppet show? God knows who will love him and who won't and is apparently happy with the situation as is, because if he weren't happy with it he could change it.

If I don't believe in God, God must have wanted it that way, because if he didn't, he could have changed something. He could have made me born with a different sperm that had different genes that influenced my behavior in some new way. He could have altered some environmental factor in my upbringing, five or ten or fifteen years ago, that would have a subtle effect at the time, a but very definite effect here in the future. If you say that God really wants me to believe in him, but wants to respect my free will, then you've misstated God's priorities, because you're implying that God wants people to exercise their free will first and believe in him second -- not to mention implying that he couldn't accomplish both at the same time, a total impossibility for a big omnipotent stud like God. And if God's first priority is that I believe in him? Then I have beaten God at his own game, because I don't. Are you saying I'm more powerful than God?

Quote:
He wants a personal relationship with His creation

Which is funny, because he's not a person. He's an unlimited superbeing living in some supernatural spirit realm. Kind of hard to relate to, you know? He doesn't come over to my house to watch House, he doesn't post on any of the forums I post at, we don't have long talks that keep me up past when I want to go to bed. How do you have a personal relationship with someone who doesn't talk or have conversations? Is magic involved? And, really, what would God be getting out of this relationship? He's supposed to be the creator of the entire freaking universe. He can watch galaxies collide and supernovas explode and stars coalesce out of dust and black holes tearing things apart and quasars pouring massive amounts of energy into the cosmos and cryovolcanoes spewing ice millions of miles from moons. I can't imagine listening to some guy in church ask for a new car is really going to compare.

YOU HAVE A STEREOTYPICAL AND UNBIBLICAL CONCEPT OF GOD. THE REASON GOD ROPED HIMSELF IN FLESH AS MAS WAS BECAUSE, BEING GOD, HE DID NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY OF HUMAN THOUGHTS, FEELINGS, ETC. JESUS DID FEEL TEMPTATION, JESUS FELT EVERYTHING THAT WE FEEL, THE DIFFERENCE WAS HE WAS BORN WITH GRACE. THE GRACE THAT HE WAS BORN WITH WAS NOT A "TEMPTATION SHIELD" IT WAS THE ABILITY TO KNOW HOW TO OVERCOME IT THROUGH THE SPIRIT OF GOD. THAT IS HOW GOD KNEW, "OH, WELL THIS WORKED, SO IF I LET THEM HAVE MY SPIRIT, THEN THEY CAN OVERCOME TOO", HENCE WHAT HAPPENED AT PENTECOST.

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


JesusLovesYou
Theist
Posts: 295
Joined: 2006-12-09
User is offlineOffline
HERE IS SOMETHING A FELLOW

HERE IS SOMETHING A FELLOW CHRISTIAN E-MAILED ME THAT I AGREE WITH, AFTER CONTEMPLATION:

God did in fact create hurt, pain, blood shed and even evil. He also gave man the choice as to whether or not he would have a relationship with Him. Let me explain. Hurt, which can be physical or emotional, is not a bad thing, nor is suffering. Some people (not pointing fingers in any direction, so don't take offense) tend to view pain, suffering, poverty, persecution and the like as bad because it is uncomfortable, undesirable, and seemingly unproductive, but they are only those things to those people who think God's perfect world is one in which none of these things exist. Is it plausible that before the fall Adam and Eve had an argument or a disagreement, or perhaps Adam was not giving her the emotional attention that she needed...sure, why not. God did not create us perfect in the sense that we never screwed up. Screwing up is part of how we learn and grow as human beings, it is absolutely essential, so yeah, I think it is absolutely plausible that Adam and Eve made mistakes before they fell from their relationship with God.

If you view the events and circumstances in your life (and this would apply to Christians) as essential elements and experiences in your growth that God will use to shape you to be the person you should be, than you can look at a lot of the circumstances in your life that one could easily blame on a sinful world (not that that isn't necessarily a factor) as God shaping you to be the person you should be.

As for evil, some Christians have a hard time with the idea that God created evil. What is evil? Is it some self-sufficient entity, or force, floating around, poisoning the world, dragging people to hell? Is it a seperate creation, dueling with good? Of course not, just like "good" is not some force floating around tryng to make people happy. Evil happened when man disobeyed God, when man started being more concerned with himself, when man sought to exalt himself. Evil is disobience to God, it is seeking after oneself, instead of God. It is the absence of God.

Finally, I will touch on freewill. God gave man freewill? Why? What's the point of creating a bunch of robots that always do whatever you want? It might be entertaining for a short bit, but that's it. God gave man freewill so that man's love for God would be genuine. God wants man to choose to be in relationship with Him. And God certainly wants to have a relationship with man, but not for anything God can gain, for what can God gain? Indeed, it is not God that needs man, rather that man needs God. Man has everything to gain by being in relationship with God, in that he can live and be and love and experience all that God wants for him, and God wants all that is good for man. Man can only fully experience love and joy and peace when he is right with God. For God is the author of these things. Now God is also the author of evil, in the sense that God gave man the choice to not be in relationship with him, and what follows is emptiness. Man tries to compensate by making gods of other things like money, sex, ambition (not that all ambition is bad) and etc., because man has an instinct to search for God, and that also plays itself out in adopting the idea that God does not exist, like the athiests we are trying to reason with.

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


JeremiahSmith
Posts: 361
Joined: 2006-11-25
User is offlineOffline
Caps lock is not your

Caps lock is not your friend. In fact, it is your mortal enemy and made very disparaging remarks about your mother.

JesusLovesYou wrote:
YOU HAVE A STEREOTYPICAL AND UNBIBLICAL CONCEPT OF GOD. THE REASON GOD ROPED HIMSELF IN FLESH AS MAS WAS BECAUSE, BEING GOD, HE DID NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY OF HUMAN THOUGHTS, FEELINGS, ETC.

So he's not omnipotent and omniscient? Good to know! Hey, guys, there's something we're better than God at!

Götter sind für Arten, die sich selbst verraten -- in den Glauben flüchten um sich hinzurichten. Menschen brauchen Götter um sich zu verletzen, um sich zu vernichten -- das sind wir.


Insidium Profundis
Posts: 295
Joined: 2006-10-04
User is offlineOffline
Quote:God gave man freewill

Quote:
God gave man freewill so that man's love for God would be genuine.

So, if I tell you that either you are to love me and worship me, or I would torture you forever with my insidious profundity, and you said "I love you, Lord Profundis" and worshipped me, is that genuine?

Better yet, if a man and women are in love, does that mean that that the husband is infinitely more powerful than the wive and forces her to worship him, threatening that he would beat her (this is the analogous portion to hell)? Or is love something between two equals? Now you will bring up the parent-child scenario. Well, when a child is still immature, a parent might punish him so that he will learn from his mistakes. But hell is a punishment that comes after you have made all your mistakes and used up your chances to do right from wrong. So it is useless as a deterrant. It is impossible to learn from your mistakes if you go to hell for eternity. Also, what's the worst punishment that you think is just for a parent to deliver unto his child? Eternal torture? No way. Death? Nope. Physical/sexual/emotional abuse of any kind? Negative. At worst, a parent should reprimant the child so as to deter him from making the same mistake again. Hell once again fails.

What have we learned? Our relationship with god is not love, since he has infinite power over us and will exercise infinite retribution upon us if we do not obey. Notice that the only reason for hell is retribution, not correction, nor deterrance.

An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.


GlamourKat
GlamourKat's picture
Posts: 461
Joined: 2006-08-17
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou wrote:THE

JesusLovesYou wrote:
THE REASON GOD ROPED HIMSELF IN FLESH AS MAS WAS BECAUSE, BEING GOD, HE DID NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY OF HUMAN THOUGHTS, FEELINGS, ETC. JESUS DID FEEL TEMPTATION, JESUS FELT EVERYTHING THAT WE FEEL

I disagree that Jesus would have actually felt "what we feel".
If he had actually been the son of god, then he apparently KNEW that god existed and talked to him and recieved interaction from said god. Noone I know has ever talked to god and gotten an answer back, except for crazy people. And no, "something later happened that gave me a sign from god", doesn't count.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
JesusLovesYou wrote:HERE IS

JesusLovesYou wrote:
HERE IS SOMETHING A FELLOW CHRISTIAN E-MAILED ME THAT I AGREE WITH, AFTER CONTEMPLATION:

God did in fact create hurt, pain, blood shed and even evil. He also gave man the choice as to whether or not he would have a relationship with Him.

In order to choose to have a relationship, I first have to believe that the other person suposedly involved exists. Without that, I'm just talking to myself.

Quote:

Let me explain. Hurt, which can be physical or emotional, is not a bad thing, nor is suffering. Some people (not pointing fingers in any direction, so don't take offense) tend to view pain, suffering, poverty, persecution and the like as bad because it is uncomfortable, undesirable, and seemingly unproductive, but they are only those things to those people who think God's perfect world is one in which none of these things exist.

Sorry, but this just continues the same error. The only reason that things like 'pain' are good are because they provide information. We can learn from them.

But why would an all powerful, all knowing, all loving being need to communicate through pain?

Quote:

Is it plausible that before the fall Adam and Eve had an argument or a disagreement, or perhaps Adam was not giving her the emotional attention that she needed...sure, why not. God did not create us perfect in the sense that we never screwed up. Screwing up is part of how we learn and grow as human beings,

Again, this is how things make sense in the natural world, where we need to learn. But your 'god' need not have done things this way!

Again, you're not thinking this through.

Quote:

As for evil, some Christians have a hard time with the idea that God created evil. What is evil? Is it some self-sufficient entity, or force, floating around, poisoning the world, dragging people to hell? Is it a seperate creation, dueling with good? Of course not, just like "good" is not some force floating around tryng to make people happy. Evil happened when man disobeyed God, when man started being more concerned with himself, when man sought to exalt himself. Evil is disobience to God, it is seeking after oneself, instead of God. It is the absence of God.

Your friend needs to make up his mind, did 'god' create evil or not?

Quote:

Finally, I will touch on freewill. God gave man freewill? Why? What's the point of creating a bunch of robots that always do whatever you want? I

Same old mistakes... This "god" made adam and eve as robots in the garden of eden.... and what's so bad with being a blissful robot anyway?

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
JeremiahSmith wrote:Caps

JeremiahSmith wrote:
Caps lock is not your friend. In fact, it is your mortal enemy and made very disparaging remarks about your mother.

JesusLovesYou wrote:
YOU HAVE A STEREOTYPICAL AND UNBIBLICAL CONCEPT OF GOD. THE REASON GOD ROPED HIMSELF IN FLESH AS MAS WAS BECAUSE, BEING GOD, HE DID NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY OF HUMAN THOUGHTS, FEELINGS, ETC.

So he's not omnipotent and omniscient? Good to know! Hey, guys, there's something we're better than God at!

LOL '

This is precisely what happens when you argue in an ad hoc fashion... you contradict yourself.

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


JesusLovesYou
Theist
Posts: 295
Joined: 2006-12-09
User is offlineOffline
GlamourKat

GlamourKat wrote:
JesusLovesYou wrote:
THE REASON GOD ROPED HIMSELF IN FLESH AS MAS WAS BECAUSE, BEING GOD, HE DID NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY OF HUMAN THOUGHTS, FEELINGS, ETC. JESUS DID FEEL TEMPTATION, JESUS FELT EVERYTHING THAT WE FEEL

I disagree that Jesus would have actually felt "what we feel".
If he had actually been the son of god, then he apparently KNEW that god existed and talked to him and recieved interaction from said god. Noone I know has ever talked to god and gotten an answer back, except for crazy people. And no, "something later happened that gave me a sign from god", doesn't count.

First off, you misunderstand what is meant by Son of God. Jesus Christ was not a God's son, like you are your father's child, but you aren't your father as well. By being the Son of God, Christ was the image of the invisible God.(Collosians 1:15). Christ had the Spirit of God inside of Him. Everything that Christ did, and showed us to do was of course what Christians are supposed to do. He referred to His Spirit as Father because that is what Jesus was saying God is to man.

second, nobody you know has ever interacted with God. Whom do you know?

Have you ever heard of Pentecost? NOT THE CHARISMATIC/HOLINESS MOVEMENT, that movement is a knockoff of Pentecost because those people claim that they can still live how they have always lived, that they don't have to change to a Biblical holiness lifestyle.

before you claim that God doesn't speak to/through people take a good look at Pentecost(Acts 2), and follow it all throughout the book of Acts. Research Azusa Street Los Angeles California 1906.

Have you ever tried fasting and praying for an answer? Don't claim that God doesn't speak to/through people unless you have done that with your heart in the right direction.

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Yeah, most of us know the

Yeah, most of us know the story. Jesus WAS GOD, and he failed to fix a fucking thing that GOD put upon us.

Wasn't the sacrifice of Christ supposed to redeem us?

Is there a reason God still CHOOSES to give children cancer AFTER he sent Himself to die to appease Himself for the sins and plight He Himself created? After that, kindly explain tsunamies, hurricanes and earthquakes. Tell me how the infants killed by an omnicient, supposedly loving God reconciles with that. If your God exists, He's a fucking monster. Now go ahead and make lame excuses for Him.

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.