Questions about God... theists answer these!

Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

List of questions about God, religion and the supernatural have been compiled by IG over the years as well as some interesting ones by readers.

1. If Jesus fulfilled all the OT prophecies so well, why didn't the Jews recognize him as the messiah? - Francois Tremblay

2. If Gen 3:24 is true, why hasn't anyone found the Cherubims and the " flaming sword which turned every way"?

3. It's been proven that modern humans originated from Africa. Yet, the Adam and Eve story claims the first Humans lived in a garden in Eden, near 4 rivers. ( Most of which no one can find). One of these rivers mentioned is the Euphrates, which runs through Iraq, Syria and a portion of Turkey. What's the truth? Did man come out of Africa or near the Euphrates River? - The Infidel Guy

4. When the believer gets to Heaven, how can Heaven be utter bliss when people they love and care about are burning in Hell ? - The Infidel Guy - [Note: Some say God erases your memories of them, but if God erases your memory, you as Mr. Joe /Jane Smoe ceases to exist.]

5. How can a God have emotions, i.e. jealousy, anger, sadness, love, etc., if he is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent? Emotional states are reactionary for the most part. How can God react to us if he is all-knowing and has a divine plan? - IG [Note: Indeed, many religious texts display their gods this way . Listen to the An Emotional Godshow.]
6. Why would God create a place such as hell to torture sinners forever when he foreknew who would disappoint him? - IG [Note: Some say you have a choice, but this misses the point. If God hates sin so much, why create Adam and Eve when he knew they'd sin? The only conclusion I can come up with, if Yaweh exists, is that he wanted sin to enter the world.]

7. "God is all merciful," we hear quite often. Wouldn't it be more merciful of God to simply snap sinners out of existence rather than send them to hell? Or better yet, since he's all-knowing, not allow them to be born at all? - IG
ON GOD'S LOVE & HELL
1.) God's love is superlative.
2.) God's love of man exceeds man's love of self.
3.) Man's love of self prohibits torture.
4.) Considering God's greater love for us, Hell (eternal torture) is illogical.

8. Muslims are supposed to pray 5 times a day towards Mecca. Each prayer includes a variety of ritualism and posturing. If a muslim astronaut were to land on Mars. Prayer to Mecca would be ritualistically impossible due to the rotation of Earth and Mars. Are Muslims stuck here in Earth? IG [Note: Since this was first posted, a Muslim astronaut was faced with this very dilemma. The authoritative clergy informed him to pray as he normally would. I see this no where in the Koran. You see? Religions must change, or die out. It's interesting to note that, in the Koran, the moon is believed to be in the lowest Heaven, the level for those that barely made it to Heaven. Surah 71:15-16. One problem, no man can supposedly get to Heaven until they die. Yet, we've been to the moon. Our satellites beyond that.]

9. Why haven't we seen God reattach severed heads, restore someone who was burned alive or regrow amputated limbs? Surely these would be miracles difficult to deny. - Adam Majors and IG [Note: The typical answer is that man doesn't dictate God's actions. The conundrum here however is that, if God wants us to "know" him, then surely feats such as those mentioned above would be happening all over the world. Until they do, I'll remain an atheist.]

10. Why does God entrust the spreading of 'His' word to sinners? Why doesn't he do it himself? - IG [Note: Surely God would have known that not everyone would be convinced by the reality[sic] of his Bible. If God loves us so much, we are all going to Heaven. If God knew that I would be an atheist, and he doesn't like atheists, he shouldn't have allowed me to come into existence. But he did. Therefore, I must be serving the will of God, for I exist. Smiling]

11. In II Kings 2-23/24 we read about God sending 2 she-bears to attack children for calling the prophet Elisa bald, which he was, the bears killed 42 of the children. Was this a good thing to do? -- Brandon and IG[Note: I have heard some argue that the boys were a gang. So?! I didn't read anywhere in that passage where they laid a finger on the guy . Also, what kind of bears are these that can kill 42 kids? Super Bears? Surely the kids had to be running away.]

12. I have often heard from many believers that even Satan has a presence in the church, which is why even in church people can still have impure thoughts. If Satan can find his way in the church, how do Christians know that Satan didn't find his way into the Bible and twist the whole book? After all, men did vote on which books would make the Holy Bible. - The Infidel Guy

13. Why did God allow Lot and his daughters to escape from Sodom and Gomorra when he destroyed it only to later have Lot and his daughters engage in incestuous fornication. (Genesis 19:30-36) - Disillusioned [Note: To have intercourse with daddy dearest of course.]

14. Genesis 1:28-29 shows that man and all the animals were first created herbivorous. Most young-earth Christians (ones that believes the earth is less than 10,000 years old) say that the fall of man resulted in carnivorous animals ( hence death of animals). So, why did God punish the animal kingdom, making animals kill and devour each other because of man's mistake? Or, if you're an old-earth Christian (one that accepts that animals existed on earth for billions of years before man came on the scene) then how come fossils show carnivorous animals existed before man? - http://www.caseagainstfaith.com/contact.htm.

15. Many Christians believe that God is a thinking being, that he solves problems and makes a way for them when troubles come. Does God Think? If God is thinking, did he know his thoughts before he thought them? If so, again, where is his freewill and how is God thinking at all if everything seems to be one uncontrollable action/thoughts. - The Infidel Guy [Note: I'd say a God cannot think at all. To do so, would strip him of omniscience. Thinking is a temporal process.] ON GOD'S ATEMPORALITY
1.) God, an atemporal being, created the Universe.
2.) Creation is a temporal processes because X cannot cause Y to come into being unless X existed temporally prior to Y.
3.) If God existed prior to the creation of the Universe he is a temporal being.
4.) Since God is atemporal, God cannot be the creator the Universe.
[Note: I guess I should also note here that a timeless being would be without the proposition of past, and future. But to be omniscient, God must know the past and future. Hence a God that is atemporal and omniscient cannot logically exist. Smiling]

16. I have often heard that faith is all that is neccessary to believe in God and accept the Bible as true. If this is true aren't all supernatural beliefs true since they also require "faith"? - IG ON FAITH
1.) A prerequisite to believe in a Faith is faith.
2.) Having faith is all that is required to accept a Faith (belief) as true.
3.) All Faiths are true.
[Note: Of course all Faiths aren`t true, but this is the only logical conclusion that can be drawn from a person that states that, "Faith" is how one knows God.]

17. Why didn't God just kill Adam and Eve after the Fall and start from scratch? Actually, if God is all-knowing wouldn't he know that man would need to be killed eventually anyway, (the biblical flood)? Why create Adam and Eve at all? - and ON THE GARDEN OF EDEN
1.) God is omniscient (all-knowing).
2.) God knew that before he created man that they would eat of the tree of knowledge.
3.) God placed the tree of knowledge in the Garden anyway.
4.) God wanted sin to enter the world.
[Note: If God didn`t want sin to enter the world, why create Adam and Eve at all? He knew what would happen. Why place the forbidden trees in the Garden in the first place?]

18. If a spirit is non-physical but the human body is physical, how does a spirit stay in our bodies? - IG ON SPIRITS
1.) Spirits are not physical entities.
2.) Brains are physical entities.
3.) Past experiences are stored in our physical brains, we call that, Memory..
4.) Injury can damage portions of the physical brain that store memory and can alter or erase memories completely.
5.) If human spirits exist... after death, spirits can have no memory.
[Note: Some will say the spirit stores physical memories as well, but if true, the spirit would have to be physical at least to a degree. How could a non-physical spirit store, physical memories?]

19. Does God know his own future decisions? If God is all-knowing he actually shouldn't have any decisions to make at all. Nor can he choose anything over something else. For that would mean that he is neither omniscient nor omnipotent. In fact, he can't even think if this is the case. Since he can't DO anything, he might as well not exist. - IG ON GOD'S IMMUTABILITY - Unchangingness
1. If God exists, then he is immutable.
2. If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.
3. An immutable being cannot at one time have an intention and then at a later time not have that intention.
4. For any being to create anything, prior to the creation he must have had the intention to create it, but at a later time, after the creation, no longer have the intention to create it.
5. Thus, it is impossible for an immutable being to have created anything (from 3 and 4).
6. Therefore, it is impossible for God to exist (from 1, 2, and 5) - Theodore M. Drange

20. If God is all-knowing, how could he be disappointed in His creation? -- [Note: Indeed, wouldn't God know that before the creation of our Universe what creatures would disappoint him? That being the case why create those creatures at all? Also, in knowing absolutely the behavior of humans before creation, God cannot be disappointed either... for this world is exactly as he has planned it to be. If it's not, why create us at all?]

21. God struck down the Tower of Babel angry at the intent of the people that built them, if this is the case, many of the great pyramids ( which are bigger than any ziggurat) around the world should be rubble also, yet many still stand today. Were not the Egyptians and many other ancient pyramid builders reaching toward God /The Heavens? - IG [Note: In actuality, many of the Pharaoh's believed that, via their pyramids, they would become God's themselves.]

22. In the watchmaker analogy, a watch is used to show us intelligent design and compares that to the Universe as evidence of design. We know watches are designed because we have past experience with watches, as well as with other man made objects. My question is: What Universe is the Intelligent Design proponent using to compare this Universe with to draw such an analogy? What God did he see create a Universe? - IG

23. Why did God flood the earth to remove evil? It didn't work! Evil came right back, God should have known that would happen! So why did He bother? - PhineasBg [Note: A good example of how quickly sin returned, was Noah getting drunk just after they discovered land.]

24. If the garden of Eden was a perfect paradise as xians claim, then why did Eve even want to eat the fruit? Wouldn't a perfect place provide everything a person would want or desire and thus she would want nothing? - keyser soze [Note: Why were the trees there in the first place? Of course they love to throw the serpent into the equation. But ummm..who let the serpent into the Garden?... and why would God create such a creature knowing he would cause man's fall? Hmm.. God must have wanted the fall to happen.]

25. Why would an all-powerful god become flesh in order to sacrifice himself to himself so that his creation might escape the wrath of himself. Couldn't god, in his infinite wisdom, come up with something a little more efficient? - ON THE BODY OF CHRIST
1.) God?s flesh was known as Jesus.
2.) Flesh cannot enter into Heaven (according to Paul)
3.) God is no longer Jesus.
4.) Jesus doesn?t exist.

(Note: Many at this point will state that the spirit lives on so therefore Jesus lives. This really depends on what you believe about Jesus. Is Jesus the son of God or God in flesh? If Jesus is merely the son there is no problem.However, if Jesus ?is? God himself, we do. You see, Jesus is called Jesus because of the attribute of Flesh. If Jesus = God (who is spirit) then the entity known as Jesus ceases to exist. The flesh/body of Jesus, no longer exists and the spirit of God is still the unchanging spirit of God. No Jesus at that point. The Flesh, called Jesus, is dead.)

26. After 9/11 a lot of people have been tossing around " god bless america". Why do they keep saying this? From the looks of it god hasn't blessed anything. If god had blessed america, the 9/11 event would've never happened. Theists seem to give the answer of "everything is part of gods big plan". If everything is part of gods big plan, why are we after Bin Laden? Wasn't he and other terrorists just carrying out gods desired plan? So it seems that Bin Laden/ terrorism isnt our enemy, but god . - [Note: Unfortunately many religious nuts believe they are fulfilling their God's plan by going to war.]

27. Christians say that God is NOT the author of confusion. Can you say, Tower of Babel? - The Screaming Monkeys

28. If Noah's flood supposedly covered the earth for a year, regardless of whether or not all the animals could fit on the ark, what the heck happened to all the plants? Can you imagine a cactus surviving under 4 miles of water for a year? I can't either! - Kyle Giblet [Note: With God all things are possible. Oh wait, except in Judges 1:19.]

29. The highest rainfall ever recorded in a 24 hour period was 47inches in the Reunion Islands in 1947 (during a severe tropical storm). To cover the whole earth to a depth of 5.6 miles, and cover the mountain tops (i.e. Mount Everest), it would need to rain at a rate of 372 (three hundred and seventy two) inches per hour, over the entire surface of the earth. Can rain fall at such an astronomical rate? Where did all the water come from?? Where did it all go to??? And would not the dynamics of the earth be so out of balance (tides etc.) that the earth would become so unstable that it would wobble off into outer space???? -

30. What do Muslim women get in Paradise? - IG [Note: Some Muslims I have interviewed about this say that Muslim women will get the same thing men get or equal value. Smiling Oh really? So Muslim women will get 72 virgin men? lol. If Muslim men get 72 virgins, where are all these virgin women coming from? What of their freewill? Is Allah creating these women to be slaves to the men in Paradise?]

31. In the "Last Days" Jesus is supposed to appear in the clouds. How are the Christians on the opposite end of the world going to see him? Are there going to be millions of Jesus'? What about people that work underground? What about people in deep space? -

32. The Bible says that God is a jealous God . How is this an example of a moral absolute of which man is supposed to follow? - IG ON GOD`S JEALOUSY
1.) "God is love." 1 John 4:8.
2.) "Love is not jealous." 1 Cor 13:4
3.) "I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God." Exodus 20:5.
4.) The Christian god cannot logically exist.
(NOte: Basically love is NOT jealous, yet god is jealous, then God can`t be love. But if god IS love he cannot be jealous. Be he is.)

33. A true Muslim man is not supposed to do anything that the prophet Muhammad didn't do. If one remembers there was a big debate over whether or not Muslims should eat Mangos. If this is true, why in the Hell were these Islamic Fundamentalists flying airplanes? - IG

34. If the earth was covered by a complete global flood, every living creature killed except those surviving on the ark, why are there many completely unique animal species in Australia that are found no where else indigenously on the earth? -

35. If god is omniscient and " god is love," why would he allow a child to be conceived, knowing that that child would one day reject him and spend eternity burning in a lake of fire?- TiredTurkeyProd

36. Revelations is supposed to take place on Earth. What if we colonize the moon or Mars or inhabit a self-sustaining space station? Do we escape "judgement"? -- Ray Sommers [Note: No we don't Ray... and of course we all know that if there is any intelligent life out there besides us, they are all going to Hell too. Eye-wink]

37. Isaiah 40:28 says, "...the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is he weary?" If this is true, why did God rest on the seventh day?- IG

38. Everytime I go to a funeral the preacher and guests always say that " God " has called that person to Heaven or they say, " God said it was time to come home", or some such variation. If God is calling these people "home", why are we putting the murderers of these victims in prison? How can we punish a man or woman for doing God's will? - IG

39. Does God have a gender? In most churches, God is predominately referred to as a "he"? - IG [Note: The Bible says God is male, but what does this mean? Does God have a penis? Does he have hormones that dictate his gender? Smiling]

40. Why can't we wait until we get to Heaven to worship God ? Why would it be too late? - IG

41. What is the purpose of prayer? What can a finite being on Earth possibly tell an omnipotent, omniscient deity that he doesn't know already? - IG ON PRAYER
1.) Humans can?t change God?s mind for he has a divine plan and is unchangeable.
2.) Prayer can't change God's mind.
3.) Prayer doesn't change anything.
(Prayer may make you feel better emotionally, but it doesn`t change God`s mind.)

42. Some say Jesus was the all-knowing God. Jesus would have known then that when he died he'd be in heaven in less than 3 days to rule. If Jesus is alive and ruling today, what did he sacrifice? -- Cyndy Hammond

43. God knows that men are sinners, untrustworthy and evil, why does God leave it up to fallible man (clergy..etc) to teach others about his word? Why would he put our eternal souls at risk if he loves us so much? - The Infidel Guy and Danno778

44. Did Adam have nipples? If so, how did he acquire them? In fact, why would God give "later man" nipples at all? They serve no purpose other than lactation. Some say pleasure. Where is that in Genesis exactly? All mammals have nipples as well, are theirs pleasureful for them too? Many men don't find their nipples pleasurable at all. - IG

45. How did Adam and Eve know it was wrong to disobey God if they hadn't eaten of the tree of knowledge (of good and evil) yet? You can't blame them if they didn't know. - IG

46. If God has such a tremendous problem with uncircumcised penises, why did he make man with foreskin in the first place? - IG [Note: Some say, "So God can recognize his chosen people." Recognize? Is God so stupid that he has to physically look at men's penises? If not God, do other men need to? lol.]

47. Did Noah have fish onboard? Salt or Fresh? Since fresh water fish would die in salt, and salt water fish would die in fresh, only one type of fish would survive. Yet....?" - Frank Monaco

48. Why does the omnipotent, omnipresent God need help from man or angels to spread his word or do acts? - IG [Note: Some say God doesn't need help. But apparently he does.] - IG

49. How did Jesus ascend to Heaven in the Flesh when Paul says that flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of Heaven? (1 Cor.15:50) - IG [Note: Some say, well Paul said that and not Jesus. Yet they quote Paul when it suits there purposes.]

50. If God wants us to live right and choose "the good," why did he create evil? (Isaiah 45:6,7) Not to mention he already knows which people are not going to choose "the good" so why create those people in the first place? It seems that many people are born to go to Hell. - IG ON HELL
1.) God is all-knowing.
2.) Before I was born God knew I wouldn?t believe in him.
3.) I was born to go to Hell.
(Sure you may say I have a choice, but I think I`ve proven already that I really don`t. I`m simply fulfilling the will of God by being an atheist aren`t I? If I`m not, I shouldn`t exist: For God would have known that before I was created that I wouldn`t believe in him.)

51. I hear Christians all the time speaking of a spiritual war between Heaven and Hell, if this is true does God have limitations of power? Man only conducts wars because of our limitations of power and foresight. God has both all-power and all-knowledge, no reason for war of any kind. - IG

52. The Bible is full of phrases beginning with, "and the lord saw". Didn't he know before hand? - IG

53. How can a psychologist condone belief in something not proven to exist, when people are put into mental institutions on a daily basis for the same thing? i.e. aliens, fairies, imaginary people (Multiple Personality Disorders..)? - Dan Denton [Note: I'm sure that some of the pious believe that they are improperly placed there as well Dan. Smiling]

54. If Christians say they know God exists and that he will work miracles, what do they need faith for? Faith is not knowing. - IG

55. Brain, or shall I say, body transplants, will eventually be possible, where would the soul be then? Where is the soul? - IG

56. If God really wants us to know him, why doesn't he place the knowledge of him in our minds at birth? The same way many theists believe that God implants our sense of right and wrong in us a right birth. - IG

57. If God was Jesus' father (not Joseph), then why is Jesus' family tree traced through Joseph? -- Cyndy Hammond

58. What image of God was man made from? Couldn't have been a moral one or physical one. - IG [Note: One would suspect that an image of God would be perfect and cannot sin. Oops.]

59. Why can't God appear before everyone at the same time? Everyone in the world would then "know" he exists and not have solely "believe". And please, don't say he already tried that. Surely a God knows exactly what to do to convince a measly human of his existence. - IG

60. According to the New Testament Matthew 5:17 says "Do not suppose that I have come to abolish the Law and the prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to complete. I tell you this: so long as heaven and earth endure, not a letter, not a stroke, will disappear from the Law until all that must happen has Happened." So since Jesus has not returned the "Law" is still in effect, so why aren't we still burning witches, stoning adulterers and disobedient children, killing homosexuals, ostracizing people that work on the Sabbath (nurses, doctors etc.), flinging blood onto the horns of the alter, pulling off the heads of small birds, and don't forget human sacrifice to God (Leviticus 27 P.28 )? -- Sheila L. Chambers

61. If there is freewill in Heaven yet everyone has chosen good and is happy, isn't that proof that God could have made us with freewill, choosing good ( God ) and still being happy on Earth? - Dennis Hendrix [Note: In other words, evil didn't have to exist after all. Hey wait, even in Heaven apparently, evil can exist. At least for a short while. Satan became evil and was in heaven. Apparently he even had enough time to form an Army against God. Wow. Maybe Heaven won't be as peaceful as many believe.]

62. Why does God have a plan? Man is limited in power so we make plans because we are not all-knowing nor all-powerful. If God has a plan, isn't he reduced to a mere finite being? - IG

63. How could the all-merciful/loving God watch billions of his children burn over and over again for eternity? - IG [Note: Of course this is geared to those that believe in a fiery hell. I am well aware that not all Christians believe in a fiery Hell.]

64. Before reading and writing were invented (5000BC), on what basis did God use to judge the people who died before the Hebrew and Greek text (BIBLE) were written? -- [Note: They are all roasting in Hell. Smiling]

65. Many Christians tell me that I will "burn in hell". If I have a soul, how can a soul burn? Aren't souls non-physical entities? - IG [Note: Some Christians groups believe that you will be given new bodies after judgement. However, if true, what's the significance of a spirit in the first place?]

66. How can one hold to the barbaric belief that something has to DIE in order to appease a god for a bad deed? -- Nickolaus Wing [Note: Because an old book says so Nick.]

67. Why does SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) occur? Why would God allow a baby to live for such a short period of time? Why not just let them not be born in the first place? -- Terry Clark [Note: This actually happened to a friend of mine. Not even God himself could console her.]

68. If Jesus was nailed and died on Friday evening, and walked out of the tomb on Sunday morning, where's the 3rd NIGHT he predicted? Per Matthew 12:40: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. -

69. Many Christians claim that hell is merely existence outside of God ?s presence (C.S. Lewis among others). If this is the case, then Jesus could not have descended into hell (being God Himself). As a result, are you sure your sins are forgiven? - Byron Bultsma

70. Ten to twenty percent of all women who discover they are pregnant suffer a miscarriage. Also, it is estimated that anywhere from 14 to 50 percent of all pregnancies end in miscarriage. Seeing this is all part of God 's plan, does this make God the world's number one abortion provider? - Jim

71. What if, when you get to Heaven, you saw God causing pain and suffering out of anger or for the purpose of entertaining himself. What if he required people in heaven to praise and worship him non-stop even to the point of causing his worshipers discomfort, pain and boredom. What if, when he was bored, angry, or jealous, he would create natural disasters to make himself feel better. Would you still follow him? - Fernando [Note: Of course they would Fernando, many people followed Hitler out of fear as well.]

72. In Leviticus, the bible condemns homosexuality as an "abomination", giving some Christians a reason to hate, harass, torture and kill gays and even picket their funderals with " God hates fags" signs. In the same book of the bible the eating of shellfish is equally an "abomination". Are these Christians planning to go after the patrons of Red Lobster next? - [Note: hee-hee, that's all I can say. Jewish Law states that eating Fish without scales is an abomination and thus the Shark is one among the list. However, sharks do have scales, Placoid scales, one of the many reasons why a shark is called a Fish .]

73. Christians will tell you that if a baby dies it goes to heaven. Why then are they so against abortion? All the child is being deprived of is the opportunity to go to hell. Either that or god expects unborn fetuses to accept Jesus. -

74. If one could prove to you incontrovertibly that Jesus and God were all human fabrications would still believe? And why? - LOGICnREASON [Note: If you say yes. Then you are not concerned with the truth, you simply WANT to believe; and if you WANT to believe, indeed, there is nothing anyone can tell you..]

75. It is often said that God allows evil because one could not meaningfully appreciate good without experiencing its opposite. Why is it necessary to experience the opposite of something in order to appreciate it? Must I experience death in order to meaningfully appreciate life? -excidius

76. Bible literalists want you to believe that God's Word in the Bible is meant to be taken literally. If this is the case, why was Jesus fond of explaining things in parable and metaphor? Was Jesus literally discussing the biology of mustard seeds, or was the mustard seed parable meant to be interpreted figuratively as faith? -excidius

77. Liberal Christians say some parts of the Bible are literally true, but much else is to be interpreted figuratively as allegory. How do you know which is which? What distinguishing criteria are used? How can you be certain "God" is a literal and not a figurative concept? -excidius

78. Consciousness is the result of a physical brain, how could God being metaphysical be said to be conscious or sentient without having a brain? - Mindless

79. Considering how Leviticus is considered old law, and that Christians do not obey it anymore, why do they always use it to defend homosexuality being an "abomination"? -Bohorquez

80. If God is omnipotent and he has a plan ... then why did he not create the universe as it will be one second after the plan has succeeded? Who or what prevented him from doing that? - Timothy Campbell (http://www.tc123.com)

81. The large majority of people who have ever existed could not have learned of the Bible or Jesus Christ. And many people afterwards have found other religions or no religion at all to be more convincing, sometimes while being very virtuous. Do all these people really deserve eternal torment because of that? -- lpetrich

82. The above arguments also apply among different sects of Christianity, many of which state that most others are not True Christianity. -- lpetrich

83. Is it reasonable for the Creator and Ruler of such a vast Universe to be preoccupied with the sexuality of a species living on a tiny little planet? -- lpetrich

84. If the Christian god was all loving and all knowing why did he let religious figures such as Mohammed or Gautama Budda be born, knowing that they would mislead people from the 'true' faith and trick the majority of the world's population into burning forever in hell (in fact, if Islam didn't start, most of the middle east would probably be Christian). It would simple to use the Holy Spirit to guide them to Jesus and spread the 'true' faith. If the Holy Spirit exits, it certainly isn't doing it's job!

85. If one is obliged to follow all the teachings of the bible then why is engaging in homosexuality or adultery any worse than "suffering a witch to live", "muzzling the ox that treadeth the corn", "reaping the corners of thy field", "marring the corners of they beard", "plowing with an oxen and an ass", "hating thy brother in thy heart" or "eating frogs, shellfish and eels" ?

86. Exactly how did the alleged worldwide flood kill off all the world's sea creatures? How does one go about drowning a fish? -- Steever

87. Why did this alleged god create humans as an animal form of life that gets sick and dies and experiences pain and has a limited mind when 'it' could have created humans as a form of pure energy or of some indestructible material or whatever, and was totally ?sinless? and had ?pure? thought? If a god was omnipotent 'it' could have easily have done this. --AI

88. If a god is omnipotent how did 'it' fail to foresee that Satan would turn against 'it'? --AI

89. What is a god supposedly made of? --AI

This list was compiled by the Infidel Guy with submissions from many members of the atheist community.

PICK THE QUESTION YOU WANT TO ANSWER, AND POST IT HERE...

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


dominick_777
Theist
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

4 questions for the questioners..

1) What happens if a personal can answer these in a reasonable way, that should be acceptable to anyone who follows the principles of reason?

2) Would the people asking these questions suddenly change their minds from non theism to at very least theism if that happens?

3) Or are these being asked for no real reason..implying the questioners arent really interested in reason or truth?

4) What would you say is an appropriate criteria you think is fair in answering one two or all of these?

Please be specific in your answer. I hope there's a consensus on the answer.

"It has been stated that an unexamined life is not worth living, but it can also be stated that an unexamined faith is not worth believing". Norman Geisler


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

dominick_777 wrote:
4 questions for the questioners.. 1) What happens if a personal can answer these in a reasonable way, that should be acceptable to anyone who follows the principles of reason?
If they could answer all of them, they'd have done an awfully good job proving Yahweh, exists.
Quote:
2) Would the people asking these questions suddenly change their minds from non theism to at very least theism if that happens?
I personally would formulate more questions, however if the above questions could be answered well I'd have to admit that the bible was more plausible then I give it credit for. Why bother asking the above two moot questions? For 6 years we've proposed these questions and they remain on the list because they've never been answered well. Would you care to answer a single one of them or just debate the results of what a succesful answer would do?
Quote:
3) Or are these being asked for no real reason..implying the questioners arent really interested in reason or truth?
I hope you don't really think that, and you're merely probing for a chance to stomp on someone's stupidity. I do find it ironic that the folks who believe in the bible seem to not be interested in reason or the truth, yet you're asking "us" this question.
Quote:
4) What would you say is an appropriate criteria you think is fair in answering one two or all of these?
It's not up to me to figure out how someone could appropriatly answer these questions. If I knew how that could be done, I wouldn't have to ask them. I've seen these questions debated for a very long time and I've seen people come close but I can look to no example of what is a reasonable appropriate answer to solving these "riddles/questions." Care to attempt to answer the questions, rather than answer the questions with questions?[/b]

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

I am debating these questions on a myspace page. If you have a myspace account feel free to join me here.

The most comprehensive response I have got so far is what will follow, I will quote the original question and answer and then post my response.

Quote:
1. If Jesus fulfilled all the OT prophecies so well, why didn't the Jews recognize him as the messiah? - Francois Tremblay

Because the Messiah was also prophesied to be rejected by his own people and to be make himself a sacrifice for the sins of others (Isaiah chapter 52-33, and the later portions of daniel).

There is no Isaiah 52:33. What passages in Daniel are you referring to?

Quote:
2. If Gen 3:24 is true, why hasn't anyone found the Cherubims and the " flaming sword which turned every way"?

It's called Noah's Flood (it's a few chapters later in Jesus)... and there was a resulting land reconfiguration (the earth was divide)... Needless to say after continental shift and really huge flood the landscape isn't the same and the Garden of Eden is long gone

Gone where? Would it not still be flaming? I can understand if you'd say no, but why has it not been found? It should still be located in the strata in which other fossilized remains from that time period exist. Good answer though. I suppose a good excuse could be, that it hasn't been found yet. But the idea that it is "gone" makes no sense.

Quote:
3. It's been proven that modern humans originated from Africa. Yet, the Adam and Eve story claims the first Humans lived in a garden in Eden, near 4 rivers. ( Most of which no one can find). One of these rivers mentioned is the Euphrates, which runs through Iraq, Syria and a portion of Turkey. What's the truth? Did man come out of Africa or near the Euphrates River? - The Infidel Guy

What proof is this that modern humans came from Africa? Now there is proof that modern humans can all be traced back to one female ancestor (mitochondria eve) and one male ancestor (y-chromosome Adam).

Read the answer to question number 1, from Omaha Nebraska Community College. Now where is the proof that we can all be traced to a single male ancestor? We don't have that capability with DNA yet, that I know of.

The idea of a mitochondrial eve doesn't represent that all humans came from that particular female, it is only the knowledge that we can verify. Richard Dawkins has done work showing that the mitochondrial eve might not be the actual eve. Read the Selfish Gene, by Dawkins. Mitochondrial DNA helps prove evolution, there is no signal from God, or proof of God when you look into mitochondrial DNA.

Quote:
4. When the believer gets to Heaven, how can Heaven be utter bliss when people they love and care about are burning in Hell ? - The Infidel Guy - [Note: Some say God erases your memories of them, but if God erases your memory, you as Mr. Joe /Jane Smoe ceases to exist.]

How can someone get over a lost loved one? Not sure but it happens... time heals old wounds.

Your telling me how I'll feel for an eternity if I were to go to heaven? At least you admit you're not sure. I'm not either, but from where I sit I couldn't be happy for an eternity when I know people very close to me are in torture for an eternity.

Quote:
5. How can a God have emotions, i.e. jealousy, anger, sadness, love, etc., if he is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent? Emotional states are reactionary for the most part. How can God react to us if he is all-knowing and has a divine plan? - IG [Note: Indeed, many religious texts display their gods this way . Listen to the An Emotional Godshow.]

If people screw up their own lives why can't God has feelings (people have them afterall). Surely, you must have felt bad seeing someone squander their potential, (why can't God feel the same)

That didn't answer the question, only restated it from a Christian perspective. God can't have emotions because they are reactionary, he wouldn't react in that way to things he has already known for an eternity.

Quote:
6. Why would God create a place such as hell to torture sinners forever when he foreknew who would disappoint him? - IG [Note: Some say you have a choice, but this misses the point. If God hates sin so much, why create Adam and Eve when he knew they'd sin? The only conclusion I can come up with, if Yaweh exists, is that he wanted sin to enter the world.]

Freewill, let those who want to serve him go one way and those who don't want to serve him and rather selfishly seeks their own wants.

This doesn't answer the question either, and doesn't warrant a response.

Quote:
7. "God is all merciful, " we hear quite often. Wouldn't it be more merciful of God to simply snap sinners out of existence rather than send them to hell? Or better yet, since he's all-knowing, not allow them to be born at all? - IG

ON GOD'S LOVE & HELL

1.) God's love is superlative.

2.) God's love of man exceeds man's love of self.

3.) Man's love of self prohibits torture.

4.) Considering God's greater love for us, Hell (eternal torture) is illogical.

Again God gives man choice... God is loving but he is also just, again free choice (punishing them by not allowing to be born violates that)

That's a contradiction. He can't be just and merciful at the same time. If he's just the punishment will fit the crime, if he's merciful the punishment would be less than the crime deserves. Which is it? Is he merciful, or just? Additionally id your god all powerful? If so, he surely could make a world in which nobody goes to hell, and yet we all have free will. If he is not all powerful than he isn't god.

I'm reminded of the riddle from Epicurus.

~The Riddle of Epicurus~

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

Quote:
8 didn't apply.

Quote:
9. Why haven't we seen God reattach severed heads, restore someone who was burned alive or regrow amputated limbs? Surely these would be miracles difficult to deny. - Adam Majors and IG [Note: The typical answer is that man doesn't dictate God's actions. The conundrum here however is that, if God wants us to "know" him, then surely feats such as those mentioned above would be happening all over the world. Until they do, I'll remain an atheist.]

Research has been done which shows that people who pray for recovery from diseases are more likely to heal... So what's your point again???

The point again, is that evidence isn't clear to people. God "wants" us to know him, yet provides no conclusive evidence. People should be faced with one choice: Whether they want to believe in a god that has shown himself. Instead, people are forced to make two choices. The choice I just mentioned (which should be universal), and the choice to beleive in something they have no evidence for.

Quote:
10. Why does God entrust the spreading of 'His' word to sinners? Why doesn't he do it himself? - IG [Note: Surely God would have known that not everyone would be convinced by the reality[sic] of his Bible. If God loves us so much, we are all going to Heaven. If God knew that I would be an atheist, and he doesn't like atheists, he shouldn't have allowed me to come into existence. But he did. Therefore, I must be serving the will of God, for I exist. Smiling]

Why does a father decide to take his little kids and work on the car with them. They aren't any help and are usually a delay and a hinderance. Maybe he wants to have a bonding experience by sharing his interests with them???

Your answer is a non sequitor. It didn't answer the question.

Quote:
11. In II Kings 2-23/24 we read about God sending 2 she-bears to attack children for calling the prophet Elisa bald, which he was, the bears killed 42 of the children. Was this a good thing to do? -- Brandon and IG[Note: I have heard some argue that the boys were a gang. So?! I didn't read anywhere in that passage where they laid a finger on the guy . Also, what kind of bears are these that can kill 42 kids? Super Bears? Surely the kids had to be running away.]

Umm don't underestimate the power of bears... Black bears have been known to rip the doors off cars... and running from the bears (instead of defending yourself) doesn't help.

It seems most of your answers are non answers, non sequitors or red herrings. Again, was it good of god to murder 42 children for calling a man bald?

Quote:
12. I have often heard from many believers that even Satan has a presence in the church, which is why even in church people can still have impure thoughts. If Satan can find his way in the church, how do Christians know that Satan didn't find his way into the Bible and twist the whole book? After all, men did vote on which books would make the Holy Bible. - The Infidel Guy

God can preserve however much of the bible that he wants to... although there have been extremely poor translations and medieval additions (the vast majority if not all of this has been fixed by the protestant reformation)

This is yet another non answer. How do Christians know that Satan didn't find his way into the Bible and twist the whole book? Furthermore, how do you know that Satan hasn't tricked you into being his tool? Maybe God wants you to interpret the bible completely different. A good example would be how everyone discounts old testament law today, yet Jesus said he came to fulfil those laws, not chage them. Maybe God wants you to kill young children who disobey their father by stoning them to death as it tells us to do in Deutoronomy.

Quote:
13. Why did God allow Lot and his daughters to escape from Sodom and Gomorra when he destroyed it only to later have Lot and his daughters engage in incestuous fornication. (Genesis 19:30-36) - Disillusioned [Note: To have intercourse with daddy dearest of course.]

Because Lot was a righteous man and God was making a point that when he judges he doesn't destroy the righteous with the wicked. Furthermore, Lot's daughters took advantage of their father after they got him super drunk. If you slip a pill in a girls drink then take her unconscious body home and rape her does that count as consent?

God knew what would transpire with Lot. He knew his daughters would have incestual sex with him, why did god save the daughters? (I'll entertain the thought that Lot was righteous)

Quote:
14. Genesis 1:28-29 shows that man and all the animals were first created herbivorous. Most young-earth Christians (ones that believes the earth is less than 10, 000 years old) say that the fall of man resulted in carnivorous animals ( hence death of animals). So, why did God punish the animal kingdom, making animals kill and devour each other because of man's mistake? Or, if you're an old-earth Christian (one that accepts that animals existed on earth for billions of years before man came on the scene) then how come fossils show carnivorous animals existed before man? - http://www.caseagainstfaith.com/contact.htm.

If you believe in flood geology you don't believe that the lowest layers of rock equal the oldest creatures and you don't believe the highest layers equal the youngest.

So then you don't believe in scientific fact if you believe in flood geology?

Quote:
15. Many Christians believe that God is a thinking being, that he solves problems and makes a way for them when troubles come. Does God Think? If God is thinking, did he know his thoughts before he thought them? If so, again, where is his freewill and how is God thinking at all if everything seems to be one uncontrollable action/thoughts. - The Infidel Guy [Note: I'd say a God cannot think at all. To do so, would strip him of omniscience. Thinking is a temporal process.] ON GOD'S ATEMPORALITY

1.) God, an atemporal being, created the Universe.

2.) Creation is a temporal processes because X cannot cause Y to come into being unless X existed temporally prior to Y.

3.) If God existed prior to the creation of the Universe he is a temporal being.

4.) Since God is atemporal, God cannot be the creator the Universe.

[Note: I guess I should also note here that a timeless being would be without the proposition of past, and future. But to be omniscient, God must know the past and future. Hence a God that is atemporal and omniscient cannot logically exist. Smiling]

You aren't making sense with this one... God created the universe end of point...

If you don't understand something, it's ok. You should've just not answered. There is no need to tell someone they don't make sense when you are unable to comprehend. Your silly answer is evidence of your lack of understanding the question. Let's simplify to the first two sentences for you (try again):

Many Christians believe that God is a thinking being, that he solves problems and makes a way for them when troubles come. Does God Think? If God is thinking, did he know his thoughts before he thought them?

Quote:
16. I have often heard that faith is all that is neccessary to believe in God and accept the Bible as true. If this is true aren't all supernatural beliefs true since they also require "faith"? - IG ON FAITH

1.) A prerequisite to believe in a Faith is faith.
2.) Having faith is all that is required to accept a Faith (belief) as true.
3.) All Faiths are true.

[Note: Of course all Faiths aren`t true, but this is the only logical conclusion that can be drawn from a person that states that, "Faith" is how one knows God.]

According to Christianity one is justified by faith in God and Jesus (and his sacrifice for your sins)... Other beliefs have other means to be justified (I haven't heard of any others being based solely on faith)

Geez. Most of the time Christians have no understanding of religions from hundreds and thousands of years ago. You seem to have your problem in current day. Muslims and Jews all base their religion on faith. Faith is what you use to help believe something you have no evidence for, nobody has evidence for god, therefore EVERYONE who believes in a god bases their belief on faith. Now would you care to answer the question?

Quote:
17. Why didn't God just kill Adam and Eve after the Fall and start from scratch? Actually, if God is all-knowing wouldn't he know that man would need to be killed eventually anyway, (the biblical flood)? Why create Adam and Eve at all? - and ON THE GARDEN OF EDEN

1.) God is omniscient (all-knowing).
2.) God knew that before he created man that they would eat of the tree of knowledge.
3.) God placed the tree of knowledge in the Garden anyway.
4.) God wanted sin to enter the world.

[Note: If God didn`t want sin to enter the world, why create Adam and Eve at all? He knew what would happen. Why place the forbidden trees in the Garden in the first place?]

Because God wanted beings with freewill even if the choose incorrectly, besides weren't you just complaining about God not being merciful enough??? make up your mind?

It is not merciful to allow freewill so that you can punish someone for an eternity when they make the wrong choices, which he knew ahead of time they would do.

Quote:
18. If a spirit is non-physical but the human body is physical, how does a spirit stay in our bodies? - IG ON SPIRITS

1.) Spirits are not physical entities.
2.) Brains are physical entities.
3.) Past experiences are stored in our physical brains, we call that, Memory..
4.) Injury can damage portions of the physical brain that store memory and can alter or erase memories completely.
5.) If human spirits exist... after death, spirits can have no memory.

[Note: Some will say the spirit stores physical memories as well, but if true, the spirit would have to be physical at least to a degree. How could a non-physical spirit store, physical memories?]

How is it that humans have a conscious awareness of their surroundings... nothing can account for this, computers don't have it. Why don't humans just be like computers (avoid p[pain]), seek pl[pleasure]... why does pain have to hurt so damn much and pleasure make you moan. People are more than biomechanisms... deal with it.

Again, you didn't answer the question. YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE ATTEMPTED TO ANSWER THESE WITHOUT A CLUE! I count one that you had anywhere near a valid response to the actual question. I will address the point you made though.

Quote:
How is it that humans have a conscious awareness of their surroundings... nothing can account for this, computers don't have it.

Computers don't have hearts, arms, and blood vessels either. But dolphins, dogs and chimps do, so what?!

Quote:
why does pain have to hurt so damn much and pleasure make you moan.

Pain doesn't always hurt so much, pleasure doesn't always make you moan. This soooo has nothing to do with a spirit staying in our body.

Quote:
19. Does God know his own future decisions? If God is all-knowing he actually shouldn't have any decisions to make at all. Nor can he choose anything over something else. For that would mean that he is neither omniscient nor omnipotent. In fact, he can't even think if this is the case. Since he can't DO anything, he might as well not exist. - IG ON GOD'S IMMUTABILITY - Unchangingness

1. If God exists, then he is immutable.
2. If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.
3. An immutable being cannot at one time have an intention and then at a later time not have that intention.
4. For any being to create anything, prior to the creation he must have had the intention to create it, but at a later time, after the creation, no longer have the intention to create it.
5. Thus, it is impossible for an immutable being to have created anything (from 3 and 4).
6. Therefore, it is impossible for God to exist (from 1, 2, and 5) - Theodore M. Drange

Again you aren't making sense... God had the intention to create the universe, he created it (goal accomplished)... further intention to create the universe no longer required.

Ok, so you see how silly this is starting to look, let's simplify it:

Question: Does God know his own future decisions?

Your answer: God had the intention to create the universe, he created it. Further intention to create the universe no longer required

YOUR ANSWER HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE QUESTION!!

Quote:
20. If God is all-knowing, how could he be disappointed in His creation? -- [Note: Indeed, wouldn't God know that before the creation of our Universe what creatures would disappoint him? That being the case why create those creatures at all? Also, in knowing absolutely the behavior of humans before creation, God cannot be disappointed either... for this world is exactly as he has planned it to be. If it's not, why create us at all?]

Have you ever known in advance someone would let your down (gf, friend) we all have... but it still sucks nevertheless.

No, I rarely have a knowledge of things in advance. If I did, I wouldn't be disappointed over what I knew would happen, that's ridiculous. If I "know a girlfriend" is going to let me down in the future, I drop her." I can never recall a time in my life when I knew that. You still haven't answered the question. God is ALL knowing, I am not.

Quote:
21. God struck down the Tower of Babel angry at the intent of the people that built them, if this is the case, many of the great pyramids ( which are bigger than any ziggurat) around the world should be rubble also, yet many still stand today. Were not the Egyptians and many other ancient pyramid builders reaching toward God /The Heavens? - IG [Note: In actuality, many of the Pharaoh's believed that, via their pyramids, they would become God's themselves.]

Well that and too much of humanity was settling in a given location and he wanted to scatter them.

Again, you didn't answer the question which was... "Were not the Egyptians and many other ancient pyramid builders reaching toward God /The Heavens?"

Quote:
22. In the watchmaker analogy, a watch is used to show us intelligent design and compares that to the Universe as evidence of design. We know watches are designed because we have past experience with watches, as well as with other man made objects. My question is: What Universe is the Intelligent Design proponent using to compare this Universe with to draw such an analogy? What God did he see create a Universe? - IG

It's usually a comparison to living systems (a reproducing organism/life in it's most basic form, the mammalian antibody-immune response, the blood clotting cascade, etc). All of the above involve several if not many well interlocked, and interconnected well tuned mechanisms that couldn't be arrived at gradually.

Because if you missed on mechanism or any of them didn't work at a high level of the specific function than the whole system wouldn't work and be useless).

Although you can say the universe is pretty well tuned... Gravity isn't so strong that universe is a giant black hole, yet isn't so weak that the universe would instantly superexpand into heat death. The strong nuclear force is strong enough that elements larger much than hydrogen (helium, oxygen, carbon, potassium, magnesium, iron, etc) can exist, etc.

I know what the usual comparison is to. That's why the question was asked, because the logic is flawed. To insist that the Universe has a creator because a watch has a creator, one must have another universe to compare it to, that required a creator. We can empirically see that watches, have creators, we can't see that as it pertains to a Universe.

Quote:

23. Why did God flood the earth to remove evil? It didn't work! Evil came right back, God should have known that would happen! So why did He bother? - PhineasBg [Note: A good example of how quickly sin returned, was Noah getting drunk just after they discovered land.]

Yeah it can back but it took a while, think of it as pruning...

A while? It took like 10 minutes. Noah was drunk and naked in a few minutes. Furthermore who cares how long it took, the point is it came back! Did God not know it would? If not, he's not all knowing, if so... then what the heck was he doing? You dismiss the murder of millions of god children that he loves as pruning? Seek mental help.

Quote:
24. If the garden of Eden was a perfect paradise as xians claim, then why did Eve even want to eat the fruit? Wouldn't a perfect place provide everything a person would want or desire and thus she would want nothing? - keyser soze [Note: Why were the trees there in the first place? Of course they love to throw the serpent into the equation. But ummm..who let the serpent into the Garden?... and why would God create such a creature knowing he would cause man's fall? Hmm.. God must have wanted the fall to happen.]

The grass is greener on the other side... In regards to Satan... again freewill

first half: actually an answer worth lending credence to! CONGRATS.
second half: Who was talking about Satan? We're talking about the serpent. Guess you think they're the same thing. :shock:

Quote:
25. Why would an all-powerful god become flesh in order to sacrifice himself to himself so that his creation might escape the wrath of himself. Couldn't god, in his infinite wisdom, come up with something a little more efficient? - ON THE BODY OF CHRIST

1.) God?s flesh was known as Jesus.
2.) Flesh cannot enter into Heaven (according to Paul)
3.) God is no longer Jesus.
4.) Jesus doesn?t exist.

You are trying too hard... God wanted to have a better relationship with man... and there really is alot to say about walking a mile in someone else's shows. Jesus lived the perfect life (which is why he was able to get into heaven... other flesh [you and me] can't make that claim). Jesus died for our sins... painful but also demonstrative of God's love

No buddy, it is you who are trying to hard. You dodged the question. Do you realize that an all powerful being could come up with other way to walk a mile in someone else's shoes? And and all knowing being would NEVER need to walk in someone elses shoes to attain knowledge. Additionally the question remains...

Why would an all-powerful god become flesh in order to sacrifice himself to himself so that his creation might escape the wrath of himself. Couldn't god, in his infinite wisdom, come up with something a little more efficient?

Quote:
26. After 9/11 a lot of people have been tossing around " god bless america". Why do they keep saying this? From the looks of it god hasn't blessed anything. If god had blessed america, the 9/11 event would've never happened. Theists seem to give the answer of "everything is part of gods big plan". If everything is part of gods big plan, why are we after Bin Laden? Wasn't he and other terrorists just carrying out gods desired plan? So it seems that Bin Laden/ terrorism isnt our enemy, but god . - [Note: Unfortunately many religious nuts believe they are fulfilling their God's plan by going to war.]

This is becoming more a rant isn't it... Maybe they aren't saying "God Bless America" not as reality but as a prayer "God Bless America" (I love the land, it's my home, please bless it).

Do you get the point? Why pray to a being who just screwed you?

Quote:
27. Christians say that God is NOT the author of confusion. Can you say, Tower of Babel? - The Screaming Monkeys

Again to redistribute humanity, into given languages and thus divide them (and most linguists believe that humans originally had one language)

Smiling You just agreed with the fact that God is the author of confusion. Smiling

Quote:
28. If Noah's flood supposedly covered the earth for a year, regardless of whether or not all the animals could fit on the ark, what the heck happened to all the plants? Can you imagine a cactus surviving under 4 miles of water for a year? I can't either! - Kyle Giblet [Note: With God all things are possible. Oh wait, except in Judges 1:19.]

You would be surprised how long seeds can survive... Functional wheat seeds have been found in the tombs of egyptian pharoahs (from 4000 years ago)

And, how long can cactus survive under 4 miles of water? Semi-good job on this one. However in a previous question you suggested that the flood would've altered the layers of strata in the Earth, so therefore you have no assurance that the seeds would be anywhere near the surface.

Quote:
29. The highest rainfall ever recorded in a 24 hour period was 47inches in the Reunion Islands in 1947 (during a severe tropical storm). To cover the whole earth to a depth of 5.6 miles, and cover the mountain tops (i.e. Mount Everest), it would need to rain at a rate of 372 (three hundred and seventy two) inches per hour, over the entire surface of the earth. Can rain fall at such an astronomical rate? Where did all the water come from?? Where did it all go to??? And would not the dynamics of the earth be so out of balance (tides etc.) that the earth would become so unstable that it would wobble off into outer space???? -

You are assuming that the geography of earth was the same then as it is now. However, if there were no deep ocean trenchs and basins... nor really high mountains... then it would only take the amount of water now on the surface. According to Creationists the whole surface of the earth changed from shallow hills and valleys, to mountains and deep ocean trenches.

This is why no intellectual person looks to creationists for knowledge. I'll entertain the thought.... where is the biblical passage suggesting spontaneous reconfiguration of all the Earths surface AFTER the flood?

Quote:
30. Doesn't Apply

Quote:
31. In the "Last Days" Jesus is supposed to appear in the clouds. How are the Christians on the opposite end of the world going to see him? Are there going to be millions of Jesus'? What about people that work underground? What about people in deep space? -

God can work out the details... and there is such a thing called television... btw... and the international space station isn't deep space by any stretch of the imagination

DING DING DING, I'll give you a B+ on this one, but only because you answered all of them. An all powerful god should be able to work out the details. I still wonder how those underground workers will figure it out, and I agree the Space Station isn't deep space. However the question never said it was.

Quote:
32. The Bible says that God is a jealous God . How is this an example of a moral absolute of which man is supposed to follow? - IG ON GOD`S JEALOUSY

1.) "God is love." 1 John 4:8.
2.) "Love is not jealous." 1 Cor 13:4
3.) "I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God." Exodus 20:5.
4.) The Christian god cannot logically exist.

(NOte: Basically love is NOT jealous, yet god is jealous, then God can`t be love. But if god IS love he cannot be jealous. Be he is.)

Inadequate English translation... God want's what is rightfully his... just like we expect our wives and girlfriends not to cheat on us.

Bad answer. Maybe you should research what some of those creationists have to say about God being jealous.

Exodus 34: 13 (?)-- For thou shalt worship no other god: for The Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God

HIS NAME IS JEALOUS!! The hebrew translation is pronounced "caw-naw" which means provoked to jealousy.

Quote:
33. Doesn't Apply

Quote:
34. If the earth was covered by a complete global flood, every living creature killed except those surviving on the ark, why are there many completely unique animal species in Australia that are found no where else indigenously on the earth? -

Australia has a unique climate and as such the unique species were able to survive there and not in other areas (post-flood)

Eh? This is a weird non-answer. It's almost an answer, but dodges the fact that those animals that can't swim... SWAM over to Australia.

Quote:
35. If god is omniscient and " god is love, " why would he allow a child to be conceived, knowing that that child would one day reject him and spend eternity burning in a lake of fire?- TiredTurkeyProd

Freewill and justice... refer to earlier postings

Fine, refer to my earlier postings then too.

Quote:
36. Revelations is supposed to take place on Earth. What if we colonize the moon or Mars or inhabit a self-sustaining space station? Do we escape "judgement"? -- Ray Sommers [Note: No we don't Ray... and of course we all know that if there is any intelligent life out there besides us, they are all going to Hell too. Eye-wink]

I'm not seeing that happen anytime soon, but in revelations it says that 1/3 of the heavens will go dark as well as other things that happen which effect the physical universe... If there are people on Mars (and that's a really big if) then they will probably suffer different plagues.

Another, fine answer. You could've just said... "No"

Quote:
37. Isaiah 40:28 says, "...the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is he weary?" If this is true, why did God rest on the seventh day?- IG

Because he was done making stuff, and he wanted to set the precedent for a human weekend.

LMAO. But why does someone who never gets weary need to rest? Precedent for a weekend, huh? Is that like setting a precedent for Nations to commit war against each other?

Quote:
38. Everytime I go to a funeral the preacher and guests always say that " God " has called that person to Heaven or they say, " God said it was time to come home", or some such variation. If God is calling these people "home", why are we putting the murderers of these victims in prison? How can we punish a man or woman for doing God's will? - IG

It may be God's will that people ultimately die, but it's not his will that people commit acts of evil. It was God's will the man died, but that doesn't justify the choice of his murderer.

We didn't say it justified the acts of the murderer. We said the murderer was doing gods will. Everything is his will dude, or he's not god. Even actions of satan are his will, as he willed satan knowing everything that would ever occur.

Quote:
39. Does God have a gender? In most churches, God is predominately referred to as a "he"? - IG [Note: The Bible says God is male, but what does this mean? Does God have a penis? Does he have hormones that dictate his gender? Smiling]

"It" is relatively impersonal, if you can think of a personal gender neutral equivalent of he... then feel free

Fine answer.

Quote:
40. Why can't we wait until we get to Heaven to worship God ? Why would it be too late? - IG

Not getting you... we can worship God here or there... and many people do

I don't like this question too much, fine answer. Moving on...

Quote:
41. What is the purpose of prayer? What can a finite being on Earth possibly tell an omnipotent, omniscient deity that he doesn't know already? - IG ON PRAYER

1.) Humans can?t change God?s mind for he has a divine plan and is unchangeable.
2.) Prayer can't change God's mind.
3.) Prayer doesn't change anything.
(Prayer may make you feel better emotionally, but it doesn`t change God`s mind.)

That's why Jesus said to keep your prayers short (God already knows everything), still it's also an opportunity for people to listen and be honest with themselves.

Isn't that a contradiction? How is someone being honest with themselves when they pray hoping to tell god to help them with something? Gods mind is already made up, aren't they just lying to themselves?

Quote:
42. Some say Jesus was the all-knowing God. Jesus would have known then that when he died he'd be in heaven in less than 3 days to rule. If Jesus is alive and ruling today, what did he sacrifice? -- Cyndy Hammond

Um he was subject to a life of scorning, mocking, and humiliation, culminating in a traumatic and painful death... What did he sacrifice??? I'll let you answer that

If you'll let me answer that I say he sacrificed nothing. I deal with scorn, mocking, "attempts" of humiliation on your Hardcore Christians message board in almost half the responses to my posts. As far as a painful death, I'd deal with a few days of that to be king of all humanity for eternity.

Quote:
43. God knows that men are sinners, untrustworthy and evil, why does God leave it up to fallible man (clergy..etc) to teach others about his word? Why would he put our eternal souls at risk if he loves us so much? - The Infidel Guy and Danno778

You are repeating them now... (Refer back to question 10)

And I'll repeat my answer to number 10: "Your answer is a non sequitor. It didn't answer the question."

Quote:
44. Did Adam have nipples? If so, how did he acquire them? In fact, why would God give "later man" nipples at all? They serve no purpose other than lactation. Some say pleasure. Where is that in Genesis exactly? All mammals have nipples as well, are theirs pleasureful for them too? Many men don't find their nipples pleasurable at all. - IG

It's genetically efficient to give both the sexes nipples and breasts (although the male ones aren't an obstruction)... It's also genetically efficient to give the sexs, two eyes, two ears, two arms and two legs.

In what sense is it efficient? It saved god a step? He's all powerful, certainly he'd know that the male nipple would help prove evolution, and that people would use it as evidence against his existence. For a god who is jealous that wants us to believe, it certainly doesn't seem efficient to me.

Quote:
45. How did Adam and Eve know it was wrong to disobey God if they hadn't eaten of the tree of knowledge (of good and evil) yet? You can't blame them if they didn't know. - IG

God told them that if they ate of the tree they would die... it's the only thing he didn't want them to do and he let it be known. Simple command, but they didn't follow it.

BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE KNOWLEDGE! Now would you answer the question?

Quote:
46. If God has such a tremendous problem with uncircumcised penises, why did he make man with foreskin in the first place? - IG [Note: Some say, "So God can recognize his chosen people." Recognize? Is God so stupid that he has to physically look at men's penises? If not God, do other men need to? lol.]

Why do most parents get their children circumcised? The foreskin is a pain in the ass and requires alot of cleaning. Sex is more pleasurable with it... but that's the only benefit. Circumcision was a rite in which the person said they would not live after the flesh (symbolised by the removal of part of the flesh which symbolizes living after the flesh).

You see what you did there? You answered a question by posing an entirelly different question and then proceeded to answer your own question.

Man, I'm glad I'm just past halfway.

Quote:
Per new testament for the gentiles... it's no big deal either way whether you are circumcised or not (it was only a command specific to Jewish culture).

What's the passage?

Quote:
47. Did Noah have fish onboard? Salt or Fresh? Since fresh water fish would die in salt, and salt water fish would die in fresh, only one type of fish would survive. Yet....?" - Frank Monaco

Or you just had fish at that time which were mostly capable of living in both (many species of fish are known to spawn in fresh water and live in salt water (salmon for instance). Perhaps there were both shallow seas and shallow lakes before the flood???

So where did all the other kinds of fish on Earth come from, after the flood? Evolution? :shock:

Quote:
48. Why does the omnipotent, omnipresent God need help from man or angels to spread his word or do acts? - IG [Note: Some say God doesn't need help. But apparently he does.] - IG

God it's the third time he has asked that question... go back to 10...

Then I'll repeat my answer to number 10: "Your answer is a non sequitor. It didn't answer the question."

Quote:
49. How did Jesus ascend to Heaven in the Flesh when Paul says that flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of Heaven? (1 Cor.15:50) - IG [Note: Some say, well Paul said that and not Jesus. Yet they quote Paul when it suits there purposes.]

Another repeat... Again Jesus was sinless... thus entering heaven wasn't an issue.

How ironic, another dodge. The question had nothing to do with his sin, it has to do with a man of the flesh entering heaven when the bible states that the flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven.

Quote:
50. If God wants us to live right and choose "the good, " why did he create evil? (Isaiah 45:6, 7) Not to mention he already knows which people are not going to choose "the good" so why create those people in the first place? It seems that many people are born to go to Hell. - IG ON HELL

1.) God is all-knowing.
2.) Before I was born God knew I wouldn?t believe in him.
3.) I was born to go to Hell.

(Sure you may say I have a choice, but I think I`ve proven already that I really don`t. I`m simply fulfilling the will of God by being an atheist aren`t I? If I`m not, I shouldn`t exist: For God would have known that before I was created that I wouldn`t believe in him.)

Bordering on a repeat... free will

No need for me to answer, if you're not gonna answer the question. YOU SHOULD HAVE LEFT MANY OF THESE BLANK! It wasn't required to answer a little bit of drivel to all of them, only answer what you can present a coherent answer for. I'll repost this message for the rest of the unanswered questions.

Quote:
51. I hear Christians all the time speaking of a spiritual war between Heaven and Hell, if this is true does God have limitations of power? Man only conducts wars because of our limitations of power and foresight. God has both all-power and all-knowledge, no reason for war of any kind. - IG

God is allowing the conflict for the purposes of free will, when everyone has chosen sides to his satisfaction, the game ends.

You didn't answer the question.

Quote:
52. The Bible is full of phrases beginning with, "and the lord saw". Didn't he know before hand? - IG

He did, but he also acted at the appropriate time (you know at or right after the appropriate event)

eh... I can kinda see that. I know what you mean to say.

Quote:
53. How can a psychologist condone belief in something not proven to exist, when people are put into mental institutions on a daily basis for the same thing? i.e. aliens, fairies, imaginary people (Multiple Personality Disorders..)? - Dan Denton [Note: I'm sure that some of the pious believe that they are improperly placed there as well Dan. Smiling]

Intelligent design plain and simple. It depends on what your believe is "proven to exist". Everything mechanical in this world (planes, trains, automobiles) was designed... It's a simple extrapolation to come to the conclusion of God.

Again, you didn't answer the question.

Quote:
54. If Christians say they know God exists and that he will work miracles, what do they need faith for? Faith is not knowing. - IG

Faith is belief plain and simple... I believe in the existence of the President of China (even though I've never met him), I believe in the existence of Russian Mafia (even though I've never met them either)

Yes, but evidence for those men can be provided. Faith is not belief plain and simple. Faith is belief without evidence.

Quote:
55. Brain, or shall I say, body transplants, will eventually be possible, where would the soul be then? Where is the soul? - IG

Refer back to 18

And here was my answer to 18: "Again, you didn't answer the question. YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE ATTEMPTED TO ANSWER THESE WITHOUT A CLUE!"

Quote:
56. If God really wants us to know him, why doesn't he place the knowledge of him in our minds at birth? The same way many theists believe that God implants our sense of right and wrong in us a right birth. - IG

Again that wouldn't allow free will

Yes it would. We'd have knowledge of god, and then the ability to choose whether to worship him and follow him, or if we choose to reject him. You conveniently sucked at answering this question. This question is a doozy, it bit you bad.

Quote:
57. If God was Jesus' father (not Joseph), then why is Jesus' family tree traced through Joseph? -- Cyndy Hammond

Because Joseph was the step-father of Jesus and Jesus's legal succession to the throne of David went through Joseph (who was a decent of David, Solomon and a whole line of Jewish Kings)

Another half decent answer, although this answer isn't my specialty. Maybe someone else will offer other insight.

Quote:
58. What image of God was man made from? Couldn't have been a moral one or physical one. - IG [Note: One would suspect that an image of God would be perfect and cannot sin. Oops.]

Man was made the from the moral image of God (is creative, has free-will). Obviously a good deal of that has been tainted by the fall, and subsequent genetic degradation of the human race

So "the fall" was or wasn't god's image?

Quote:
59. Why can't God appear before everyone at the same time? Everyone in the world would then "know" he exists and not have solely "believe". And please, don't say he already tried that. Surely a God knows exactly what to do to convince a measly human of his existence. - IG

Again it messes with free will

No, it doesn't. Free will is about the ability to choose what you want to do. God could show himself, and then I could choose to not love him, worship him, etc. Again, you conveniently sucked at answering this question too, it's a doozy, and it bit you twice. Kudos to the brilliant Infidel Guy for posing it. (infidelguy.com) <-- shameless plug

Quote:
60. According to the New Testament Matthew 5:17 says "Do not suppose that I have come to abolish the Law and the prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to complete. I tell you this: so long as heaven and earth endure, not a letter, not a stroke, will disappear from the Law until all that must happen has Happened." So since Jesus has not returned the "Law" is still in effect, so why aren't we still burning witches, stoning adulterers and disobedient children, killing homosexuals, ostracizing people that work on the Sabbath (nurses, doctors etc.), flinging blood onto the horns of the alter, pulling off the heads of small birds, and don't forget human sacrifice to God (Leviticus 27 P.28 )? -- Sheila L. Chambers

God never approved of human sacrifices... I challenge you to find such a passage. Neverless the old testament has been superceded by the new testament (kosher laws for example are no longer in effect per the book of acts)

The passage was listed above. Man I envision you just pounding on the keys only half reading everything before you respond. Here is a link with even more passages. I've even included all the contradictory passages so you can argue with yourself about it:

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/human_sacrifice.html

Quote:
61. If there is freewill in Heaven yet everyone has chosen good and is happy, isn't that proof that God could have made us with freewill, choosing good ( God ) and still being happy on Earth? - Dennis Hendrix [Note: In other words, evil didn't have to exist after all. Hey wait, even in Heaven apparently, evil can exist. At least for a short while. Satan became evil and was in heaven. Apparently he even had enough time to form an Army against God. Wow. Maybe Heaven won't be as peaceful as many believe.]

I'm amazed how many people have problems with free will. When Jesus seperates the results of his allowing of sentient life to have free will (the christians and anti-christians)... then we will have peace... till then there will be conflict.

I'm amazed at how many ways you can respond to a question without answering it.

Quote:
62. Why does God have a plan? Man is limited in power so we make plans because we are not all-knowing nor all-powerful. If God has a plan, isn't he reduced to a mere finite being? - IG

People make plans to organize things (power does effect if you can succesfully carry out your plan or not).

Again, you don't answer. The question is why does god have a plan? We already agreed that people make plans, there is no point on agreeing on that, ANSWER THE QUESTION!

Quote:
63. How could the all-merciful/loving God watch billions of his children burn over and over again for eternity? - IG [Note: Of course this is geared to those that believe in a fiery hell. I am well aware that not all Christians believe in a fiery Hell.]

Free will and Justice... this is getting repetitive

No need for me to answer, if you're not gonna answer the question. YOU SHOULD HAVE LEFT MANY OF THESE BLANK! It wasn't required to answer a little bit of drivel to all of them, only answer what you can present a coherent answer for. I'll repost this message for the rest of the unanswered questions.

Quote:
64. Before reading and writing were invented (5000BC), on what basis did God use to judge the people who died before the Hebrew and Greek text (BIBLE) were written? -- [Note: They are all roasting in Hell. Smiling]

Oral tradition, and general natural revelation

Where is the proof of that?

Quote:
65. Many Christians tell me that I will "burn in hell". If I have a soul, how can a soul burn? Aren't souls non-physical entities? - IG [Note: Some Christians groups believe that you will be given new bodies after judgement. However, if true, what's the significance of a spirit in the first place?]

Hell is also dark, think longer term visual sensory deprivation.

How can a soul see, and have senses?

Quote:
66. How can one hold to the barbaric belief that something has to DIE in order to appease a god for a bad deed? -- Nickolaus Wing [Note: Because an old book says so Nick.]

Because people still hold to the "barbaric" belief in justice... people who commit the crime have to do the time.

Justice is barbaric, yet you claim god is just? Ironic. So your god is barbaric, ok. Maybe that's one of those "god sets a precedent" items.

Quote:
67. Why does SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) occur? Why would God allow a baby to live for such a short period of time? Why not just let them not be born in the first place? -- Terry Clark [Note: This actually happened to a friend of mine. Not even God himself could console her.]

Bad things happen, test of faith, etc.

No need for me to answer, if you're not gonna answer the question. YOU SHOULD HAVE LEFT MANY OF THESE BLANK! It wasn't required to answer a little bit of drivel to all of them, only answer what you can present a coherent answer for. I'll repost this message for the rest of the unanswered questions.

Quote:
68. If Jesus was nailed and died on Friday evening, and walked out of the tomb on Sunday morning, where's the 3rd NIGHT he predicted? Per Matthew 12:40: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. -

Friday, Saturday, Sunday = Three days

ROTFLMFAO!!! Now, where's the third NIGHT! NIGHT! NIGHT! NIGHT!

Not, day!! Night!

Quote:
69. Many Christians claim that hell is merely existence outside of God ?s presence (C.S. Lewis among others). If this is the case, then Jesus could not have descended into hell (being God Himself). As a result, are you sure your sins are forgiven? - Byron Bultsma

He didn't go into gehenna, he went into abrahams bosom... misconception of scripture.

So you're sure your sins are forgiven? If yes... How do you know Satan isn't tricking you.

Quote:
70. Ten to twenty percent of all women who discover they are pregnant suffer a miscarriage. Also, it is estimated that anywhere from 14 to 50 percent of all pregnancies end in miscarriage. Seeing this is all part of God 's plan, does this make God the world's number one abortion provider? - Jim

People carry in their bodies the accumulating defects that have resulted from the fall and subsequent genetic drift. In approximately 200, 000 years if the degradation continues at the present rate males will no longer exist.

SO evolution occurs? :shock:

Quote:
71. What if, when you get to Heaven, you saw God causing pain and suffering out of anger or for the purpose of entertaining himself. What if he required people in heaven to praise and worship him non-stop even to the point of causing his worshipers discomfort, pain and boredom. What if, when he was bored, angry, or jealous, he would create natural disasters to make himself feel better. Would you still follow him? - Fernando [Note: Of course they would Fernando, many people followed Hitler out of fear as well.]

Nobody believes God is like that... next...

That wasn't the question. Care to answer the question?

Quote:
72. In Leviticus, the bible condemns homosexuality as an "abomination", giving some Christians a reason to hate, harass, torture and kill gays and even picket their funderals with " God hates fags" signs. In the same book of the bible the eating of shellfish is equally an "abomination". Are these Christians planning to go after the patrons of Red Lobster next? - [Note: hee-hee, that's all I can say. Jewish Law states that eating Fish without scales is an abomination and thus the Shark is one among the list. However, sharks do have scales, Placoid scales, one of the many reasons why a shark is called a Fish .]

The levitical dietary law is superceded by God's command to eat non-kosher in acts. The condemnation of homosexuality (although no longer carrying a death sentence) was reaffirmed by the apostle Paul in several locations, and implicitedly reaffirmed by Jesus in his comments regarding marriage

What locations? Quote the passages like you expect me to do, and I have.

Quote:
73. Christians will tell you that if a baby dies it goes to heaven. Why then are they so against abortion? All the child is being deprived of is the opportunity to go to hell. Either that or god expects unborn fetuses to accept Jesus. -

Because people are murdering those babies

So you'd rather a baby come into existence, with a chance of going to hell for eternity and 70 years on Earth, than allow the baby a chance to go straight to heaven for an eternity? Good dodge.

Quote:
74. If one could prove to you incontrovertibly that Jesus and God were all human fabrications would still believe? And why? - LOGICnREASON [Note: If you say yes. Then you are not concerned with the truth, you simply WANT to believe; and if you WANT to believe, indeed, there is nothing anyone can tell you..]

I haven't seen anybody prove incontrovertibly that Jesus and God are human fabrications... next...

Again, that wasn't the question. NEXT!

Quote:
75. It is often said that God allows evil because one could not meaningfully appreciate good without experiencing its opposite. Why is it necessary to experience the opposite of something in order to appreciate it? Must I experience death in order to meaningfully appreciate life? -excidius

You often don't know the value of something till you lose it or experience the alternative... Moreover evil/suffering allows human choice and the manifestation of love (because the manifestation of love is sacrifice)

Again you didn't answer the question: Must I experience death in order to meaningfully appreciate life?

Quote:
76. Bible literalists want you to believe that God's Word in the Bible is meant to be taken literally. If this is the case, why was Jesus fond of explaining things in parable and metaphor? Was Jesus literally discussing the biology of mustard seeds, or was the mustard seed parable meant to be interpreted figuratively as faith? -excidius

Would you take a Los Angeles Times article literally or figuratively? If God wants his word to be taken literally he will let you know.

On the LA times I take it literally and cross reference the knowledge attained. On the issue of God letting us know whats literal and whats not, your answer is utterly ridiculous. If this were true there would not be over 2000 sects of Christianity having a different opinion of what is literal and what isn't.

Quote:
77. Liberal Christians say some parts of the Bible are literally true, but much else is to be interpreted figuratively as allegory. How do you know which is which? What distinguishing criteria are used? How can you be certain "God" is a literal and not a figurative concept? -excidius

This is problem serious christians have with liberal "christians".

So how do you know which is which?

Quote:
78. Consciousness is the result of a physical brain, how could God being metaphysical be said to be conscious or sentient without having a brain? - Mindless

Scientists don't know why we have consciousness or how it comes about... computers don't have it why do we? In fact half of scientists who study this area believe we don't (silly but true)

Dude, you asked a question in your answer that was already answered in our question. Consciousness is the result of a brain, computers don't have a brain.

Care to answer the question now?

Quote:
79. Considering how Leviticus is considered old law, and that Christians do not obey it anymore, why do they always use it to defend homosexuality being an "abomination"? -Bohorquez

Refer back to 72

And my answer to 72: "What locations? Quote the passages like you expect me to do, and I have."

Quote:
80. If God is omnipotent and he has a plan ... then why did he not create the universe as it will be one second after the plan has succeeded? Who or what prevented him from doing that? - Timothy Campbell (http://www.tc123.com)

God wanted a fair number of people that would freely choose to have a relationship with him on his terms. When God has accomplished that goal to his satisfaction he will move on.

And who or what prevented him from "creating the universe as it will be one second after the plan has succeeded?"

Quote:
81. The large majority of people who have ever existed could not have learned of the Bible or Jesus Christ. And many people afterwards have found other religions or no religion at all to be more convincing, sometimes while being very virtuous. Do all these people really deserve eternal torment because of that? -- lpetrich

People will be judged based at least in part on what they know

So, will atheists get a free pass because they knew that there was no evidence for God and all empirical evidence actually points to there not being a Yahweh? Remember you can't say that some non-christians will get in but not atheists. Nowhere in the bible does it say non-Christians will enter heaven.

Let me restate the questions as you often miss the question and answer something else:

So, will atheists get a free pass because they knew that there was no evidence for God and all empirical evidence actually points to there not being a Yahweh?

Quote:
82. The above arguments also apply among different sects of Christianity, many of which state that most others are not True Christianity. -- lpetrich

Refer to 81

Refer to my answer to 81.

Quote:
83. Is it reasonable for the Creator and Ruler of such a vast Universe to be preoccupied with the sexuality of a species living on a tiny little planet? -- lpetrich

It is if those people are having sex with the wrong sex/disordered behavior. God also has the right to be concerned about incest and pedophilia.

Ok, so the answer to you is yes, it's reasonable. Got it.

Quote:
84. If the Christian god was all loving and all knowing why did he let religious figures such as Mohammed or Gautama Budda be born, knowing that they would mislead people from the 'true' faith and trick the majority of the world's population into burning forever in hell (in fact, if Islam didn't start, most of the middle east would probably be Christian). It would simple to use the Holy Spirit to guide them to Jesus and spread the 'true' faith. If the Holy Spirit exits, it certainly isn't doing it's job!

Who said that all of what Mohammed and Buddah said was false. Perhaps Christianity could only spread to a certain area in a certain time because of cultural considerations (the arabs and persians were enemies of the romans who had embraced christianity).

Thus God in a way wins if he allows other belief systems to come into existence that are closer to the truth than the belief systems they replace. Plus you have to take into account the adage that power corrupts... thus by ensuring competition, some purity is ensured in each respective religion.).

Have you ever read the first commandment? God clearly doesn't like the idea that people believe in other gods.

Quote:
85. If one is obliged to follow all the teachings of the bible then why is engaging in homosexuality or adultery any worse than "suffering a witch to live", "muzzling the ox that treadeth the corn", "reaping the corners of thy field", "marring the corners of they beard", "plowing with an oxen and an ass", "hating thy brother in thy heart" or "eating frogs, shellfish and eels" ?

Refer to 72

And my answer to 72 was: What locations? Quote the passages like you expect me to do, and I have.

Quote:
86. Exactly how did the alleged worldwide flood kill off all the world's sea creatures? How does one go about drowning a fish? -- Steever

Didn't I just read something about salt and fresh water stuff not surviving??? Make up your mind..

No not all sea creatures would die... although a massive onslaught of water... would kill quite a few (God is focusing on wiping out landlife with the flood).

Have you not even caught on that these questions were submitted by a plethora of different people? Obviously two people have had entirelly different conversations with Christians.

Massive onslaught of water would kill a fish, eh? You have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?

Quote:
87. Why did this alleged god create humans as an animal form of life that gets sick and dies and experiences pain and has a limited mind when 'it' could have created humans as a form of pure energy or of some indestructible material or whatever, and was totally ?sinless? and had ?pure? thought? If a god was omnipotent 'it' could have easily have done this. --AI

Free will... plus suffering facilitates stuff like love and sacrifice

It's our free will to get sick and die? It's our free will to have a limited mind?

Quote:
88. If a god is omnipotent how did 'it' fail to foresee that Satan would turn against 'it'? --AI

He didn't fail to foresee it, but allowed him too for the purpose of freewill

So he wanted Satan to turn against him? He cou

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

Quote:
Quote:
1. If Jesus fulfilled all the OT prophecies so well, why didn't the Jews recognize him as the messiah? - Francois Tremblay

Because the Messiah was also prophesied to be rejected by his own people and to be make himself a sacrifice for the sins of others (Isaiah chapter 52-33, and the later portions of daniel).

I'm assuming you mean Isaiah 52:53? Evidence tends to prove the servant being discussed is Israel or the Jews. In any event, it certainly isn't Jesus as the following show:

  1. (1) "Behold, my servant shall prosper (Isa. 52:13 RSV). When did Jesus prosper? How can a condition of prosperity or success be predicated of the Godhead?

  2. (2) "He shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high" (52:13). This was not fulfilled in Jesus either. His humanity was condemned to death in an inglorious manner. This verse implies he was not high and exalted before, which would be contrary to his divinity. It also contradicts Isa. 53:3 ("He is despised and rejected of men"Eye-wink and Isa. 57:15 which says God (Jesus) is high and exalted continually. Exaltation is not a condition he will attain.

  3. (3) "...his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men" (52:14). If Jesus was God, how could his features have suffered disfigurement and when was his visage marred more than that of all others? This verse also contradicts the alleged description of Jesus given in Psalm 45:2 ("Thou are fairer than the children of men"Eye-wink.

  4. (4) "...the kings shall shut their mouths because of him" (52:15 RSV). What king ceased to speak because of Jesus?

  5. (5) "For he shall grow up" (53:2). This should have been translated, "he grew up," as is done in the RSV, which would show someone living before Isaiah was under discussion.

  6. (6) "...he had no form or comeliness that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him" (53:2).
    1. (a) Like 52:14 (See #3 above), this contradicts the description of Jesus in Psalm 45:2 and Jer. 11:16.
    2. (b) If this describes Jesus' condition at death, there is nothing singular about it, because it applies to all dead people.

  7. (7) "He is despised and rejected of men" (53:3).
    1. (a) According to 52:13, he was to be "exalted and extolled, and be very high."
    2. (b) How many people really hated Jesus as opposed to the number of tribes who hated the Jews?

  8. (Cool "...a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief..." (53:3).
    1. (a) Jewish scholars claim "grief" as used here only refers to bodily ailment in Scripture. Jesus had no bodily ailment. Nowhere in the NT does it say Jesus had so much as a headache prior to the cross, nor is his death ever referred to as a sickness.
    2. (b) The Jews had no conception of a suffering Messiah. They thought of him as a king or ruler over willing subjects and subduing his enemies.

  9. (9) "...we hid as it were our faces from him" (53:3). The Jews did not hide their faces from him but condemned him many times and the Gentiles accepted him.

  10. (10) "his visage was so marred" (52:14) and "we hid," "he was despised," "we esteemed" (53:3) and "he hath borne," "smitten of God and afflicted" (53:4) and "he was wounded," "he was bruised" (53:5) and "He was oppressed, and he was afflicted" (53:6) and "He was taken and cut off" (53:Cool and "he made his grave" and "he had done no violence" (53:9). All these past tense verbs show that Isaiah is referring to an earlier individual, not someone living 700 years in the future.

  11. (11) "yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted" (53:4). Jesus was smitten by men not God. Would God smite and af
  12. flict his son, Christ, especially when the two are supposedly identical?

  13. (12) "Surely he hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities" (53:4-5).
    1. (a) This refers to Israel. Prophets often designated humiliations and adversities as sicknesses and wounds. Isa. 1:5-6, Jer. 10:19, 30:17-18, 33:6-8, Lam. 2:13, and Hosea 6:1 all describe the Captivity as attended with calamities described as bruises and wounds.
    2. (b) Contrary to Matt. 8:16-17 ("...they brought unto Jesus many that were possessed with devils: and he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaias, the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses"Eye-wink which claims to fulfill this prophecy, 53:4-5 says nothing about casting out devils or curing sicknesses as does Matt. 8:16-17.

  14. (13) "Behold my servant shall deal prudently" (52:13).
    1. (a) There is no reason to believe that the servant referred to is Jesus. "Servant" refers to anyone who works hard for God. It is used in reference to Moses (Num. 12:7, Job 1:Cool, all the prophets (Amos 3:7), and all of Israel (Lev. 25:42). The servant is expressly identified with Jacob or Israel in Isa. 41:8-9, 42:19, 44:1-2, and 49:3. Judging from the context, it refers to the Jews or Jacob, God's people, not Jesus.
    2. (b) The phrases applied to Jehovah in connection with the servant ("he that formed thee" and "I have redeemed thee"Eye-wink suit Israel alone, not Jesus. Jehovah is often called Israel's Redeemer.
    3. (c) How could Jesus (God) be God's servant? Would it make sense to call Christ God's servant, or would a prophet call him a servant? How could Jesus (God) be termed the servant of anybody? It would be an indignity to apply "servant" to the godhead.
    4. (d) Although debatable, Jewish scholars seem to feel that "deal prudently" actually means "to acquire knowledge;" yet, how could an all-knowing God acquire knowledge as this would imply he previously lacked wisdom.

  15. (14) "he was wounded for our transgressions" (53:5). According to Christian theology, Jesus was not so much bruised or wounded for man's transgressions as he was killed.

  16. (15) "He was oppressed,...yet he opened not is mouth:...so he openeth not his mouth" (53:7). According to John 18:21-23 ("Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said. And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me?"Eye-wink, John 18:33-37 ("Then Pilate...said to Jesus, Art thou King of the Jews? Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?...Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am king"Eye-wink, and Matt. 27:46 ("Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying,...my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"Eye-wink, Jesus not only opened his mouth when oppressed but was struck in the process. He even cried for help.

  17. (16) "...for he was cut off out of the land of the living" (53:Cool contradicts Psalm 116:9 which says, "I will walk before the Lord in the land of the living."

  18. (17) "for the transgressions of my people was he stricken" (53:Cool. Yet, Jesus was supposedly stricken for all people, not just my people. (18) "And he made his grave with the wicked and with the rich in his death" (53:9).
    1. (a) When was Jesus buried with anyone?
    2. (b) When was Jesus with the rich in his death or buried with the rich?
    3. (c) This description contradicts the glorious burial predicted in Isaiah 11:10 ("And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse,...and his rest shall be glorious"Eye-wink.
    4. (d) Actually, in so far as Jesus is concerned, the prophecy was reversed. Jesus made his grave with the righ by being buried in the sepulchre of the rich Joseph of Arimathoea (Matt. 27:57), and was with the wicked, crucified thieves (not rich people) in his death.

  19. (19) "because he had done no violence" (53:9). John 2:15 ("And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables"Eye-wink and Mark 11:15 clearly prove the inapplicability of this verse to Jesus.

  20. (20) "...neither was any deceit in his mouth" (53:9). Anyone who seriously believes this refers to Jesus should read the commentaries in issues 24, 25, 26, and 27.

  21. (21) "Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him" (53:10).
    1. (a) Would God be pleased to bruise Christ, his only begotten son and equal or to put him to grief?
    2. (b) Applying this verse to Jesus would seem to prove that he did not come of his own accord to meet death. The pleasure was not in him but in the Creator.
    3. (c) If Jesus wished to save the wicked from perdition, then he assumed responsibility for his sufferings, and it is wrong to argue that God willed it.
    4. (d) And this verse is clearly in opposition to the description of God given in Lam. 3:33 ("For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men"Eye-wink.

  22. (22) "...when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin" (53:10). But wasn't the body of Jesus offered as a sacrifice, not his soul?

  23. (23) "he shall see his seed" (53:10).
    1. (a) Throughout the OT "seed" always meant children or physical descendants. Yet, Jesus had no children.
    2. (b) If "seed" refers to Jesus' disciples then the prophet should have written "sons" because "seed" refers to those produced by carnal acts.

  24. (24) "...he shall prolong his days" (53:10).
    1. (a) The verse means he shall live long; whereas, Jesus did not live to an old age. He died when he was approximately 33 years old.
    2. (b) Actually Psalm 55:23 is much more applicable. "But thou O God, shalt bring them down into the pit of destruction: bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days." Jesus did not live out half his days.
    3. (c) It's difficult to see how this could be applied to a divine being since the idea of longevity is inappropriate to an eternal Diety.

  25. (25) "And the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand" (53:10). Jesus has come and gone yet the world that God desires has never materialized.

  26. (26) "He shall see the travail of his soul" (53:11). I thought only the flesh of Jesus suffered, not his soul or divinity.

  27. (27) "Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great" (53:12).
    1. (a) If Jesus is not great, then who are the great?
    2. (b) When did Jesus ever divide a portion with the great?
    3. (c) Who could divide him his portion, since he is God? Who is the I?

  28. (28) "...and he shall divide the spoil with the strong" (53:12).
    1. (a) Jesus divides spoils? Would a perfectly good being be dividing spoils? Nowhere do we read that he plundered or divided spoils with the strong.
    2. (b) This verse implies Jesus was not one of the strong which would contradict John 17:2 ("As thou hast given him power over all flesh"Eye-wink.

  29. (29) "...he poured out his soul to death" (53:12).
    1. (a) I thought only the flesh of Jesus underwent death.
    2. (b) Jesus did not die willingly for his creatures. He feared and prayed as is shown by Matt. 26:37-39 ("And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy. Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death:...and he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me..." and Matt. 27:46 ("My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"Eye-wink.

  30. (30) "This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord" (54:17). Here servants is plural, showing that more than one servant is referred to in Isaiah 53.

  31. (31) And lastly, immediately before Isaiah 52:13-53:12 Isaiah is predicting the gathering of the exiles and just after Isa. 54:1 he is talking of the glorious promises descriptive of the same events. Therefore, logically, all inbetween is speaking of the same thing. The conclusion to be drawn from all the above is that if Isa. 52-53 is the strongest reference to Jesus in the OT, then the case for messianic prophecy is weak indeed.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


dominick_777
Theist
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

Sapient wrote:
dominick_777 wrote:
4 questions for the questioners..

1) What happens if a personal can answer these in a reasonable way, that should be acceptable to anyone who follows the principles of reason?

If they could answer all of them, they'd have done an awfully good job proving Yahweh, exists.

I don't know about that. I think that one must use a worldview to intepret particulars they observe, and if its already a materialism/naturalism that is there no matter how much positive proof you give, itll be interpreted throughout those goggles/worldview lenses. I think its best to disprove materialism and naturalism FIRST prior to giving positive proof..but for those that don't hold to atheism or a strong anti theism, as an honest agnostic, perhaps Ill attempt to answer these for that reading audience.

Quote:
2) Would the people asking these questions suddenly change their minds from non theism to at very least theism if that happens?

I personally would formulate more questions, however if the above questions could be answered well I'd have to admit that the bible was more plausible then I give it credit for.


Fair enough.

Why bother asking the above two moot questions? For 6 years we've proposed these questions and they remain on the list because they've never been answered well. Would you care to answer a single one of them or just debate the results of what a succesful answer would do?

Well even if they have been answered that doesnt by necessity mean that 1) the reader(s) in this place understand them as reasonable even though the answers may infact be reasonable 2) It doesnt of necessity mean that there not answerable because you've "waiting" 6 years and havent seen one.

Not finding water for a dire thrist doesnt mean there is no water anywhere, but on the contrary I would argue that any real need (not mere desire) implies a real way to fullfill that need, since people including the greatest skeptics and atheists have expressed a REAL NEED for God, I think it follows that there must be a real God that exists to fullfill that need..else Nietzches statment that his view is a cruel view, would make no sense unless there was a real way to fullfill that need. To say there are no real faries for ones want for them to be real isnt cruel because there are no faries..but to say there is no water anywhere for your real thirst would be cruel because there really is water out there..even if someone dies in the process of trying to find it.

Quote:
3) Or are these being asked for no real reason..implying the questioners arent really interested in reason or truth?

I hope you don't really think that, and you're merely probing for a chance to stomp on someone's stupidity. I do find it ironic that the folks who believe in the bible seem to not be interested in reason or the truth, yet you're asking "us" this question.

Im not trying to probe for stupidity, I think its an honest question. Many a times people ask qustions for other reasons OTHEr than finding an answer..they sometimes do it inorder to distract one from a real issue, others do it inorder to somehow express theres no answer, thus I think its a valid question and I hope it allows someone to check their reasons for asking questions in the first place..is it done for the sake of asking questions, which i think my question DIRECTLY reffers to, OR are you asking questions inorder to find answers..IE do you have a point or not in asking your questions here?

Quote:
4) What would you say is an appropriate criteria you think is fair in answering one two or all of these?

It's not up to me to figure out how someone could appropriatly answer these questions. If I knew how that could be done, I wouldn't have to ask them. I've seen these questions debated for a very long time and I've seen people come close but I can look to no example of what is a reasonable appropriate answer to solving these "riddles/questions."

I think that also is a real valid question. If you have no idea as to what youre looking for, why ask the question? Furthermore, if you dont take time to envision what the answer couldnt be, vs could be, I dont see how you would be able to identify it even if it was right in front of your face. You follow what Im saying?

Here's a whole forum devoted to these questions:
http://www.infidelguy.com/forum-22.html

Care to attempt to answer the questions, rather than answer the questions with questions?


Im thinking about it. I think I will. But what I may do instead is offer a proof or two for the existence of a theistic God if I lack time to answer every question here, and instead deal with it in the sense that if it can be shown that Theism is true, then it follows that all non theism is false..as a first step. Id like to know your thoughts on that?

"It has been stated that an unexamined life is not worth living, but it can also be stated that an unexamined faith is not worth believing". Norman Geisler


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

dominick_777 wrote:

Im thinking about it. I think I will. But what I may do instead is offer a proof or two for the existence of a theistic God if I lack time to answer every question here, and instead deal with it in the sense that if it can be shown that Theism is true, then it follows that all non theism is false..as a first step. Id like to know your thoughts on that?

I'm thinking you just dodged a bunch of questions, including these as well.

Addditionally I'm thinking that you need to start a new thread on it, and yes if you could give valid proof of a theistic god than obviously all non-theism is false. Do I think you can provide valid proof? NO.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


jzschneider
Posts: 1
Joined: 2006-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

First off, I like this thread (so much so I joined just to post). I'm an atheist and I love actual debate around theology (you could say I want to beleive and am just waiting for someone to convince me).

So many questions, I can't answer all of them... but here goes the 'college try' to your logical arguments (debating religion is kinda pointless IMHO).

To address: God is good but lets bad things happen and created hell and such...

- God created Heaven to reward those who please him (which he knows in advance apparently).
- God is merciful so he doesn't want people to go to hell - and should therefore not allow those hell-bound people to be.

My answer is that God allows all his creations the maximum amount of time on earth up until death. At the moment they would have commited a hell worthy trespass, he kills them BEFORE (accident, medical reasons, even stillborns for the going-to-be-unrepentant sinners). In this way he knows who is going to sin, he allows them experience of life, takes into account the environmental effects on behavior, and explains why accidental deaths occur (in this case to save your soul from damnation).

Any thoughts? I'm out for a run, I'll check back later.


dominick_777
Theist
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Dominicks reply

Sapient wrote:
dominick_777 wrote:

Im thinking about it. I think I will. But what I may do instead is offer a proof or two for the existence of a theistic God if I lack time to answer every question here, and instead deal with it in the sense that if it can be shown that Theism is true, then it follows that all non theism is false..as a first step. Id like to know your thoughts on that?

I'm thinking you just dodged a bunch of questions, including these as well.

Addditionally I'm thinking that you need to start a new thread on it, and yes if you could give valid proof of a theistic god than obviously all non-theism is false. Do I think you can provide valid proof? NO.

I have no problem answering any of those questions, though I think some of them are not worthy of being answered. I think its first important to deal with truth, then the existence of a theistic God, which will elimate all non theistic worldviews (pantheism, panentheism, polytheism, atheism, Finite Goddism, and Deism) and leave you only with the three major Theistic world religions, Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. If I am able to do a new thread for it, if you could ask one or at most two of the questions on here, where the proof I give doesnt apply I will answer them. Im only one person, work fulltime and am doing a quite a bit of stuff on the side. Let me know if you think thats fair?

"It has been stated that an unexamined life is not worth living, but it can also be stated that an unexamined faith is not worth believing". Norman Geisler


dominick_777
Theist
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

jzschneider wrote:
First off, I like this thread (so much so I joined just to post). I'm an atheist and I love actual debate around theology (you could say I want to beleive and am just waiting for someone to convince me).

So many questions, I can't answer all of them... but here goes the 'college try' to your logical arguments (debating religion is kinda pointless IMHO).

To address: God is good but lets bad things happen and created hell and such...

- God created Heaven to reward those who please him (which he knows in advance apparently).
- God is merciful so he doesn't want people to go to hell - and should therefore not allow those hell-bound people to be.

My answer is that God allows all his creations the maximum amount of time on earth up until death. At the moment they would have commited a hell worthy trespass, he kills them BEFORE (accident, medical reasons, even stillborns for the going-to-be-unrepentant sinners). In this way he knows who is going to sin, he allows them experience of life, takes into account the environmental effects on behavior, and explains why accidental deaths occur (in this case to save your soul from damnation).

Any thoughts? I'm out for a run, I'll check back later.

Unless you know for certain there is no God, Gods existence is possible. Furthermore if you wanna go down the path of trying to defend an absolute negative youll find the existence of God unavoidable, for youd have to know everything to be able to conclude there is no omniscient being. Besides that...

The second premise to the question you were dealing with is flawed. God allows people their choice, and its contradictory to say he forces people to freely be with Him when some really dont want to be. God cannot force people to freely do anything, for forced freedom is a contradiction. Rather he creates the potential for evil, by giving a good thing called free will to us, to be able to do or do otherwise, and it is man who actualizes that evil. So God is responsible for the FACT of freedom, man is responcible for the ACTS of freedom. We can know our past for sure, yet we dont think that KNWOING the past free actions for sure, MEANS that our sure knowledge of causes those past actions, likewise God knowing our future free acts for sure, doesnt mean that his knowledge causes our future free acts.

In regards to your reply, there are several flaws.

Firstly all sin, and any sin is hell worthy because its an act of rebellion towards the eternal infinite creator. So the quality of such an act bears infinite consequences. If you say, oh let God kill me before I do any evil, that is equivalent to saying that God gacve us free will only so that we cannot excersive it..for unless thre is a REAL potential for evil, and unless WE OURSELVES are allowed to decide how to respond to God, we arent free. Youre scenario goes against the current fact that we have free will. It also makes God not good, but cruel, evil, and is basically impossible for a theistic God, because Hes destroying people for choosing to not be with Him, which He gave them the abillity to do in the first place. Furthermore Why would He destroy what is most like Him in them, namely their existence. No rather He respect their chose to voluntarily diustance themselves from Him, and will respect their existence whatever their choise mayby be.

Secondly even IF person A for example never sinned by act, there are also acts of ommission where you sin by not doing what you should have done. So theres acts of commision, where you commit acts you shouldnt, and acts of ommision where you dont act as you should. Lets say the person hasnt even committed any acts of freedom, the problem is that they have corruption regardless of that, which makes it as if they had sinned. That person merely needs to seek the way out, being Christ, to escape consequence for their sinful state. Thats a real choice. Besides that, while its possible for men to not sin, its inevitable that they do. All men women and children of an age of accountabillity do. Youre scenario is equivalent to a shotgun wedding in heaven, where God arbitrarily says well..if you become a doctor Ill let you live but if you become a plumber Ill annihilate you...or where hes telling people by gun point they should freely choose to be with Him forever..heaven in that case wouldnt be heaven for the people who dont want to go there..for them, heaven would be hell. The righteous would inherit a counterfeit heaven, and the fallen would be forced to go where they dont want to go..

WIthout a final separation of good and evil, where the unavoidable consequences of ones choices leads them to either heaven or hell are finalized, there couldnt be heaven or hell, let alone free will in man. All acts have an end, and in regards to heaven and hell that is not an exception. Besides that accidental death thats guarenteed upon sinning, not nonly isnt freedom, but is cruel, unfair, and would render natural events as miraculous because God is directly intervening in each time one sins...Mayby thats how youd do it if you were God, but I thank God Hes not like you. One can decide to jump off a cliff..even if its undesirable all the way down, you will splatter no matter what. There are some unavoidable consequcnes for actions..the choice between heaven and hell is ones choice, and soley ones choice. No one can decide for you and there is evidence for their existence.

"It has been stated that an unexamined life is not worth living, but it can also be stated that an unexamined faith is not worth believing". Norman Geisler


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Re: Dominicks reply

dominick_777 wrote:

I have no problem answering any of those questions, though I think some of them are not worthy of being answered. I think its first important to deal with truth, then the existence of a theistic God, which will elimate all non theistic worldviews (pantheism, panentheism, polytheism, atheism, Finite Goddism, and Deism) and leave you only with the three major Theistic world religions, Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. If I am able to do a new thread for it, if you could ask one or at most two of the questions on here, where the proof I give doesnt apply I will answer them. Im only one person, work fulltime and am doing a quite a bit of stuff on the side. Let me know if you think thats fair?

Huh? Fair for what? Fair to prove a god exists? No. Fair, that you'll post two answers to two questions? I can't see what's unfair about that.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


dominick_777
Theist
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

Wait..you don't think it's fair for me to prove God exists...? Unless I read that wrong, and Nyquil can help me do that..Could you clarify your reply to the part about ME (not you) proving God exists..?

"It has been stated that an unexamined life is not worth living, but it can also be stated that an unexamined faith is not worth believing". Norman Geisler


dominick_777
Theist
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

Just to let you know, while I didn't think I could get through all these questions, I think I'm about half way done with them..so I may post them in a couple of days..or wait till next week for my days off to finish them.Smiling I was actually aiming at posting a proof for two for the existence of a Theistic God, and PERHAPS also posting a reply to all 89 questions..with more than a sentance reply to each..at least I think for most part.

"It has been stated that an unexamined life is not worth living, but it can also be stated that an unexamined faith is not worth believing". Norman Geisler


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

dominick_777 wrote:
Just to let you know, while I didn't think I could get through all these questions, I think I'm about half way done with them..so I may post them in a couple of days..or wait till next week for my days off to finish them.Smiling I was actually aiming at posting a proof for two for the existence of a Theistic God, and PERHAPS also posting a reply to all 89 questions..with more than a sentance reply to each..at least I think for most part.

How bout you post the answers to the first ten first? They don't fit properly with responses when you do em all at once. Notice my first rebutal got cut off.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

dominick_777 wrote:
Wait..you don't think it's fair for me to prove God exists...? Unless I read that wrong, and Nyquil can help me do that..Could you clarify your reply to the part about ME (not you) proving God exists..?

I don't think giving good answers to two questions would provide enough proof to verify a God must exist.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


dominick_777
Theist
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

I was offering one to two PROOFS for the existence of God, not offering to answer only 2 of the questions listed here. Im half way done with the questions list, but are you saying one sufficient proof for the existence of God that verifies He exists isn't enough proof??

"It has been stated that an unexamined life is not worth living, but it can also be stated that an unexamined faith is not worth believing". Norman Geisler


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

dominick_777 wrote:
I was offering one to two PROOFS for the existence of God, not offering to answer only 2 of the questions listed here.

Ok, because they're two seperate things. Offering a proof for the existence of god is different than answering a tough question about Gods existence.

Quote:
Im half way done with the questions list

You're on the verge of not receiving a response from me when I get them. Please provide the answers you have now, I don't have the time to sit and answer all 89 in a sitting and they wont fit in a post. Please respect that I'm juggling tons of projects and if you hope for a response (from me atleast) please provide the answers you have, as I've asked for earlier.

Quote:
but are you saying one sufficient proof for the existence of God that verifies He exists isn't enough proof??

No of course thats not what I'm saying. However I find it extremely unlikely you have a valid sufficient proof for the existence of God, but I'll keep waiting, with an open mind.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


dominick_777
Theist
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Ok.

Ok fair enough. I understand about being busy trying to keep on top of stuff, but seemingly so little time and or energy to do so. Ill post the questions and the answers I have for them, and in time will post a proof for the existence of a Theistic God. I'm glad at least part of you is open to at least considering a proof for the theistic Gods existence. I appreciate youre openess. I used to debate on Infidels.org a while back but I found it kinda went downhill in terms of quality of debate, so I havent done so in a while. I hope to contribute something that stimulates thought, open and honest discussion, and an open exchange of ideas. Thanks for your time and replies.

"It has been stated that an unexamined life is not worth living, but it can also be stated that an unexamined faith is not worth believing". Norman Geisler


dominick_777
Theist
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Around half way done..I cannot promise to reply 2 all rebuts

As it seems was perhaps intended by the person(s) who compiled this daunting list, to stiffle many if anyone from taking the time to reply because of its length, please do not expect me to reply to most if not many replies to this because of the same reason..length and that I don't have time to. Lord willing when I get a chance to post a proof or two for the existence of a Theistic God, I will devote more specific time to replies there as I did at infidels.org. I appreciate your openess and wilingness to consider what I typed here for you. Have a good day.

Quote:
List of questions about God, religion and the supernatural have been compiled by IG over the years as well as some interesting ones by readers.

1. If Jesus fulfilled all the OT prophecies so well, why didn't the Jews recognize him as the messiah? - Francois Tremblay

This wrongly assumes that the problem men have with the existence of God and His love for us, is intellectual assent. Because men are free to choose to be with or apart from God, as this forum implies, and God will not force anyone to freely be with Him forever, men can do other than what they may infact know to be true and right and good. I'd STRONGLY contend that the existence of God is self evident, undeniable, and knowable to all men. That all men have an inclination towards God in that all atheists and famous skeptics have expressed a need for God, in accord with twhat the Bible says about them, yet they can choose to supress the truth they may know about God, and supplant it with lies, because men can do so for whatever autonomous reason, and the problem isnt there being a lack of evidence but of desiring darkness instead of light. From nieztche to freud to Sartre, all men express at some point a need for God. Experience and expectation point out that aevery real NEED implies there is a REAL WAY to fullfill that need. If hunger, then food, if lonliness then society, if need for sex then a way to fullfill that eros..Not all desires have a real way to fullill that desire, but every need must have a real way to fullfill that need. If one has a real thirst, its meaningless and cruel to say there is none anywhere. A real thrist implies there must be drink somewhere EVEN IF someone dies trying to find it. Since all men really need (not necesarily desire or want) God, there must be a real God that exists to fullfill that need. This is an argument from need. Besides, while many people who identified themselves as Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah even though they may have knew He was the fullfillment, Enron, and other scandals show us that men can act contrary to what they know to be and contrary to what they know to be right. Its also possible that a person may not full understand how Jesus is the messiah, without despising the idea He is or could be the One. By the way, not all Jew rejected Jesus..there were many many Jews who became Christians, the apostles, the hundreds and thousands of disciples back then, those during the neronian persecutions, many pharisees, saducees and the like..its just that the main establishment of Judaism at large rejected Jesus as Messiah. it doesnt mean that all Jew rejected Him.

Quote:

2. If Gen 3:24 is true, why hasn't anyone found the Cherubims and the " flaming sword which turned every way"?

Is this a serious question..?? Who says that since Adam and Eves demise that there needed to be a continuing Cherubum or sword there? They were there to make sure they didnt eat from the tree of eternal life, where the trees were more so symbolic of their choice, in rejecting Gods commands...God didnt want them to fully actualize their choice forever, but wanted to give them a way out and gave the prophecy about the Messiah in Genesis 3:15, the One they walked with in the Garden. They were cast out of Eden which was the main issue, the prescence of God. Noahs Flood would have taken care of any remaining things in Eden..though it may still be possible to find more details on it in time..archeology is a very new science, only some 125 years old. Give it time, for Archeology has always been the friend of the Bible. Watch what you deny, because time and time again it is the skeptic that is the one that ends up with egg on his face..not the theist.

Quote:
3. It's been proven that modern humans originated from Africa. Yet, the Adam and Eve story claims the first Humans lived in a garden in Eden, near 4 rivers. ( Most of which no one can find). One of these rivers mentioned is the Euphrates, which runs through Iraq, Syria and a portion of Turkey. What's the truth? Did man come out of Africa or near the Euphrates River? - The Infidel Guy

I would disagree that man has been shown to decend from Africa conclusively. Theres no single ONE view of Darwinian evolution. Theres much debate on central things within it, and many scientists who are in a stance of questioning and challening it, see its demise as imminent. Stephen J Goulds view shows he didnt believe in incremental evoultion from one kind into another kind or species (for a view that is more consistent with the Biblical record..where the species come fully formed as they appear in the fossil record), they debate the time line of how old the universe is, many many things have changed in the darwinian camp..as the box with the supposed preported transitional fossils gets smaller and smaller through time. It can be shown that 1) Truth about reality is knowable 2) A theistic God exists 3) Miracles can be used to verify a word from God 4) The Bible is historically reliable 5) God has done miracles in time and validates the Bible and its claims as do archeology, and other lines of evidence 5) History is objectively reconstructable 6) Historical evidence points out that the Bible is not only historically reliable but is also not merely human but divine in origin. Many times in history people have made these aparent statments of contradiction in the BIble, which in time contemporary finds end up validating the Bible and not the skeptic. William Ramsey, Simon Greenleaf, Lord Littleton, CS Lewis, Layards the great Assyriologist..and many other skeptics changed their view by looking carefully at the evidence..would you do the work they did and make a contribution, or instead throw out easily stated "nah ahs" or "youre stupid"s or some equivocation or strawman?

Quote:
4. When the believer gets to Heaven, how can Heaven be utter bliss when people they love and care about are burning in Hell ? - The Infidel Guy - [Note: Some say God erases your memories of them, but if God erases your memory, you as Mr. Joe /Jane Smoe ceases to exist.]

After hearing most of your broadcast, I can see how you don't seem to understand that you in fact have some great misunderstandings of the Bible you passionately reject. Firstly people arent tortured in hell, theyre tormented, which is a difference, knowing their choice was wrong for all eternity, they have eternal regret, unsatisfaction or pain, and emptiness..basically they have the same life as here, but with an unavoidable consequence..being stuck in the present state of dying in ones sins, having no resolution for them or their condition, to the degree of a potential infinity.

Those who volutarily distance themselves from God in this life will have their choices ratified by God. As CS Lewis stated, some will say to God "Thy will be done", and there will be others to whom God will say "thy will be done". The gates of hell are locked on the insides of a person. Its their choice. Either stay in sin forever, or recieve the way out forever. Since these choices are in relationship to your infinite creator, they bear infinite consequence, where good must be rewarded, and evil punished. The chooice is either to pay for your own sins forever or have Christ fully pay them once for all, for all time forever. We can come to a full knowledge of theyr state, knowing their existence was respected in that God didnt snuff them out, that their choice was freely given, because they didnt want to be with God, and they were given justice in accord with what they did on earth..where some will have greater degree of punishment where as others will have less. Their choice is progressively solidified till the end of their life either towards God or away from him. Its your choice and yours alone..which will you choose? As Gandalf said to Frodo, something to the effect of the what will you do with the time that has be given to you?

Quote:
5. How can a God have emotions, i.e. jealousy, anger, sadness, love, etc., if he is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent? Emotional states are reactionary for the most part. How can God react to us if he is all-knowing and has a divine plan? - IG [Note: Indeed, many religious texts display their gods this way . Listen to the An Emotional Godshow.]

Emotions for HUMANS and all contingent changing beings is sequentially and temporally reactive, but not for God. Its falsely assumed that God is like men, particularily in this regard. He is not. Thats the danger of making God in our own image. If we get the nature of God wrong, as do all cults and practically all world religions, we miss the point. God as necessary, without potential, cannot change, for He must be and cannot not be. Since he has no potential, He cannot change, and hence cant change from being into non being or have any change with regards to his nature. Therefore He cannot REACT in a progressive, sequential, or changing sense as you describe. Rather as Gods knowledge, and will/decision to create, is done in accordance with His unchanging eternal nature, His decision, will, and emotion works the same way. It is only in one single eternal co intuition that He knows all inside Himself, for all preexists in His mind. And it is in one single eternal decision does he eternally decide to cause the universe and allow our future free actions. While things are unchanging from his perspective in regards to his unchanging knowledge of our future free actions, that certain knowledge doesnt cause anything, nor dos it cuase our free actions, anymore than does our certain knowledge of anything cause anything. Knowledge causes nothing. Its an awareness of events external to oneself. So its determined according to His knwoledge because his knwoledge is sure and certain, where as from our perspective in time all our actions are free. So its Gods thoughts of our actions thats determined or unchanging, so theres no contradiction in saying God knows for sure the future free actions of men.

Quote:
6. Why would God create a place such as hell to torture sinners forever when he foreknew who would disappoint him? - IG [Note: Some say you have a choice, but this misses the point. If God hates sin so much, why create Adam and Eve when he knew they'd sin? The only conclusion I can come up with, if Yaweh exists, is that he wanted sin to enter the world.]

God doesnt hate the potential to do evil, because that is a good thing called freedom/free will. So that doesnt bug him at all..its only when man ACTUALIZES that evil that He hates, because of what the reality of corruption does to men, in their relationship to others, and in regards to their relationship to God. So its an anger that is rooted in care, concern, and love for His own creation. I believe Ezekiel 18 outlines this point particularily vs 23. Sin separated, destroys, and corrupts. Hell isnt eternal conscious torture, its eternal torment as Ive described. Its the consequence of choosing to pay for ones own sins forever themselves and rejecting the possibility for CHrist to pay for their sins instead. This question could be asked like so..If you know that your children will get hurt in this world, and eventually suffer and die, why have them?? Well, you have them because you want to have children, see the good that comes from it, and want it inspite of the fact that pain or suffering will result. The assumption here is that its NOT better to have loved and lost than not to love at all. Freedom allows the potential for evil, which is good, but that doesnt mean that freedom is evil, nor does it mean that all evil is meaningless or without a purpose. God allows evil into the ring so that He can conquor it, He allows men their own freedom and choice to sin, so that love can be meaningfull (for without choice love would be meaningless if it couldnt be reciprocated) and so that sin/evil can be conquered in the end....so that those who choose to, can see it over come even in their own life as they conquer it and its ending result..death...through Christs ressurection claimed as their own as He freely offers it to anyone who wants it. So youre answer is partly true. God chose to ALLOW sin to enter the world, through the free will of Adam and his children, in the sense that He PERMITS it, but not in the sense that He approves of it or desire it for us. Theres a big difference between permitting sin for the purpose of defeating it, and approving and or encouraging sin to take place. Its the difference between going to the dentists office to suffer for the greater good of having better teeth, vs banging ones head up againsta cement floor over and over again. If one doesnt see this difference, I truely feel bad for them. So did God know wed sin? Yes. If He able to overcome it? Yes. Has He done so? Yes but its not fully overcome. The beginning was done on the cross of Christ, the end will be the result of the life, death, burial, and ressurection...where evil is separated from evil forever, and Eden is restored, ressurected, and made perfect...in paradise with God.

Quote:
7. "God is all merciful," we hear quite often. Wouldn't it be more merciful of God to simply snap sinners out of existence rather than send them to hell? Or better yet, since he's all-knowing, not allow them to be born at all? - IG
ON GOD'S LOVE & HELL
1.) God's love is superlative.
2.) God's love of man exceeds man's love of self.
3.) Man's love of self prohibits torture.
4.) Considering God's greater love for us, Hell (eternal torture) is illogical.

No. Mayby thats how youd do it if you were God, but thankfully God is more merciful than you are. Firstly God wouldnt destory what is most like Hismelf in us..existence. It would imply He devalues what He himself made. Existence is good, not evil. What is evil is the choice of free agents to fantasize about what is not right, and to do what is not right, or not do what they should. Its where they dont love God or men as they ought..for this is when evil occurs. Youre scenario basically is saying well you either be with me or if you choose not to Ill annihilate you...no prob. Thats not respecting life, thats treating life He made arbitrarily and visciously. Rather the God who has revealed Himself will not work against what He Himself has made, but will preserve it in existence, to respect its existence, and respect its choice, because He genuinly wants free people to be able to meaningfully reciprocate the love He offers us.
The fault in the premise of your formula there. Id ask you to define superlative, but besides that 3 is incorrect. Its implying Hell is torture. Hell is not torture, Hell is torment, and many people choose to do things they regret in this life. If they continue to make these sort of choices to the disregard of their conscience, this leads to an end of ultimate torment and dissatisfaction in life, being separated from the very source of love and goodness. This is Hell. Eternal conscious torment. Gods greater love for us isnt coerced, but freely offered and to be freely recieved. Forced love is rape and God isnt a divine rapist. So He freely offer men His love, they in turn can accept and recieve it or decline and reject it. To do so is to reject the source of love and goodness, and to do so is to decide they want no real good and dont want real love.To do so leads to a life of total dissatisfaction because theyre acting contrary to how they were designed to act, and choosing emptiness in contrast to eternal satisfaction. Mans love of self would seem to lead one to God not away..but who says men always choose the right thing? Either chase the wind and inherit nothingness, eternal lack and dissatisfaction or choose to recieve and inherit God and the world in a state of eternal inner satisfaction. Thats youre choice, and its a real choice only you can make for yourself.

Quote:

8. Muslims are supposed to pray 5 times a day towards Mecca. Each prayer includes a variety of ritualism and posturing. If a muslim astronaut were to land on Mars. Prayer to Mecca would be ritualistically impossible due to the rotation of Earth and Mars. Are Muslims stuck here in Earth? IG [Note: Since this was first posted, a Muslim astronaut was faced with this very dilemma. The authoritative clergy informed him to pray as he normally would. I see this no where in the Koran. You see? Religions must change, or die out. It's interesting to note that, in the Koran, the moon is believed to be in the lowest Heaven, the level for those that barely made it to Heaven. Surah 71:15-16. One problem, no man can supposedly get to Heaven until they die. Yet, we've been to the moon. Our satellites beyond that.]

I am not a muslim so I wont respond to that directly. I can say that Christianity lacks any of those forced anthropocentric problems, where ones relationship to God, (because in Islam theres no intimacy with God)can be thought of as is limited to language (arabic or else you arent really reading the Quran), location (Mecca, prayer direction etc..) and the like. Christianity, for should I say. Christ wants a love relationship with everyone Hes made, from regular people to the garden variety pagan, from the person who masqurades as a christian to the apostate. He wants all, loves all, and desires that all be saved, and none lost or destroyed. QUite a different story than from Islam that asks you to submit..Christ asks rather that you choose or decide.

Quote:
9. Why haven't we seen God reattach severed heads, restore someone who was burned alive or regrow amputated limbs? Surely these would be miracles difficult to deny. - Adam Majors and IG [Note: The typical answer is that man doesn't dictate God's actions. The conundrum here however is that, if God wants us to "know" him, then surely feats such as those mentioned above would be happening all over the world. Until they do, I'll remain an atheist.]

Miracles are unique direct act of God. Hes done many miracles through prohets and apostles, and if the audience already has a worldview in opposition to a reality of miracles, no matter how many are done, or to what extent, there worldview doesnt allow miracles to be even possible, no amount of miracles will convince. HEs done so many and with such a concentration, that naturalists will always interpret them as natural events, or at best as some sort of phenomena or irregularity. Only if one is open to it would they do anything, and even so, why not look at the miracles as ones as recorded in the Bible, or the providential changed lives of people whos experienced a personal meeting with God? Somehow if one already presupposes an irrational stance like David Hume had with miracles, where you dont believe them even if they were to happen, for they must be done with reglulairty as like a natural law, miracles would never convince that person. Only after one is shown that materialism, naturalism or a non theistic view is false, would they then be at very least open to seeing a miracle for with these kinds of people, a miracle is possible. When an atheist asks to see one, I find it disingenuous for their very view doesnt allow for miracles to even be possible.

Quote:
10. Why does God entrust the spreading of 'His' word to sinners? Why doesn't he do it himself? - IG [Note: Surely God would have known that not everyone would be convinced by the reality[sic] of his Bible. If God loves us so much, we are all going to Heaven. If God knew that I would be an atheist, and he doesn't like atheists, he shouldn't have allowed me to come into existence. But he did. Therefore, I must be serving the will of God, for I exist. Smiling]

Why not? The reason is because for God to do it for each and every person directly would make no sense. The miracle would become the natural, so that people would be forced to believe in God because its the everday, and theyd really have no choice. No rather God has wisdom. If He wanted men to have a choice to search for Him or not Hed have to give not enough evidence as to coerse a decision, but yet enough inorder to make a sufficient decision to come to know He exists, and to come to know Him personally. Many of these questions reveal a hidden hatred of freedom, which i fnd odd, for those who express such hatred of freedom, seeem to like their freedom to express the hatred of it. So I think all men really do value their freedom, but are selective with their valung of it when it comes to God. HGod on the contrary doesnt not like atheists..rather He LOVES atheists because he made the person who would decide to reject Him. He loves him or her and wants a love relationship with him or her regardless of and inspite of whether they want a relationship with Him. So He made you, loves you and wants you, but you dont seem to underscore the fact that the atheists doesnt. WHy not point that out in your question? Therefore your logic is quite off because it assumes incorrect things about God and our position before him. God knew youd choose to become an atheist, but values you and youre freedom to do so. He wants you to come to Him, reciproctae his love for you, but its your choice. Thats what someone who loves you will do. You cant force anyone to do anything they dont want to do.

Quote:
11. In II Kings 2-23/24 we read about God sending 2 she-bears to attack children for calling the prophet Elisa bald, which he was, the bears killed 42 of the children. Was this a good thing to do? -- Brandon and IG[Note: I have heard some argue that the boys were a gang. So?! I didn't read anywhere in that passage where they laid a finger on the guy . Also, what kind of bears are these that can kill 42 kids? Super Bears? Surely the kids had to be running away.]

Ill summarize what Norman Geisler states about this in his book When Critics Ask page 192... This was no minor offense, these young men held contempt for Gods prophet. To insult Gods prophet was to insult God. They werent small innocent children, they were wicked young men comparable to a modern street gang. so his life was threatened by their very number. 42 I think could safely be called a gang.. Elishas action was to strike fear into the hearts of other street gangs. If they were not afraid to mock a venerable man of God they would have been a threat to the lives of all Gods people..their number, nbature of sin, and obvious disrespect for authority underscores this. Some have noted that they challenged elishas claim to being a prophet. meaning to communicate "If you are a man of God, why dont you go on up to heaven like Elijah did? Baldhead might be a refference to the fact that lepers shaved their heads. They saw him as a detestable outcast. Lastly it wasnt Elisha who took their lives but God wh oprovidentially directed the bears to attack them. They revealed their true attitudes of God in their acts of contempt of elisha. Such contempt was punishable by death. Elisha didnt pray for this kind of punishment. It was clearly an act of God ion judgment upon this impous gang.

Quote:

12. I have often heard from many believers that even Satan has a presence in the church, which is why even in church people can still have impure thoughts. If Satan can find his way in the church, how do Christians know that Satan didn't find his way into the Bible and twist the whole book? After all, men did vote on which books would make the Holy Bible. - The Infidel Guy

While thats possible its not actually the case. Church people as with any humans can and do have impure thoughts. Were all sinners. Some run TO sin otherds run FROM sin, but nevetrhless HOW they deal with their sins shows where their heart is at. While satan can actively work with people, even if hes not physically there, as a spirit isnt physical, nevetheless he can influence people by a quiet suggestion, or through the overt actions of another who chooses to do what is more in accord with his will than Gods. Either way all acts are either intended by God as a test to lead one to repentance and becomming closer to God, where as those same acts are meant as a temptation to lead one away from God. What can be stated is that while its possible Satan could have found his way into the Bible, He couldnt have done so against or in opposition to Gods will for as Luther stated the devil is Gods devil. He allows him to do things, and ONLY by Gods permission even though God may not approve, He permits evil for good reason as stated above...for a greater good to come about at very least. We know Satan didnt find his way into the Bible because we can see from historical manuscript and archeological evidence that God has preserved his word througout time. We have more mansucripts, better copied manuscripts, earlier manuscripts than any other work from antiquity so that we can have in copies what is the same in substance as the original..for not all scribes make the same mistakes, and from the copies you can reconstruct the original autographa. What was considered inspired in contrast to psuedopigrapha (which means false..) or apocrypha was not secret nor hidden..it was always know the 4 gopsel writters writtings were scripture because the others were historically inaccurate, were written by an eyewitness or someone close to eyewitness sources, and isnt congruent with the Christian faith. Apocrypha was included with the 66 books but were NOT considered inspired or divinely authoratative. Those principles they used back then to discover what is divinely inspired vs what isnt would render the same amount of books we have in todays bible. Those principles are commonsense and sensible.

Quote:
13. Why did God allow Lot and his daughters to escape from Sodom and Gomorra when he destroyed it only to later have Lot and his daughters engage in incestuous fornication. (Genesis 19:30-36) - Disillusioned [Note: To have intercourse with daddy dearest of course.]

Not everything that is recorded in the Bible is approved of by God. God knows well all sin, that doesnt mean He wants to immediately and cruelly destroy us, nor does it mean that there isnt a greater purpose to allow some like lots daughters to survive and not others. Why have children when you know theyll get hurt and eventually die? If you dont have children I suppose you may not get the question Im posing, and get the answer even less. Thereason why is because while theres great potential for evil and harm to come to them, to have children is a really good thing. Why not suggest we kill ourselves if we do wrong? I dont think it needs to be as extreme as is being framed here. God allows his creations to choose as they will, and live even though they may bring harm on themselves or others, for the broader reason that it will bring about a greater good because evil overcome and conquored follows from there being choice to do one or the other, and in seeing evil conquored it maynot be the best possible world, BUT its the best WAY to the best possible world...namely to allow freedom, which in turns allows love to take place. But to take away the potential to do evil, takes away freedom and thus would take away the greatest good, being love..which would be the greatest evil. God isnt evil, Hes good and wants the best for us even if we dont reciprocate any love back to Him. Besides, incest is problematic because of what..? Freaks resulting right? Well look around..jk. Incest only occured after a period of accumultaed genetic defects, but since there were no defects in the beginning, because everything was made good, it only became a problem in time..Moses didnt forbid incest till hundreds of years later because it didnt create deformities at the time of lot and sodom and gommorah.

Quote:
14. Genesis 1:28-29 shows that man and all the animals were first created herbivorous. Most young-earth Christians (ones that believes the earth is less than 10,000 years old) say that the fall of man resulted in carnivorous animals ( hence death of animals). So, why did God punish the animal kingdom, making animals kill and devour each other because of man's mistake? Or, if you're an old-earth Christian (one that accepts that animals existed on earth for billions of years before man came on the scene) then how come fossils show carnivorous animals existed before man? - http://www.caseagainstfaith.com/contact.htm.

Mans mistake made men and animals become twisted in terms of their relationships with each other..hence we wear clothing as a symbol of self protection from the selfishness of men. Animals need protection from men, as do animals need protection from animals who became corrupted. If youre ayoung earther I guess youd argue this way. I am not decided yet on that issue so wont directlt comment. Young earthers would cast doubt of a reliable dating system based on carbon dating so your argument wont hold water. They would point out that that was resulted from a catastrophic event of Noahs flood and youll see creatures at one time being enveloped into quickly forming sedimentary layers. I dont know how you can use that against old earth creationists. Ill leave it at that.

Quote:
15. Many Christians believe that God is a thinking being, that he solves problems and makes a way for them when troubles come. Does God Think? If God is thinking, did he know his thoughts before he thought them? If so, again, where is his freewill and how is God thinking at all if everything seems to be one uncontrollable action/thoughts. - The Infidel Guy [Note: I'd say a God cannot think at all. To do so, would strip him of omniscience. Thinking is a temporal process.] ON GOD'S ATEMPORALITY
1.) God, an atemporal being, created the Universe.
2.) Creation is a temporal processes because X cannot cause Y to come into being unless X existed temporally prior to Y.
3.) If God existed prior to the creation of the Universe he is a temporal being.
4.) Since God is atemporal, God cannot be the creator the Universe.
[Note: I guess I should also note here that a timeless being would be without the proposition of past, and future. But to be omniscient, God must know the past and future. Hence a God that is atemporal and omniscient cannot logically exist. Smiling]

This is answered with a previous reply I gave.Not all thinking is a temporal process that is an incoorect assumption that results in a proof for omniscience. How do yo uknow theres no omniscient being? That would imply youve looked under one rock, only to see you missed another he could be hiding under. If you look at both youll have a better chance, but if you look at one part of reality he could be in another..so really you have to have access to all evidence all reality simultaneously to be able to conclude to absolutely know there is no omniscient being. But to do so would make you omniscience for you couldnt know there was no omniscient being unless you had omniscience. The problem is that while youre argument proves the actual inescapabillity and undeniabillity of an omniscient mind, it shows youre not one because an omnissicent mind wouldnt make the self negating argument you gave. So its actually inescapable that not all thinking is temporal..an omniscient mind exists..but its not you. In short God doesnt have sequential, progressive, or temporal thoughts. He doesnt start then begin thinking. He does it in acordance with his necessary and unchanging nature. He thinks as one single eternal co intuition within himself as he has access to every potential and actual within himself. God existing "prior" to the beginig of the physical universe is a way of saying that God isnt chronologically prior but ONTOLOGICALLY prior to the universe. So theres no temporality implied there if you care to correctly undersatnd how theists argue this. If I know ABOUT you that doesnt mean I AM you. Likewise for God to know ABOUYT a past and present doesnt require Him to BE part of a past present scenario. So to ascribe change to an unchanging being is irrational and meaningless..which only results from a practice of trying to give ultimate concern or committment to things that are less than ultimate. God made us in His image, lets not think we need to return the favor.

Quote:
16. I have often heard that faith is all that is neccessary to believe in God and accept the Bible as true. If this is true aren't all supernatural beliefs true since they also require "faith"? - IG ON FAITH
1.) A prerequisite to believe in a Faith is faith.
2.) Having faith is all that is required to accept a Faith (belief) as true.
3.) All Faiths are true.
[Note: Of course all Faiths aren`t true, but this is the only logical conclusion that can be drawn from a person that states that, "Faith" is how one knows God.]

You heard wrong. Faith is required to have belief IN God, but isnt needed for believe THAT He exists or whether the claims of the Bible are true. Theres a adifference between belief IN and belief THAT. You cant have a meaningfull belief IN IF theres no factually existing OBJECT one is placing ones trust in. Belief in comes AFTER belief that. So you must have factual knowledge whether youre spouse exists and which house they live in BEFORE You open just any door and hug and kiss just anyone anywhere. Yo umust believe THAT they are before you have a relational trust in them. While other faiths ask you to take a blind leap into a dark chasm, where you turn your back on reality, Christian Theism asks the exact opposite. It alone meaningfully asks you take a rational step into the ligfht of evidence, test and weigh it to make sure its objectively true, and then take a step of trust based on objective verifiable facts. Paul said that if the physical ressurection of Christ didnt happen in time and space christians are without hope and are among men most foolish. So Christianity puts highest stock into it being factually and historically true for that is what distinguishes it from all other religions and cults.

Quote:
17. Why didn't God just kill Adam and Eve after the Fall and start from scratch? Actually, if God is all-knowing wouldn't he know that man would need to be killed eventually anyway, (the biblical flood)? Why create Adam and Eve at all? - and ON THE GARDEN OF EDEN
1.) God is omniscient (all-knowing).
2.) God knew that before he created man that they would eat of the tree of knowledge.
3.) God placed the tree of knowledge in the Garden anyway.
4.) God wanted sin to enter the world.
[Note: If God didn`t want sin to enter the world, why create Adam and Eve at all? He knew what would happen. Why place the forbidden trees in the Garden in the first place?]

Are you asking why didnt God kill people for freely choosing to not be with Him? Would you suggest that a parent kill their children because they disobey in todays democracy? I hope not. Man didnt need to be killed, at one point the pervasivness of evil was such that if they were allowed to continue theyd destroy everything with it..God in mercy preserved men and the earth by wiping out such pervasive evil at that time. He created Adam and Eve not because He NEEDED them, as if He was lonely, rather He WANTED others to share His goodness and love with inorder to have a relationship with them. To have a love relationship its required that freedom be a reality..IE a potential for evil. Without that reality there could not be a genuine relationship or reciprocation. He COULD HAVE MADE robots but didnt decide to do that. Rather he wanted genuine love relationships with His creation, knew that many would do so, so it was better to allow evil as opposed to approving it so that a greater good could occur. Evil has a purpose, youre questions imply there is none. Which is erroneous. God didnt WANT sin to eneter the world as in His APPROVING of it, rather He permitted it for the greater good..by allowing freedom, this allows the greatest good, love, to be realized and for evil to be defeated in turn. he didnt desire evil but permitted it for that greater good.

Quote:
18. If a spirit is non-physical but the human body is physical, how does a spirit stay in our bodies? - IG ON SPIRITS
1.) Spirits are not physical entities.
2.) Brains are physical entities.
3.) Past experiences are stored in our physical brains, we call that, Memory..
4.) Injury can damage portions of the physical brain that store memory and can alter or erase memories completely.
5.) If human spirits exist... after death, spirits can have no memory.
[Note: Some will say the spirit stores physical memories as well, but if true, the spirit would have to be physical at least to a degree. How could a non-physical spirit store, physical memories?]

A spirit stores memories which arent physical, for memories are in the realm of thought, and thougt in the mind isnt physical. You cant bump into or trip over a thought. The concept you used to express all or most things as merely phsyical is itself not material. Use must use an immaterial thought inorder to say all is mere matter. But how could you make an observational judgment about all matter UNLESS there was an aspect of self that has a distinct observation vantage point beyond matter by which to observe it and judge it as such. So if yo ucan judge or observe or think ABOUT matter, I think that implies theres an aspect of self that is beyond matter by which to be able to observe and think about matter. The thought of or about matter isnt identical to the matter it thinks about. So your very response implies a distinction between the observed thing vs the observer. If not my question would be how could you call thinking thinking when in reality according to you theyre a passing of a stream of electrons? Since when does squirts or secretions pass for thoughts? I also challenge you to think of a red fire engine and show me where the real mental image youre having of it is? How much it weighs and what its diameters are. You cant becuase while the end resulting mental image is REAL it nevertheless isnt physical. SO spirits dont store physical memories, rather they store non phsyical memories as accessed through the brain with the mind. Mind isnt identical to the phsyical brain therefore while it may be dependant on the brain for access to the physical world, it isnt ontologically dependant on it in any sense.

Quote:
19. Does God know his own future decisions? If God is all-knowing he actually shouldn't have any decisions to make at all. Nor can he choose anything over something else. For that would mean that he is neither omniscient nor omnipotent. In fact, he can't even think if this is the case. Since he can't DO anything, he might as well not exist. - IG ON GOD'S IMMUTABILITY - Unchangingness
1. If God exists, then he is immutable.
2. If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.
3. An immutable being cannot at one time have an intention and then at a later time not have that intention.
4. For any being to create anything, prior to the creation he must have had the intention to create it, but at a later time, after the creation, no longer have the intention to create it.
5. Thus, it is impossible for an immutable being to have created anything (from 3 and 4).
6. Therefore, it is impossible for God to exist (from 1, 2, and 5) - Theodore M. Drange

I already replied to that false assertion, which assumes that all deciding must be sequential, chronological, and envolve change, which in the case of God is not the case. God never lacked an intention to create. He eternallu decided to create in line with the one eternal co intuition He has in terms of His thought on everything. While He could have eternally decided never to create, and that was a possibility, it was always his decision to create vs not create. While hsi actions are necessary, in that if hes good he must necessarily act in accord with his unchangably good and rational nature, it wasnt required that he create because that was soley based in His willn ot his nature. So while God can have creative potential, in regards to enacting change outside of himself, He can have no internal change or potential to do so. Its just that since He always decided to create, he never changed that, for he doesnt occuy time to be able to go from a time of not intended to intending as you suggest. God eternally decided to begin the universe into being, and to sustain its continued existence. While God and ourselves exist NOW, we experience now differently than does God in regards to the kind of existence He has. It only leads to contradictions to confuse the two. Gods intention doesnt exist in time, but outside of it so He suffers no problem with regard to potential, time, or change.

Quote:
20. If God is all-knowing, how could he be disappointed in His creation? -- [Note: Indeed, wouldn't God know that before the creation of our Universe what creatures would disappoint him? That being the case why create those creatures at all? Also, in knowing absolutely the behavior of humans before creation, God cannot be disappointed either... for this world is exactly as he has planned it to be. If it's not, why create us at all?]

He wasnt dissapointed his with creation, he was eternally saddened or grieved with SOME peoples decisions. Why create them if they grieve you? Why not kill your family if they dissapoint you? Is that your logic? Kill or destroy whatever dissapoints you? Make sure you have no children because theyre gunna get hurt and will die in time? Thats a pretty sad way to live. Im glad God doesnt do things your way otherwise we'd all be destroyed. If some people will reciprocate love to you but let you personally down, what do you do? Kill them? Or love them inspite of that and offer them a better way out of their pain, suffering, and emptiness? Thats at least what God does.

Quote:
21. God struck down the Tower of Babel angry at the intent of the people that built them, if this is the case, many of the great pyramids ( which are bigger than any ziggurat) around the world should be rubble also, yet many still stand today. Were not the Egyptians and many other ancient pyramid builders reaching toward God /The Heavens? - IG [Note: In actuality, many of the Pharaoh's believed that, via their pyramids, they would become God's themselves.]

The problem with the Tower of Bable was that the whole world was unified under the humanist project of self deification, which would lead to their destruction based on their dillusion and dependance on lies. Egypt was oone part of the world, so were the other ziggurats. It wasnt the case of theh whole world being unified under a banner of evil. You look at all the past groups of people who practiced evil and where are they now? Aztecs..Incas, Egyptian Pharaohs, tribal leaders..etc. All destroyed. God separated the people at the Tower of Bable, from their unification around this evil intention, and therefore spared humanity their self destruction. Thats what God does..He gives chance after chance after chance..Hes not like us, who would destroy others because they dont do what we want them to. God loves us inspite of our stupid decisions and wants better for us. Hes a God of second third and fourth chances in this life.

Quote:
22. In the watchmaker analogy, a watch is used to show us intelligent design and compares that to the Universe as evidence of design. We know watches are designed because we have past experience with watches, as well as with other man made objects. My question is: What Universe is the Intelligent Design proponent using to compare this Universe with to draw such an analogy? What God did he see create a Universe? - IG

Hes compairing the connection between specified complexity and an intelligent mind as its source. The watch we know has a connection to an intelligent mind, a watch maker, a car, mt rushmore etc..If you see Mt Rushmore and compaire it to say, the Grand Canyon, you can tell which was caused by natural laws, time, plus, force, plus chance..and which was caused by an intelligent mind. We can intuatively tell the difference between language or specified complexity and natural formations. Natural formations may have specificity, OR complexity, but NOT BOTH specificity AND complexity. It is the type of thing you see in language. Language can only come from a mind, so if we see specified and coplex things like a cell, or dna, it stands to reason from prior experience with other designs, based on the principle of analogy that allows us to do science, that it too must have come from an intelligent mind. So the comparison is as David Hume said that the causal source is known by constant conjuction, between specified complexity and an intelligent mind. It doesnt matter how big the ball gets, whether the size of a coin, country, the world or the universe, we know that if it is specified and complex that past experience shows us that theres always intelligence behind it. SETI itself bases their research on this principle and it is commonsense to see the connection.

Quote:

23. Why did God flood the earth to remove evil? It didn't work! Evil came right back, God should have known that would happen! So why did He bother? - PhineasBg [Note: A good example of how quickly sin returned, was Noah getting drunk just after they discovered land.]

Uh no. He did it to remove such a condensed and infected level of evil, the kind that would have enveloped the world, and all its righteous people with it. God saved the righteous in it, and preserved them through the flood waters that took away the incredibly prevasive evil. It was the amount, level, and prevasivness of the evilk at that time that had God allow the flood waters.

Quote:
24. If the garden of Eden was a perfect paradise as xians claim, then why did Eve even want to eat the fruit? Wouldn't a perfect place provide everything a person would want or desire and thus she would want nothing? - keyser soze [Note: Why were the trees there in the first place? Of course they love to throw the serpent into the equation. But ummm..who let the serpent into the Garden?... and why would God create such a creature knowing he would cause man's fall? Hmm.. God must have wanted the fall to happen.]

She wanted to eat the fruit because she chose to along with the outter influence of satan. She had no sin nature, so the only things she had to go on were the free choice always present to choose between eating every other tree that was good for nourishment OR to disobey God and see herself as the arbitor of whats right and wrong, instead of God. The question for her is God God or do you really think youre your own God? Are you gunna do it Gods way or your own? Satan was PERMITTED into the garden. His presence wasnt approved of, but permitted. He didnt CAUSE adam and ev e choose to disobey, he INFLUENCED them and suggested that they do that. But they must have first fantasized about doing that before, which is why I point out that the spiritual deathing that took place was not AFTER the choice to disobey, but was itself the choice to death themselves from God..to choose to be separated from Gods love and grace. What resulted was suffering and physical death, and the possibility of dying in ones sins leaving one to pay for them themselves. God created Satan,. or more correctlyt Lucifer as a good being. But with that he gave Lucifer among all other rational agents a free will. So while God created the POTENTIAL to do evil, the angel Lucifer freedly chose to ACTUALIZE that evil. God didnt approve of the fall, but PERMITTED the fall so that a greater good could take place as I mentioned before. The conquoring and judgment of evil, the preserving the existence of all men with their free will, and the possibility of those who aim for good to recieve it via a love relationship with the source of all good things we enjoy.

Quote:
25. Why would an all-powerful god become flesh in order to sacrifice himself to himself so that his creation might escape the wrath of himself. Couldn't god, in his infinite wisdom, come up with something a little more efficient? - ON THE BODY OF CHRIST
1.) God?s flesh was known as Jesus.
2.) Flesh cannot enter into Heaven (according to Paul)
3.) God is no longer Jesus.
4.) Jesus doesn?t exist.

Bad argument. Youre equivocating on the word flesh. What is pointed out in the context of the passages you took out of context to make your argument is that it is CORRUPTABLE flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven, not just ANY KIND of flesh. Flesh was a figurative way of reffering to corruptabillity. So the argument should rather say

1) Gods came in flesh in Jesus.
2) Corruptable flesh cannot enter into heaven.
3) God through Christ made it so that corruptable flesh could be able to enter into heaven..
4) Where by through the incorruptable flesh of Jesus, his death burial and ressurection of the His physical flesh, He could offer the power of His conquoring of corruptabillity to anyone who wants it, enabling men to enter into heaven without corruption or corruptabillity.

Theres no other way for man to be seen as just before God. God is perfect and therefore demands perfection, we dont have it. The question is, where are we going to get it from? God provides the perfection we need to be made right with Him..and its by the Son taking on an additional nature, a human nature, living the perfect life in our place which we could never live, offering to us His perfection in exchange for our sin as an absolutely free gift..where heaven can be freely offered and then freely recieved by us...all through the perfect life of Jesus who paid the full penalty of our sins in His physical suffering and death, and conquored sin suffering and death by raising himself from the dead. As man he could be our human representative, and as God He could bear the punishment of all the sins of the world because as a divine being his death would take on infinite value.This perfect life which conquores sin is offered to us as an absolutely free gift. WHat we do with Jesus is what determines our eternal destinty. What will you decide to do with Jesus? Ask He asked "Who do you say I am"?

Quote:
(Note: Many at this point will state that the spirit lives on so therefore Jesus lives. This really depends on what you believe about Jesus. Is Jesus the son of God or God in flesh? If Jesus is merely the son there is no problem.However, if Jesus ?is? God himself, we do. You see, Jesus is called Jesus because of the attribute of Flesh. If Jesus = God (who is spirit) then the entity known as Jesus ceases to exist. The flesh/body of Jesus, no longer exists and the spirit of God is still the unchanging spirit of God.

No Jesus at that point. The Flesh, called Jesus, is dead.)
Son of God means God in flesh means God the Son in the Bible. The enemies of Christ knew this when He said this about Himself and attampted to kill Him for what they percieved as blasphemy. Son of God meant you only beget after your own kind, so (not to say that Jesus was begotten in the way we understand the word today like as in procreation, rather meaning more so a direct proceeding from) if Jesus is calling Himself Gods son, then that means Hes making Himself equal to God. Jesus is called jesus because His name means what He is.."Yahweh saves" He is God who comes to save mankind from their sins as it was prophecied from the beginning of the world. Jesus was always Jesus, was always Jeshua or Joshua, he was always what those words in other languages meant. He was always Gods son, the son of God part of the eternal family of the one divine nature. Hes not called Jesus BECAUSE of His flesh but because of who He is and what He was prophecied to do. Jesus isnt God in the sense you speak. Hes one person with two DIFFERENT natures..one divine which he shares with the father and spirit, and the other being a human nature. So He never ceased being God, nor did He when He took on an additional nature of human flesh. Your thoughts are merely part of a platonic story and has not to do with reality. That is not what the Bible states about Him and is not something the church in 2000 years has evcer taught. Your logic is way off.

Quote:

26. After 9/11 a lot of people have been tossing around " god bless america". Why do they keep saying this? From the looks of it god hasn't blessed anything. If god had blessed america, the 9/11 event would've never happened. Theists seem to give the answer of "everything is part of gods big plan". If everything is part of gods big plan, why are we after Bin Laden? Wasn't he and other terrorists just carrying out gods desired plan? So it seems that Bin Laden/ terrorism isnt our enemy, but god . - [Note: Unfortunately many religious nuts believe they are fulfilling their God's plan by going to war.]

What? Let me see if I understand this. If God has a plan where He permits evil and doesnt approve of it for the purpose of ultimately defeating it, that means he isnt against what Bin Laden did in 9/11? So to permit= approve of? Bin Laden was not carrying out the true God of the universes will. HE was following hiw own idea of who God is, according to Himself, or Mohammed as some would say, and acted according to his own view of God. The God of the Bible says to love your enemies, to do good to them...not to unjustly destroy them in the name of your own irrational extremist religious or pollitical views. Bin Laden is one enemy, but we have many. We have some countries perhaps, satan, demons, and the lies that so permeate peoples heads. Bin Laden is an enemy of freedom, human value, and thus God. So hes not doing Gods will rather hes doing the exact opposite. God isnt the enemy. The question is is our thinking more so like Bin Ladens in that were following stories about God and the world, or are we following a real and true description of God and the world according to Christian Theism. If youre not on that side, you are open to be more easily inclined towards terroristic ideals because to detract away from the judeochristian worldview is to move away from a just view of the intrinsic value of humanity ensured by an intrinsically good God/creator. If you respect your own views, then you must think you have value for how else could you make valuable truth statments unless you had value in the first place. So in order to be truthfull and consistent it would seem to make sense to move away from views that detract from the intrinsic value of humanity....getting into questions with a bias like..asking whether if Bin Laden is a friend and not an enemy, and whether the source of all good is evil is backwards? That is way of looking for goodness and truth where it cant be found, and a way of looking for God in all the wrong places. The Bible tells it like it is. Thats where you can find the answers you seek if you want them...remembering to test what I and others say in light of it because it can be verified to be divine in origin.

Quote:

27. Christians say that God is NOT the author of confusion. Can you say, Tower of Babel? - The Screaming Monkeys

He changed the languages or created new ones miraculously. He did that inorder to preserve order in society. So a way of saying He confused their languages is the same thing in saying He created new languages, from one language. Thats an argument based on semantics.

Quote:

28. If Noah's flood supposedly covered the earth for a year, regardless of whether or not all the animals could fit on the ark, what the heck happened to all the plants? Can you imagine a cactus surviving under 4 miles of water for a year? I can't either! - Kyle Giblet [Note: With God all things are possible. Oh wait, except in Judges 1:19.]

Ill research that one and return when I have the answer..the Nyquil is kicking in..I caught a cold.so Im not exactly with it right thsi moment...As far as Judges the text says that the human Israelites couldnt cast out the inhabitants..it doesnt say God couldnt. He delivered the Israelites from Egypt, destroyed pharaohs army, through an immense body of water/sea, therefore He could cast out nations. HOW He does that is in His prerogative. He may intervene for some reasons, but not for other reasons. In general perhaps he wanted the israelities to learn to trust In Him or something else.As far as Gods omnipotence, He can do anything that is ACTUALLY possible, but not things that are impossible by definition..like kill himself, throw the elect into hell, begin to exist, do evil, change, make a square circle, lie, etc..

Quote:
29. The highest rainfall ever recorded in a 24 hour period was 47inches in the Reunion Islands in 1947 (during a severe tropical storm). To cover the whole earth to a depth of 5.6 miles, and cover the mountain tops (i.e. Mount Everest), it would need to rain at a rate of 372 (three hundred and seventy two) inches per hour, over the entire surface of the earth. Can rain fall at such an astronomical rate? Where did all the water come from?? Where did it all go to??? And would not the dynamics of the earth be so out of balance (tides etc.) that the earth would become so unstable that it would wobble off into outer space???? -

The Bible says that the undergorund waters were also a contributing factor of why there was a flood. It depends on whether youre a young or old earth creationist to answer these last two questions. If youre an old earther, youd believe the flood is universal but not global, where as if youre a young earther youd believe in a global wordwide flood. So it depends on ones view as to how one would answer that. www.johnankerberg.org has a video with the best known young and old earth creationists debating. I think its worth checking out...the one with Kent Hovind in it is not worth checking out if you want a real debate, cause he wasnt any good and is kinda cooky.

Quote:
30. What do Muslim women get in Paradise? - IG [Note: Some Muslims I have interviewed about this say that Muslim women will get the same thing men get or equal value. Smiling Oh really? So Muslim women will get 72 virgin men? lol. If Muslim men get 72 virgins, where are all these virgin women coming from? What of their freewill? Is Allah creating these women to be slaves to the men in Paradise?]

Im not a muslim, so Im not going to comment.

Quote:
31. In the "Last Days" Jesus is supposed to appear in the clouds. How are the Christians on the opposite end of the world going to see him? Are there going to be millions of Jesus'? What about people that work underground? What about people in deep space? -

Its a figure of speech. Comming on the clouds reffers to passages in the Old Testament such as in Daniel which reffers to one who is distinct from the Father yet is top be worshipped as God (Jesus), who would come to judge the nations in the final eschaton. Its a figure of speech that reffers to Gods/Jesus judgment of the nation or world. Thsi question is asking something the text isnt saying.

Quote:
32. The Bible says that God is a jealous God . How is this an example of a moral absolute of which man is supposed to follow? - IG ON GOD`S JEALOUSY
1.) "God is love." 1 John 4:8.
2.) "Love is not jealous." 1 Cor 13:4
3.) "I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God." Exodus 20:5.
4.) The Christian god cannot logically exist.
(NOte: Basically love is NOT jealous, yet god is jealous, then God can`t be love. But if god IS love he cannot be jealous. Be he is.)

Just like theres a good and bad angry, theres a good and bad jealous. God isnt jealous in the bad sense, which is to say that He is not unjustly jealous or possessive. ALl was made by Him therefore for Him to say Hes jealous is justified. Since we didnt make anything, we cant really call it our own creation,. therefore arent in a position to be jealous in that sense. We can be jealous of a spouse not speaking a just amount of time with you, in other words wanting more of you which you should give, but theres bad jealousy when it turns to possessiveness, acting like theyre there to obey you as if you were God. We should spend the time we have appropriately within eahc type of relationship we have. With God all is His so we owe Him all, to not do so, by following other gods, or self over Him, is idolatry and is evil. Yet to do this in the same sense as applied to humans doesnt make any sense. The way it makes sense is if theres a man and woman who have a marriage committment for a lifelong love relationship, and they neglect their parts in it, which can make one partner jealous of them spending time with someone else when they OUGHT to be spending it with their spouse. So yes, God is love, and we can HAVE love. God is a jealous God in one sense but not in another. Theres some jealousy that is good and justified but another kind that is not justified or reasonable. You must properly relate whos the one reffered to as loving that makes a difference. While were not identical; with God, and Hes not TOTALLY other than us, but is similar, there will be similarities and differences between how those issues apply..to him they may apply differently than they do to us. The jealousy results in human relationships where there is a lack of love that ought to be there. In regards to God, jealousy is reffering to unjustly treating what isnt ultimate as if it WAS ultimate, replacing the true God with a false one..following the false one instead of the true one. REason why? Were not God, only God is God, and we should treat Him like such, and not anything else.

Quote:
33. A true Muslim man is not supposed to do anything that the prophet Muhammad didn't do. If one remembers there was a big debate over whether or not Muslims should eat Mangos. If this is true, why in the Hell were these Islamic Fundamentalists flying airplanes? - IG

What??

Quote:
34. If the earth was covered by a complete global flood, every living creature killed except those surviving on the ark, why are there many completely unique animal species in Australia that are found no where else indigenously on the earth? -

Depends on whether youre a young or old earth creationist. Somewould say the plates split others would say the oceans covered recesses in the continents that connect one another, others would say they migrated through connections that later dissapeared.

Quote:
35. If god is omniscient and " god is love," why would he allow a child to be conceived, knowing that that child would one day reject him and spend eternity burning in a lake of fire?- TiredTurkeyProd

Ive already answered this. God didnt want robots, but free agents who could recrprocate love back. Freedom, means the possibility of love, which also means the possibility of evil. Its good for God to permit the possibility of evil for a greater God, without approving of evil. To take away evil or its potential is to take away freedom which hence takes away the greatest good..namely love. Since this would be the greatest evil and God is unchangably good, he cannot do this

"It has been stated that an unexamined life is not worth living, but it can also be stated that an unexamined faith is not worth believing". Norman Geisler


Gravity
Posts: 112
Joined: 2006-02-13
User is offlineOffline
Re: Questions about God... theists answer these!

1. They needed a jew.

2. It is not true.

3. Both are probably wrong.

4. Reincarnation

5. It doesn't.

6. Man created hell.

7. Perhaps bad is necessary, perhaps evil doesn't exist, just like hell?

8. He would die a horrible death for his sin.

9. Well seeing as though all life dies, I think it'd sort of defeat the purpose if God made us to die, to bring us back to life again.

10. Because god doesn't have words and people use it for their own power.

11. The bible is crazy.

12. Satan doesn't exist.

13. Why did the writers of the Bible include this anyways?

14. I give up. This has abso-fu**ing-lutely nothing to do with theism. It's just a bunch of anti-christian crap. Not very well thought up, might I add. I hate anti-christians that can't think well, sounds like a bunch of teenagers got together and decided to rant about religion. Of course that is whta IG is all about anyways. It makes the true anti-religious people pissed off because there are idiots like this that do stuff like this.

I'm a dipshit.


GuentherBacon
Rational VIP!
GuentherBacon's picture
Posts: 49
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Re: Questions about God... theists answer these!

Gravity wrote:
1. They needed a jew.

2. It is not true.

3. Both are probably wrong.

4. Reincarnation

5. It doesn't.

6. Man created hell.

7. Perhaps bad is necessary, perhaps evil doesn't exist, just like hell?

8. He would die a horrible death for his sin.

9. Well seeing as though all life dies, I think it'd sort of defeat the purpose if God made us to die, to bring us back to life again.

10. Because god doesn't have words and people use it for their own power.

11. The bible is crazy.

12. Satan doesn't exist.

13. Why did the writers of the Bible include this anyways?

14. I give up. This has abso-fu**ing-lutely nothing to do with theism. It's just a bunch of anti-christian crap. Not very well thought up, might I add. I hate anti-christians that can't think well, sounds like a bunch of teenagers got together and decided to rant about religion. Of course that is whta IG is all about anyways. It makes the true anti-religious people pissed off because there are idiots like this that do stuff like this.

The same can be said for silly pseudo-theists that give unelaborate four-to-six word answers and, because of their pretentious hot-shit mentality, think that's all you need to support your argument.

1) Your answer was: "They needed a jew."

Jesus was a Jew. Thus, they had a Jew at their disposal who fulfilled all of the OT prophecies. Think about it harder; why didn't they need a messiah?

2) Your answer was: "It is not true."

Then the Bible is not infallable as Christian theists profess.

3) Your answer was: "Both are probably wrong."

What's your ground-breaking evidence to suggest this? We have scientific evidence to support that all mankind came from Africa; we have a faith-based geological theory to support that it was near the Euphrates. Tell us about your "gray area" theory.

4) Your answer was: "Reincarnation."

The Bible strictly teaches against reincarnation, as it says in the later New Testament that there is no waiting for judgement upon death.

5) Your answer was: "It doesn't."

Then why are there passages in the Bible to suggest that he does? Such as being jealous, and angry?

6) Your answer was: "Man created Hell."

According to the Bible, God created the Hell. Considering this list of questions was concerning The Bible, it helps to believe in it if you're actually going to attack us for compiling a list of it's errancies.

7) Your answer was: "Perhaps bad is necessary, perhaps evil doesn't exist, just like hell?"

How can bad be necessary and evil not exist at the same time? That claim is self-contradictory.

Cool Your answer was: "He would die a horrible death for his sin."

The answer does not apply to the question. The question had to do with a muslim's moral obligation to stay here on Earth in order for prayer to Mecca, not the reprocussions of said action.

9) Your answer was: "Well seeing as though all life dies, I think it'd sort of defeat the purpose if God made us to die, to bring us back to life again."

One word: Lazarus. He obviously had a purpose, because Jesus apparently brought him back to life.

10) Your answer was: "Because god doesn't have words and people use it for their own power."

God's power predates and has seniority over man's power, who is really carrying out God's will, therefore, all power is God's power. And being all-powerful, as well as outspoken in the Bible, God appeared to have had words to say. Such a claim is not only idiotic but irrelevant to these questions. I'd like to know what God you're really talking about.

11) Your answer was: "The bible is crazy."

Then why are you attacking a list of questions intended to challenge Christian theists? You are in the same boat we are! My hypothesis would be that your mind is a propaganda sponge and you spout whatever brilliant rhetoric pops into your head first. Trying to look impressive? You look like an asshat.

12) Your answer was: "Satan doesn't exist."

Again, that refutes the biblical cosmic battle between good and evil! What God do you believe in?

13) Your answer was: "Why did the writers of the Bible include this anyways?"

That's what were trying to figure out. Your fifteen minutes of boredom is counterproductive to the cause.

14) Your "answer" was: " I give up. This has abso-fu**ing-lutely nothing to do with theism. It's just a bunch of anti-christian crap. Not very well thought up, might I add. I hate anti-christians that can't think well, sounds like a bunch of teenagers got together and decided to rant about religion. Of course that is whta IG is all about anyways. It makes the true anti-religious people pissed off because there are idiots like this that do stuff like this."

It has everything to do with theism. All of these questions are directed to question the integrity of a faith-based writing surrounding the Christian God. If that isn't theism, I don't know what is.

Call us a bunch of teenagers who "just got together and decuded to rant about religion", but you're the asshole that came and called us out on our turf with an argument that did not even apply to the subject at hand! And if it did, it was a poorly educated one at that! Did it take you far out of your way?

What difference does it make if you come attacking us "anti-Christians" and you close your argument putting anti-religious people on a pedestal?

Everything you have presented here today is counterproductive to your cause and a waste of perfectly good forum space. I'd much rather see a picture of a naked woman here.

Say unto thine own heart, "I am mine own redeemer."
The Book Of Satan IV:3, The Satanic Bible


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Re: Around half way done..I cannot promise to reply 2 all re

dominick_777 wrote:
As it seems was perhaps intended by the person(s) who compiled this daunting list, to stiffle many if anyone from taking the time to reply because of its length, please do not expect me to reply to most if not many replies to this because of the same reason..length and that I don't have time to.

Hi Dominick. The list was not created by one person. It was created by many posters on Infidelguy.com, over a period of time. This is specifically stated in the list, so I'm not sure how you missed it.

Quote:

Lord willing when I get a chance to post a proof or two for the existence of a Theistic God,

How can you talk about the existence of something that violates ontology?

Quote:
List of questions about God, religion and the supernatural have been compiled by IG over the years as well as some interesting ones by readers.

1. If Jesus fulfilled all the OT prophecies so well, why didn't the Jews recognize him as the messiah? - Francois Tremblay

This wrongly assumes that the problem men have with the existence of God and His love for us, is intellectual assent.

It does? Then why do christians claim that there were prophecies in the first place? How else do people assess the outcome of a prophecy, if not by 'intellectual assent".

It seems that you are just trying to find an ad hoc way out of a mess.

Quote:

2. If Gen 3:24 is true, why hasn't anyone found the Cherubims and the " flaming sword which turned every way"?

Is this a serious question..?? Who says that since Adam and Eves demise that there needed to be a continuing Cherubum or sword there?


Is this a serious response? You ask "who says there needs to be a continuing flaming sword"

Well, the simple thing to do is check your source for your claim, the bible.

The bible states this:

3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.

3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

Nothing here implies that the tree of life was taken away, nor does anything here imply that the cherubim or sword would be taken away.

Quote:
3. It's been proven that modern humans originated from Africa. Yet, the Adam and Eve story claims the first Humans lived in a garden in Eden, near 4 rivers. ( Most of which no one can find). One of these rivers mentioned is the Euphrates, which runs through Iraq, Syria and a portion of Turkey. What's the truth? Did man come out of Africa or near the Euphrates River? - The Infidel Guy

I would disagree that man has been shown to decend from Africa conclusively. Theres no single ONE view of Darwinian evolution.


So what? The fact that an inductive claim can be doubted, in of itself, is not a reason to reject an inductive claim. Do you have a reason as to why you think man did not descend from Africa? If not, how do you know that you're not just denying this, to suit your biases?

Quote:
4. When the believer gets to Heaven, how can Heaven be utter bliss when people they love and care about are burning in Hell ? - The Infidel Guy - [Note: Some say God erases your memories of them, but if God erases your memory, you as Mr. Joe /Jane Smoe ceases to exist.

After hearing most of your broadcast, I can see how you don't seem to understand that you in fact have some great misunderstandings of the Bible you passionately reject. Firstly people arent tortured in hell, theyre tormented, which is a difference, knowing their choice was wrong for all eternity, they have eternal regret, unsatisfaction or pain, and emptiness..


How is purposely tormenting someone better than torturing them?

How can a person be blamed for making the choice that their intellect and conscious dictates?

Why would any loving being offer a 'choice' between torment and worship?

Would you torment your own children for not obeying you?

Quote:

Those who volutarily distance themselves from God in this life will have their choices ratified by God.

You assume that people actually believe there is a god, and choose not to be near him. What about people who really just don't believe in a god?

You never answered the question, by the way.

Quote:
5. How can a God have emotions, i.e. jealousy, anger, sadness, love, etc., if he is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent? Emotional states are reactionary for the most part. How can God react to us if he is all-knowing and has a divine plan? - IG [Note: Indeed, many religious texts display their gods this way . Listen to the An Emotional Godshow.

Emotions for HUMANS and all contingent changing beings is sequentially and temporally reactive, but not for God.

Sorry, but this is more ad hocism. Emotions are sequentially and temporally reactive... so if you remove this element, you no longer have an 'emotion'

Quote:
6. Why would God create a place such as hell to torture sinners forever when he foreknew who would disappoint him? - IG [Note: Some say you have a choice, but this misses the point. If God hates sin so much, why create Adam and Eve when he knew they'd sin? The only conclusion I can come up with, if Yaweh exists, is that he wanted sin to enter the world

God doesnt hate the potential to do evil, because that is a good thing called freedom/free will.

Incorrect. Theists claim that man must have 'free will' to follow god. Therefore, evil acts have no role at all in this situation. The only 'free will' that is required is free choice to 'follow god'

Therefore, no other evil act is required.

Therefore, this argument fails.

This argument actually fails several times. It also fails in that this god must make himself completely and totally known to all, without any doubt, for it to work. Yet 'god' is not even a coherent term, let alone something axiomatic.

Oh, by the way, if you read Acts 13:48, you'll learn that the bible states that only pre-ordained people would be allowed in heaven. So much for freewill...

Basically, I find your responses here ironic. You complain about the length of the list, yet your own responses are unneccesarily verbose. Second, your responses often don't even deal with the question. Third, your responses are basically ad hoc - if something refutes your belief, you just don't believe it. Finally, many of your claims are not only ad hoc, but based on a presumption that is itself unjustified, irrational, or even anti biblical.

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

Books on atheism.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Re: Questions about God... theists answer these!

GuentherBacon wrote:
I'd much rather see a picture of a naked woman here.

*busy doing taxes, but not too busy to satisfy your manhood, Bacon*

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


GuentherBacon
Rational VIP!
GuentherBacon's picture
Posts: 49
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

I did my taxes in a half hour. Smiling

And give me that girl's number. I'd like to rationally respond to this picture.

(entirely kidding if she's a girlfriend of someone on the board)

Say unto thine own heart, "I am mine own redeemer."
The Book Of Satan IV:3, The Satanic Bible


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

GuentherBacon wrote:
I did my taxes in a half hour. Smiling

And give me that girl's number. I'd like to rationally respond to this picture.

(entirely kidding if she's a girlfriend of someone on the board)

Actually I believe she's recently single, if she has stayed single. She's from New York, profile here.

PM her yourself. Eye-wink

My taxes, corporate and personal are about a 20-30 hour ordeal.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

Nice little forum you have here, by the way. I hope you liked my response. My favorite part of it would have to concern refuting the anti-biblical 'free will defense".

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

Books on atheism.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

todangst wrote:
Nice little forum you have here, by the way. I hope you liked my response. My favorite part of it would have to concern refuting the anti-biblical 'free will defense".

You kick ass, as usual. :smt067

Thanks for helping me out, I've been seriously neglecting the finishing touches on 2005, and logistics of closing my business so I can do this full time.

Dominick, I'll likely get a response to ya, but I am trying to handle some real life stuff, and only have time for the quick one liner stuff right now.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

"If there was a god, we would not have to deal with taxes," she sighed!

I, too, am attempting to get papers together for my CPA.

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


dominick_777
Theist
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Erase this message please..

dhhhhhhhh


Gravity
Posts: 112
Joined: 2006-02-13
User is offlineOffline
Re: Questions about God... theists answer these!

GuentherBacon wrote:

"The same can be said for silly pseudo-theists that give unelaborate four-to-six word answers and, because of their pretentious hot-shit mentality, think that's all you need to support your argument."

Aww. I wish you could write with such brevity too!

"1) Your answer was: "They needed a jew."
Jesus was a Jew. Thus, they had a Jew at their disposal who fulfilled all of the OT prophecies. Think about it harder; why didn't they need a messiah?"

Okay, they needed a messiah.

"2) Your answer was: "It is not true."
Then the Bible is not infallable as Christian theists profess."

Duh.

"3) Your answer was: "Both are probably wrong."
What's your ground-breaking evidence to suggest this? We have scientific evidence to support that all mankind came from Africa; we have a faith-based geological theory to support that it was near the Euphrates. Tell us about your "gray area" theory."

- Both are probably wrong. Science has been wrong more than it has been right... in history of course. It may be that civilization began in Africa, but it is rather unlikely that this was the only place it began, being that island of Africa, Europe and Asia is pretty damn big.

"4) Your answer was: "Reincarnation."
The Bible strictly teaches against reincarnation, as it says in the later New Testament that there is no waiting for judgement upon death."

Hey, I was justt giving an answer. Didn't need to be.... a correct... one.

"5) Your answer was: "It doesn't."
Then why are there passages in the Bible to suggest that he does? Such as being jealous, and angry?"

I don't know. Perhaps humans need a humane god. Or would that be inhumane?

"6) Your answer was: "Man created Hell."
According to the Bible, God created the Hell. Considering this list of questions was concerning The Bible, it helps to believe in it if you're actually going to attack us for compiling a list of it's errancies."

The bible says this, the bible says that. Okay. Who cares? - People who have questions for theists...?

"7) Your answer was: "Perhaps bad is necessary, perhaps evil doesn't exist, just like hell?"
How can bad be necessary and evil not exist at the same time? That claim is self-contradictory."

... Perhaps bad is necessary, or perhaps evil doesn't exist...

"8) Your answer was: "He would die a horrible death for his sin."
The answer does not apply to the question. The question had to do with a muslim's moral obligation to stay here on Earth in order for prayer to Mecca, not the reprocussions of said action."

The question does not apply to the answer. I think this was my point.

"9) Your answer was: "Well seeing as though all life dies, I think it'd sort of defeat the purpose if God made us to die, to bring us back to life again."
One word: Lazarus. He obviously had a purpose, because Jesus apparently brought him back to life."

One word: proof. Who the hell is this Lazarus guy? Some guy from a book? I don't believe it.

"10) Your answer was: "Because god doesn't have words and people use it for their own power."
God's power predates and has seniority over man's power, who is really carrying out God's will, therefore, all power is God's power. And being all-powerful, as well as outspoken in the Bible, God appeared to have had words to say. Such a claim is not only idiotic but irrelevant to these questions. I'd like to know what God you're really talking about."

The god of the people. My god. Your god. His god. Her god. Dr. Seuss' god. - some poor crazed man would even say the will to power.

"11) Your answer was: "The bible is crazy."
Then why are you attacking a list of questions intended to challenge Christian theists? You are in the same boat we are! My hypothesis would be that your mind is a propaganda sponge and you spout whatever brilliant rhetoric pops into your head first. Trying to look impressive? You look like an asshat."

I'm glad I impressed you, with my spongy spongeness and rhetorical spongituity. Might I absorb all your water for you? - Oh, and theists does not equal Christian.

"12) Your answer was: "Satan doesn't exist."
Again, that refutes the biblical cosmic battle between good and evil! What God do you believe in?"

I believe in you.

"13) Your answer was: "Why did the writers of the Bible include this anyways?"
That's what were trying to figure out. Your fifteen minutes of boredom is counterproductive to the cause."

Oh no, I'm wasting your time... quick, think up more questions to ask christians! 99 and counting! Hurry hurry super scurry!

"14) Your "answer" was: " I give up. This has abso-fu**ing-lutely nothing to do with theism. It's just a bunch of anti-christian crap. Not very well thought up, might I add. I hate anti-christians that can't think well, sounds like a bunch of teenagers got together and decided to rant about religion. Of course that is whta IG is all about anyways. It makes the true anti-religious people pissed off because there are idiots like this that do stuff like this."
It has everything to do with theism. All of these questions are directed to question the integrity of a faith-based writing surrounding the Christian God. If that isn't theism, I don't know what is."

It is theism (arguably), but theism is not it. That was my point.

"Call us a bunch of teenagers who "just got together and decuded to rant about religion", but you're the asshole that came and called us out on our turf with an argument that did not even apply to the subject at hand! And if it did, it was a poorly educated one at that! Did it take you far out of your way?"

No. I'm uneducated on someone else's turf. Woe is me. How long 'til I'm banned?

"What difference does it make if you come attacking us "anti-Christians" and you close your argument putting anti-religious people on a pedestal?"

Aww, I really can't stand people that do not understand how to criticize something.

"Everything you have presented here today is counterproductive to your cause and a waste of perfectly good forum space. I'd much rather see a picture of a naked woman here."

Figures. I'm counterproductive because I'm here to tell a bunch of rational responders to stop wasting their time insulting christians. You're right. Carry on!

- Hey Jesus freaks! Can god make a rock so big that even he can't lift it? Haha, you're wrong!

I'm a dipshit.


Gravity
Posts: 112
Joined: 2006-02-13
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

... bible thumpers.


GuentherBacon
Rational VIP!
GuentherBacon's picture
Posts: 49
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Re: Questions about God... theists answer these!

Gravity wrote:

"The same can be said for silly pseudo-theists that give unelaborate four-to-six word answers and, because of their pretentious hot-shit mentality, think that's all you need to support your argument."

Aww. I wish you could write with such brevity too!

So, because my refute to your arguments are longer than the four word systematical brain puss that you spit out to draw attention to yourself, they're a problem?

Gravity wrote:
"1) Your answer was: "They needed a jew."
Jesus was a Jew. Thus, they had a Jew at their disposal who fulfilled all of the OT prophecies. Think about it harder; why didn't they need a messiah?"

Okay, they needed a messiah.

They had a messiah. Jesus fulfilled all of the OT prophecies. Now why didn't they call him Messiah?

Gravity wrote:
"2) Your answer was: "It is not true."
Then the Bible is not infallable as Christian theists profess."

Duh.

I'd like to know, once and for all, the fundamentals behind your personal theist philosophy. By all means, fill us in.

Gravity wrote:
"3) Your answer was: "Both are probably wrong."
What's your ground-breaking evidence to suggest this? We have scientific evidence to support that all mankind came from Africa; we have a faith-based geological theory to support that it was near the Euphrates. Tell us about your "gray area" theory."

- Both are probably wrong. Science has been wrong more than it has been right... in history of course. It may be that civilization began in Africa, but it is rather unlikely that this was the only place it began, being that island of Africa, Europe and Asia is pretty damn big.

The absence of evidence is the evidence of absence. We found evidence in Africa to suggest that all of human kind originated there. No where else on Earth have we found what we found there. You can't say "Well, the Earth is pretty damn big", and submit that as an argument. You can base that on personal belief, but it's no argument.

Gravity wrote:
"4) Your answer was: "Reincarnation."
The Bible strictly teaches against reincarnation, as it says in the later New Testament that there is no waiting for judgement upon death."

Hey, I was justt giving an answer. Didn't need to be.... a correct... one.

Then why the Hell are you answering these questions? The name of the threat is atheist vs. theist, not theist vs. pseudo-theist. Don't get me wrong; I'm glad you chimed in with your two-cents. It made for an entertaining day overall.

Gravity wrote:
"5) Your answer was: "It doesn't."
Then why are there passages in the Bible to suggest that he does? Such as being jealous, and angry?"

I don't know. Perhaps humans need a humane god. Or would that be inhumane?

The God of the Bible is in no way humane! Either you've never read the Bible (which would draw further suspicion that you're just here to draw attention to yourself), or you need to look up the words "humane" and "inhumane" in the dictionary before using them in debate.

Gravity wrote:
"6) Your answer was: "Man created Hell."
According to the Bible, God created the Hell. Considering this list of questions was concerning The Bible, it helps to believe in it if you're actually going to attack us for compiling a list of it's errancies."

The bible says this, the bible says that. Okay. Who cares? - People who have questions for theists...?

Who cares? Obviously you care, or you wouldn't have taken the time to ridicule us by answering fifteen of the questions, regardless of how irrational and half-assed they were.

Gravity wrote:
"7) Your answer was: "Perhaps bad is necessary, perhaps evil doesn't exist, just like hell?"
How can bad be necessary and evil not exist at the same time? That claim is self-contradictory."

... Perhaps bad is necessary, or perhaps evil doesn't exist...

I refuted your answer, and you answered my refute with the answer that I refuted. You are an idiot.

Gravity wrote:
"8) Your answer was: "He would die a horrible death for his sin."
The answer does not apply to the question. The question had to do with a muslim's moral obligation to stay here on Earth in order for prayer to Mecca, not the reprocussions of said action."

The question does not apply to the answer. I think this was my point.

It's your point to give answers that are completely irrelevant to the questions? (::scrolls up and down page:Smiling Okay, I can see that now.

Gravity wrote:
"9) Your answer was: "Well seeing as though all life dies, I think it'd sort of defeat the purpose if God made us to die, to bring us back to life again."
One word: Lazarus. He obviously had a purpose, because Jesus apparently brought him back to life."

One word: proof. Who the hell is this Lazarus guy? Some guy from a book? I don't believe it.

Exactly. These questions were intended for the people who believe it.

Gravity wrote:
"10) Your answer was: "Because god doesn't have words and people use it for their own power."
God's power predates and has seniority over man's power, who is really carrying out God's will, therefore, all power is God's power. And being all-powerful, as well as outspoken in the Bible, God appeared to have had words to say. Such a claim is not only idiotic but irrelevant to these questions. I'd like to know what God you're really talking about."

The god of the people. My god. Your god. His god. Her god. Dr. Seuss' god. - some poor crazed man would even say the will to power.

And who is this God?

When you talk about the will to power, you almost sound like a Satanist, but I would not give you that much credit, seeing as that is what I am, and I am not a theist as yourself.

I would venture to guess that you don't even know what you believe.

Gravity wrote:
"11) Your answer was: "The bible is crazy."
Then why are you attacking a list of questions intended to challenge Christian theists? You are in the same boat we are! My hypothesis would be that your mind is a propaganda sponge and you spout whatever brilliant rhetoric pops into your head first. Trying to look impressive? You look like an asshat."

I'm glad I impressed you, with my spongy spongeness and rhetorical spongituity. Might I absorb all your water for you? - Oh, and theists does not equal Christian.

That's not what I was saying. A Christian equals a theist, dumbass.

Gravity wrote:
"12) Your answer was: "Satan doesn't exist."
Again, that refutes the biblical cosmic battle between good and evil! What God do you believe in?"

I believe in you.

Explain your philosophy a little further.

Gravity wrote:
"13) Your answer was: "Why did the writers of the Bible include this anyways?"
That's what were trying to figure out. Your fifteen minutes of boredom is counterproductive to the cause."

Oh no, I'm wasting your time... quick, think up more questions to ask christians! 99 and counting! Hurry hurry super scurry!

At least that will be a more productive use of time than arguing theism with theism, as you have done here.

Gravity wrote:
"14) Your "answer" was: " I give up. This has abso-fu**ing-lutely nothing to do with theism. It's just a bunch of anti-christian crap. Not very well thought up, might I add. I hate anti-christians that can't think well, sounds like a bunch of teenagers got together and decided to rant about religion. Of course that is whta IG is all about anyways. It makes the true anti-religious people pissed off because there are idiots like this that do stuff like this."
It has everything to do with theism. All of these questions are directed to question the integrity of a faith-based writing surrounding the Christian God. If that isn't theism, I don't know what is."

It is theism (arguably), but theism is not it. That was my point.

I made that point earlier on.

Gravity wrote:
"Call us a bunch of teenagers who "just got together and decuded to rant about religion", but you're the asshole that came and called us out on our turf with an argument that did not even apply to the subject at hand! And if it did, it was a poorly educated one at that! Did it take you far out of your way?"

No. I'm uneducated on someone else's turf. Woe is me. How long 'til I'm banned?

About as long as it takes for you to leave, since it appears that your state of mind is that you're wasting your time here anyway.

Like I said before, I think you're just here to draw attention to yourself, and your plan backfired and made you look like a huge idiot.

Gravity wrote:
"What difference does it make if you come attacking us "anti-Christians" and you close your argument putting anti-religious people on a pedestal?"

Aww, I really can't stand people that do not understand how to criticize something.

By neglecting to criticize my question, and instead leaving a useless statement concerning your preference of people and criticism, you have shown your failure in knowing how to properly criticize my question, which was perfectly valid. So I am, in a sense, turning this comment onto you.

Gravity wrote:
"Everything you have presented here today is counterproductive to your cause and a waste of perfectly good forum space. I'd much rather see a picture of a naked woman here."

Figures. I'm counterproductive because I'm here to tell a bunch of rational responders to stop wasting their time insulting christians. You're right. Carry on!

- Hey Jesus freaks! Can god make a rock so big that even he can't lift it? Haha, you're wrong!

We're not insulting Christians. It's called the Rational Response Squad. Of course, we have a bit of fun at their expense, but we are overall dead set on the presentation of ideas and the shedding of light upon misconception.

Also, that last line, was a waste of time insulting Christians. Just thought you should know that you have no right to be on a soapbox right now.

Say unto thine own heart, "I am mine own redeemer."
The Book Of Satan IV:3, The Satanic Bible


GuentherBacon
Rational VIP!
GuentherBacon's picture
Posts: 49
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

Sapient wrote:
GuentherBacon wrote:
I did my taxes in a half hour. Smiling

And give me that girl's number. I'd like to rationally respond to this picture.

(entirely kidding if she's a girlfriend of someone on the board)

Actually I believe she's recently single, if she has stayed single. She's from New York, profile here.

PM her yourself. Eye-wink

My taxes, corporate and personal are about a 20-30 hour ordeal.

Bah. She hasn't logged on for about a month. I'll probably pass on it. Shucks.

Say unto thine own heart, "I am mine own redeemer."
The Book Of Satan IV:3, The Satanic Bible


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

GuentherBacon wrote:

Bah. She hasn't logged on for about a month. I'll probably pass on it. Shucks.

She's too sexy for this message board... too sexy for this message board...

Most people get emailed when they receive a PM.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Gravity
Posts: 112
Joined: 2006-02-13
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

Hahaha. I'm loving the inundation of meaning... I'm the only forum asshole.


Gravity
Posts: 112
Joined: 2006-02-13
User is offlineOffline
Re: Questions about God... theists answer these!

GuentherBacon wrote:
Gravity wrote:

"So, because my refute to your arguments are longer than the four word systematical brain puss that you spit out to draw attention to yourself, they're a problem?"

-No. But might I say they save time... time certain people were complaining about.

"They had a messiah. Jesus fulfilled all of the OT prophecies. Now why didn't they call him Messiah?"

-Because they needed a messiah... in human form. The had one in text, they needed one in real life. I personally doubt Jesus ever knew he became some messiah anyways, that most of his life is a fabrication and bastardization of a famous jew who died on the cross.

"I'd like to know, once and for all, the fundamentals behind your personal theist philosophy. By all means, fill us in."

-No.

"The absence of evidence is the evidence of absence."

No. - Science must be falsifiable.

"You can't say "Well, the Earth is pretty damn big""

-I didn't.

"Then why the Hell are you answering these questions? The name of the threat is atheist vs. theist, not theist vs. pseudo-theist. Don't get me wrong; I'm glad you chimed in with your two-cents. It made for an entertaining day overall."

-Sure.

""I don't know. Perhaps humans need a humane god. Or would that be inhumane?"
The God of the Bible is in no way humane! Either you've never read the Bible (which would draw further suspicion that you're just here to draw attention to yourself), or you need to look up the words "humane" and "inhumane" in the dictionary before using them in debate."

- Or would that be inhumane. - Humane being, marked by characteristic of humanistic values- god is a reflection of human beings, human beings aren't that great, therefore god isn't that great. - Simple argument, I'd rather not scrutinize to hell.

"Who cares? Obviously you care, or you wouldn't have taken the time to ridicule us by answering fifteen of the questions, regardless of how irrational and half-assed they were."

-Yep.

"

Gravity wrote:
"7) Your answer was: "Perhaps bad is necessary, perhaps evil doesn't exist, just like hell?"
How can bad be necessary and evil not exist at the same time? That claim is self-contradictory."

... Perhaps bad is necessary, or perhaps evil doesn't exist...

I refuted your answer, and you answered my refute with the answer that I refuted. You are an idiot."

Look again. I added an or in there to make my original point more clear to you. I never said bad is necessary and evil doesn't exist. Besides, learn to ask definition before abusing your own definition of words, I could have meant something different by bad and evil, hence why I used bad and evil not evil and evil.

"It's your point to give answers that are completely irrelevant to the questions? (::scrolls up and down page:Smiling Okay, I can see that now."

- I think you've figured me out. All these answers to these questions are meaningless. Voila. All these questions are meaningless too.

"Exactly. These questions were intended for the people who believe it."

Well I'm a theist and these questions were intended for me, and I don't believe it... wait, how can somebody be a theist and not be fundamentalist, oh my gosh like valley girl!

"And who is this God?

When you talk about the will to power, you almost sound like a Satanist, but I would not give you that much credit, seeing as that is what I am, and I am not a theist as yourself.

I would venture to guess that you don't even know what you believe."

When I talk about will to power, it is Nietzschean. And I wouldn't doubt Satanists adopted this idea and misused it, like a large majority of Nietzsche's other ideas were.

"That's not what I was saying. A Christian equals a theist, dumbass."

It is necessary for a Christian to be a theist. My point...

If theist, then Christian (this statement is false)
If Christian, then theist (this statement is true, arguably).
Christian does not equal theist, meaning the necessary and sufficient conditions apply, they don't. That would be, If and only if Christian, then theist... which is obviously false.

"Explain your philosophy a little further."

No.

"At least that will be a more productive use of time than arguing theism with theism, as you have done here."

... right. And you want me to elaborate my theistic philosophy... with you?

"I made that point earlier on."

And I did too.

"About as long as it takes for you to leave, since it appears that your state of mind is that you're wasting your time here anyway.

Like I said before, I think you're just here to draw attention to yourself, and your plan backfired and made you look like a huge idiot."

-Yes, because my fear is to look like an idiot. Bert and Ernie.

"By neglecting to criticize my question, and instead leaving a useless statement concerning your preference of people and criticism, you have shown your failure in knowing how to properly criticize my question, which was perfectly valid. So I am, in a sense, turning this comment onto you."

- No, I haven't shown my failure to criticize your questions, I've shown disregard to them... which can be taken as criticism, only if you know me well enough in the first place (and I don't expect this of you).

"We're not insulting Christians. It's called the Rational Response Squad. Of course, we have a bit of fun at their expense, but we are overall dead set on the presentation of ideas and the shedding of light upon misconception."

- Haha. I've seen one shred of intelligence from anyone in the RRS- and it was, " Fast Food is rarely rational. I'd go with the packed lunch. " - Of course, you need to know the context to understand it.

"Also, that last line, was a waste of time insulting Christians. Just thought you should know that you have no right to be on a soapbox right now."

- Soapbox, soapdish. I have no rights! wow.

I'm a dipshit.


GuentherBacon
Rational VIP!
GuentherBacon's picture
Posts: 49
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Re: Questions about God... theists answer these!

Gravity wrote:
"So, because my refute to your arguments are longer than the four word systematical brain puss that you spit out to draw attention to yourself, they're a problem?"

-No. But might I say they save time... time certain people were complaining about.

So is it a necessity to forgo all logic and reasoning for the sake of time, or are detailed, rational responses to questions more reliable for the reader who has the desire to attain information?

Gravity wrote:
They had a messiah. Jesus fulfilled all of the OT prophecies. Now why didn't they call him Messiah?"

-Because they needed a messiah... in human form. The had one in text, they needed one in real life. I personally doubt Jesus ever knew he became some messiah anyways, that most of his life is a fabrication and bastardization of a famous jew who died on the cross.

Jesus was biblically God in the flesh, thus he was in human form. And he did fulfill all of the OT prophecies, according to scripture. Therefore, all criteria was met. Why was he not the messiah?

I do believe, in fact, that this was the original question. See what your lack of reason and poor attention to detail has led you? Right back to where you started.

And according to the Bible, Jesus knew that he was the promised messiah. I won't bother with verses, because you don't recognize the Bible as true.

Gravity wrote:
"I'd like to know, once and for all, the fundamentals behind your personal theist philosophy. By all means, fill us in."

-No.

Then stop wasting our time refuting our purpose with a ridiculous faith-based philosophy that 1) we know nothing about, and 2) you're not willing to share with us.

Gravity wrote:
"The absence of evidence is the evidence of absence."

No. - Science must be falsifiable.

But that does not make all science falsifiable. We're not talking about science here either. We're talking about the lack of evidence.

Gravity wrote:
"You can't say "Well, the Earth is pretty damn big""

-I didn't.

You took my statement out of context. I believe what I said was something to the effect of "You can't say 'well, the Earth is pretty damn big' and submit it as an argument".

And fine; I'll correct myself. You can't say that the continents of Africa, Europe and Asia are pretty damn big and then submit it as an argument against this question.

Gravity wrote:
""I don't know. Perhaps humans need a humane god. Or would that be inhumane?"
The God of the Bible is in no way humane! Either you've never read the Bible (which would draw further suspicion that you're just here to draw attention to yourself), or you need to look up the words "humane" and "inhumane" in the dictionary before using them in debate."

- Or would that be inhumane. - Humane being, marked by characteristic of humanistic values- god is a reflection of human beings, human beings aren't that great, therefore god isn't that great. - Simple argument, I'd rather not scrutinize to hell.

Like I have said before, we are discussing the God of the Bible; not some pseudo-theistic diety you made up to gnab attention from people. The God of the Bible does not have humanistic values, or else he would have been more open to our needs.

Gravity wrote:
7) Your answer was: "Perhaps bad is necessary, perhaps evil doesn't exist, just like hell?"
How can bad be necessary and evil not exist at the same time? That claim is self-contradictory."

... Perhaps bad is necessary, or perhaps evil doesn't exist...

I refuted your answer, and you answered my refute with the answer that I refuted. You are an idiot."

Look again. I added an or in there to make my original point more clear to you. I never said bad is necessary and evil doesn't exist. Besides, learn to ask definition before abusing your own definition of words, I could have meant something different by bad and evil, hence why I used bad and evil not evil and evil.

I saw the "or". Either way, the sentence is contradictory because you insinuate both the existence of evil and the irrelevance of evil, making no point overall.

Gravity wrote:
"It's your point to give answers that are completely irrelevant to the questions? (::scrolls up and down page:Smiling Okay, I can see that now."

- I think you've figured me out. All these answers to these questions are meaningless. Voila. All these questions are meaningless too.

These questions serve a purpose. Your answers were meaningless because they were in no way relevant to the questions.

Gravity wrote:
"Exactly. These questions were intended for the people who believe it."

Well I'm a theist and these questions were intended for me, and I don't believe it... wait, how can somebody be a theist and not be fundamentalist, oh my gosh like valley girl!

Lots of people can be theist without being fundamentalists. However, a good portion those theists also recognize the Bible as infallable, so these points must be called to question.

But since you do not agree with the Bible, they obviously would not apply to you. Why waste your time?

Gravity wrote:
"And who is this God?

When you talk about the will to power, you almost sound like a Satanist, but I would not give you that much credit, seeing as that is what I am, and I am not a theist as yourself.

I would venture to guess that you don't even know what you believe.'

When I talk about will to power, it is Nietzschean. And I wouldn't doubt Satanists adopted this idea and misused it, like a large majority of Nietzsche's other ideas were.

I KNEW you were hyped up on Nietzsche. How can you be a theist and still adopt Nietzschian philosophy? The will to power is your will to power, not the will of a higher benevolent being.

Gravity wrote:
"That's not what I was saying. A Christian equals a theist, dumbass."

It is necessary for a Christian to be a theist. My point...

If theist, then Christian (this statement is false)
If Christian, then theist (this statement is true, arguably).
Christian does not equal theist, meaning the necessary and sufficient conditions apply, they don't. That would be, If and only if Christian, then theist... which is obviously false.

Let me show you what you just wrote so you can see for yourself how stupid you actually look when you post.

"It is necessary for a Christian to be a theist."

A few lines later...

"Christian does not equal theist, meaning the necessary and sufficient conditions apply, they don't. That would be, If and only if Christian, then theist... which is obviously false."

A theist is a person who recognizes a minimum of one diety. Christianity recognizes God (the triune) as a diety. Christianity is theism, thus, a Christian is a theist.

I think you have a sick fetish for masturbatory nonsense posting.

Gravity wrote:
"Explain your philosophy a little further."

No.

Then quit wasting our time, and yours, by basing your answers to these questions on a pseudo-theistic philosophy for which it was not intended.

Gravity wrote:
"At least that will be a more productive use of time than arguing theism with theism, as you have done here."

... right. And you want me to elaborate my theistic philosophy... with you?

I think we're all a little curious as to what the Hell you believe in.

Gravity wrote:
"About as long as it takes for you to leave, since it appears that your state of mind is that you're wasting your time here anyway.

Like I said before, I think you're just here to draw attention to yourself, and your plan backfired and made you look like a huge idiot."

-Yes, because my fear is to look like an idiot. Bert and Ernie.

Your fears have come to life in ways you are too stupid to realize.

Gravity wrote:
"By neglecting to criticize my question, and instead leaving a useless statement concerning your preference of people and criticism, you have shown your failure in knowing how to properly criticize my question, which was perfectly valid. So I am, in a sense, turning this comment onto you."

- No, I haven't shown my failure to criticize your questions, I've shown disregard to them... which can be taken as criticism, only if you know me well enough in the first place (and I don't expect this of you).

Then you cannot use that as an argument, because you have not allowed us to find out more about you, and you are too stubborn to tell us anything about you. This is your own fault, not ours, and thus your failure to criticize my question directly denotes your failure to know how to properly criticize it, because you willingly do not tell us anything about you so that we understand perfectly what your definition of "criticism" is, and all that it entails.

Gravity wrote:
"We're not insulting Christians. It's called the Rational Response Squad. Of course, we have a bit of fun at their expense, but we are overall dead set on the presentation of ideas and the shedding of light upon misconception."

- Haha. I've seen one shred of intelligence from anyone in the RRS- and it was, " Fast Food is rarely rational. I'd go with the packed lunch. " - Of course, you need to know the context to understand it.

Unfortunately for you, you wouldn't know a rational thought if it crawled up your ass in the form of a fire-forged phallus.

Say unto thine own heart, "I am mine own redeemer."
The Book Of Satan IV:3, The Satanic Bible


dominick_777
Theist
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Re: Around half way done..I cannot promise to reply 2 all re

Quote:
todangst wrote:
dominick_777 wrote:
As it seems was perhaps intended by the person(s) who compiled this daunting list, to stiffle many if anyone from taking the time to reply because of its length, please do not expect me to reply to most if not many replies to this because of the same reason..length and that I don't have time to.

Hi Dominick. The list was not created by one person. It was created by many posters on Infidelguy.com, over a period of time. This is specifically stated in the list, so I'm not sure how you missed it.

I understand that many people emailed or posted questions, as each typically have someones name next to the qustion..my point is that in attempting to present yourself as professional, I assumed someone picked out of a mess of questions and posted those as a picked compilation, now having read all of them, I can see how that wasnt necessarily the way it was done. Many are repetative in different wording or saying the same thing in different ways. I was saying that someone had to take these many questions and compile them deciding that 89 was ok rather than a lesser amount..if that happened then what I said stands for someone had to ok it being 89..which is quite alot of questions..thus is daunting and doesnt seem to be something that one person is expected to tackle.

Quote:

Lord willing when I get a chance to post a proof or two for the existence of a Theistic God,

How can you talk about the existence of something that violates ontology?

Ontology is the study or being or existence. All you just did there was STATE or ASSERT that God violates ontology. Id say He doesnt and can back that up. Please back up why you say His existence violates a study of existence rather than grounds it? The only way I can see you responding is by merely begging the question by defining all existence as contingent or changing, or temporal..which is circular and does beg the question..its actually quite irrational as well to say the least. Please dont just assert, please provide evidence for your assertion.

Quote:
Quote:
List of questions about God, religion and the supernatural have been compiled by IG over the years as well as some interesting ones by readers.

1. If Jesus fulfilled all the OT prophecies so well, why didn't the Jews recognize him as the messiah? - Francois Tremblay

This wrongly assumes that the problem men have with the existence of God and His love for us, is intellectual assent.

It does? Then why do christians claim that there were prophecies in the first place? How else do people assess the outcome of a prophecy, if not by 'intellectual assent".

It seems that you are just trying to find an ad hoc way out of a mess.

I never said that intellectual assent and evidence isnt important, I said that the MAIN assumption behind that question seems to imply that if only they had the right evidence they would have believed, and I showed that that is not correct. While I also never said that intellectual assent or evidence isnt important, because it is important and is necessary, that doesnt mean its sufficient nor does it follow that that is the only problem with men who reject Jesus being the Messiah. The Bible shows that men are sinners, therefore have selfishness, choose to do what they ought not do, contrary to what they know is true and good. In light of that, there were some who knew Jesus WAS the messiah, for they acknowledged that Jesus performed miracles (see John 3 with Nicodemus) and only one from God who spoke what God wants to communicate can do miracles..because God wouldnt approve of a false teacher by performing miracles along with their message. So there were those who denied Jesus INSPITE of justified knowledge that He was the Messiah, the One who fullfills the messianic prophecies, and there were also those who just didnt fully understand..but thats a big difference. I also noted that man jews DID recieve Him as Lord and Savior including many pharisees and teachers of the law.

Quote:
Quote:

2. If Gen 3:24 is true, why hasn't anyone found the Cherubims and the " flaming sword which turned every way"?

Is this a serious question..?? Who says that since Adam and Eves demise that there needed to be a continuing Cherubum or sword there?


Is this a serious response? You ask "who says there needs to be a continuing flaming sword"

Well, the simple thing to do is check your source for your claim, the bible.

The bible states this:

3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.

3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

Nothing here implies that the tree of life was taken away, nor does anything here imply that the cherubim or sword would be taken away.

Thats an argument from silence. If it doesnt make a point saying one or the other as according to you how can you make that as an argument?? Youre right it neither says it was to be a perpetual thing..ONLY IF it said it was perpetual and to be there all times for all people could your argument make any sense. I think that is a really bad argument.

Quote:
Quote:
3. It's been proven that modern humans originated from Africa. Yet, the Adam and Eve story claims the first Humans lived in a garden in Eden, near 4 rivers. ( Most of which no one can find). One of these rivers mentioned is the Euphrates, which runs through Iraq, Syria and a portion of Turkey. What's the truth? Did man come out of Africa or near the Euphrates River? - The Infidel Guy

I would disagree that man has been shown to decend from Africa conclusively. Theres no single ONE view of Darwinian evolution.


So what? The fact that an inductive claim can be doubted, in of itself, is not a reason to reject an inductive claim. Do you have a reason as to why you think man did not descend from Africa? If not, how do you know that you're not just denying this, to suit your biases?

Well my "bias" is first principles of reason, and since Darwinian Evolution is based in and pretty much IS or is BASED IN naturalism or materialism, and these philosophies are contradictory and thus contrary to first principles of reason, it shouldnt be considered seriously..furthermore the conclusions drawn with Darwinism CANNOT be true. Conclusions drawn with Darwinism go against the law of causality, analogy, law of non contradiction etc..so its an irrational philosophy thats time has hopefully runb out with this generation. Furthermore we can see that the Bible can be verfied to be divine not human in origin not to say that its also historically reliable first of all, and thus can be relied upon to tell us how we began and who we are. Intelligent Design proponents have good refutations of Darwinian evolution, but Id argue it on the grounds of philosophy and commonsense which is avaliable to all. Wheres your proof that we descended from africa?? Btw without an unchanging necessary ground for reason, all probability deductions or inductions arent necessarily applicable to rseality..how much more does darwinism need reason to be silly putty in ones hands, to be able to express the conclusions that come from that low grade theory?

Quote:
Quote:
4. When the believer gets to Heaven, how can Heaven be utter bliss when people they love and care about are burning in Hell ? - The Infidel Guy - [Note: Some say God erases your memories of them, but if God erases your memory, you as Mr. Joe /Jane Smoe ceases to exist.

After hearing most of your broadcast, I can see how you don't seem to understand that you in fact have some great misunderstandings of the Bible you passionately reject. Firstly people arent tortured in hell, theyre tormented, which is a difference, knowing their choice was wrong for all eternity, they have eternal regret, unsatisfaction or pain, and emptiness..


How is purposely tormenting someone better than torturing them?

I dont understand how youre measuring better or worse? Please first of all tell me how or on what basis you make sense of better or worse and then I can more directly answer your question. Generally speaking I can say that the tormenting is self inflicted, because its the consequence of eternal regret that one will have after the fact of choosing to pay for ones own sins forever instead of recieving CHrists payment for them..secondly, the condition of eternal torment envolves not a tearing of ones flesh or decapitations where one wouldnt have enough body parts to keep that going forever..rather its a state of regret, deprivation, bordom, eternal mental and emotional suffocation, dissatisfaction..all self inflicted because of one choice to do what they ought not have done...reject the very source of love, life, and goodness of things you enjoyed in this life before this time of finality comes over you. Youre idea or assumption of God taking pleasure in ones suffering is unfounded, and He doesnt enjoy people rejecting Him nor suffering the consequences of doing so. Its a thing man needs to do to onesef ..and isnt something God does TO THEM..Rather He lets thm have their will be done..and you are blindly assuming you know whats best when you as a human dont always know whats best

.

Quote:
How can a person be blamed for making the choice that their intellect and conscious dictates?

Just because one sincerely believes something doesnt mean they cant be sincerely wrong. Theres at least three reasons why someone rejects God and the Bible. Ones intellect and conscious are inclined towards truth naturally, that point them to a theistic God, but another part of them is inclined to point them away from the truth..to those that supress the truth in their wickeness for the sake of sexual or other desires for independant practices apart from commonsense and morals typically choose this route. Jullian Huxley admitted this as the reaosn people grabbed onto Darwinian evolution..inotherwords not for intellectual reasons.

1) Intellectual reasons. These people need evidence and they will believe if they see some. While many are like this it can also be said that many are not like this..many SAY theyre like this but I find arent UNTILL theyre FIRST shown their view is inadequet.

2) Emotional reasons. These people will say something like "christians hurt me so Im not gunna believe in God". Well, even if all christians have done wrong, or are messed up that doesnt mean that christianity is false. So they need some sort of evidence of a real changed life, a proper understanding of what happens to you when you get saved, that theres people who claim to be christian but arent really, and other types of comfort or counsel to help them see the truth on this.

3) Valitional reasons. Some people just don't want to believe EVEN IF the evidence shows Christian Theism is true. FOr these you love, pray for, and be friends to, because if they dont want to believe they wont. Many are like this. Something to also note is I believe Jean Paul Sarte said that "If you can prove this God of the Bible to us, WE WOULD BELIEVE IT ALL THE LESS". Is that an intellectual reason or a valitional reason. If you see that as a valitional reason,m what I find funny is that people who really just dont want to believe PRETEND as if their reason is intellectual when it isnt.

Quote:

Why would any loving being offer a 'choice' between torment and worship?

Would you torment your own children for not obeying you?

Any loving being would offer a choice between torment and valuing what is really good in itself and also good for them. Any parent who isnt weighed down by some issue like ocd or something on the level of control, manipulation or some other oppressive evil will alolow their children to make their own choices, and have to suffer the consequences for their wrong choices..only a parent who is firm in their co dependance or some other unhealthy behavior will try to keep their children from not learning the difference between right and wrong. Remember torment is due to THEM CHOOSING to do what is wrong based in lies...for them to experience blessings, its because THEY CHOSE what is right and experienced the good that came from that choice whether it was difficult to make or not. God doesnt torment anyone, rather, Hes the reminder of the good they could have had but will be to late for those who didnt care to cling to the right when they had the chance. Im sorry you have such a bad notion of who God really is..loving good and kind. One whos infinitely loving, but also infinitely just, giving to people what they deserve in accordance with what they themselves have done. AT the judgment all who are in hell will know they deserved it and chose it knowiung that Gods judgments are always 100% perfect and based on ALL the evidence avaliable. If you had a bad relationship with your parent I can understand why you believe God to be so ...well ..hmmm....bad.

Quote:

Those who volutarily distance themselves from God in this life will have their choices ratified by God.

Quote:
You assume that people actually believe there is a god, and choose not to be near him. What about people who really just don't believe in a god?

You never answered the question, by the way.

I dont see where I didnt answer your question. Which one or which part didnt I answer? Well I think what Im saying is that people intuatively have an inclination towards knowing God exists..kinda like if you see two mountains that are crossed infront of each other..you may not have seen the way their bases look in relationship to each other but you can surmise how they look. You can also choose to see how they look by choosing to see it and search for it in reality. Likewise you have all the evidence in the world, with the world itself, where the creation points to a creator, design to a designer, and morals to a moral law giver. IF one responds to the light theyve been given they will be given the light of Christ which the light you have points to. My point is that all are born with an innate intuition that God exists, an inclination HE exists, a feeling He does, but its their choice to search out the answers to their questions in reality..to search out the evidence for God and who He is. Many chose not to.

So my point is that there are those who are not objectively sure, but can be if they so chose to be, where as others mayby be sure and reject Him and evidence for Him anyways. If you want to you can see the actually inescapable nature of evidence for a theistic God. But thats your choice to see it for what it is. Many people dont want to be confused by the facts because their mind is made up..ad that is unfortunate. Others assume that just because they couldnt get a solid answer from one christian or person there must not be any..thats to see yourself short. There are answers, and God has given everybody enough light sufficient to believe THAT He exists and wants to know and love you.

Quote:

Quote:
5. How can a God have emotions, i.e. jealousy, anger, sadness, love, etc., if he is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent? Emotional states are reactionary for the most part. How can God react to us if he is all-knowing and has a divine plan? - IG [Note: Indeed, many religious texts display their gods this way . Listen to the An Emotional Godshow.

Emotions for HUMANS and all contingent changing beings is sequentially and temporally reactive, but not for God.

Sorry, but this is more ad hocism. Emotions are sequentially and temporally reactive... so if you remove this element, you no longer have an 'emotion'

That just begs the question and is an indirect argument for the existence of God. If all is contingent and changing, thus COULD change from being into non being..what grounds the existence of all contingent changing being(s)? Itself? If it can go from being into non being, then it must be caused to keep existing. Since it cannot cause its own existence, it must be caused by another, and that which is beyond what changes and what is contingent is what is necessar yand unchanging. Therefore as long as you admitt that change is real, you automatically imply a theistic God exists. Youre merely defining youre way out of theism which begs the question and is circular..why do you define it that way VS defining it in a n objective independant way that allows for either type of being..contingent or necessary to fit the bill? All youre doing is assuming all that exists is changing temporal and contingent inorder to prove it is, and therefore that God doesnt exist and or doesnt have emotions/isnt personal.

Websters defines it as The part of the consciousness that involves feeling...why cant God have an aspect of His unchanging being that envoles feeling in an eternal unchanging sense?? The burden of proof is on you to prove that all emotions are changing, temporal anc successive.

Quote:
6. Why would God create a place such as hell to torture sinners forever when he foreknew who would disappoint him? - IG [Note: Some say you have a choice, but this misses the point. If God hates sin so much, why create Adam and Eve when he knew they'd sin? The only conclusion I can come up with, if Yaweh exists, is that he wanted sin to enter the world

God doesnt hate the potential to do evil, because that is a good thing called freedom/free will.

Incorrect. Theists claim that man must have 'free will' to follow god. Therefore, evil acts have no role at all in this situation. The only 'free will' that is required is free choice to 'follow god'

Therefore, no other evil act is required.

Therefore, this argument fails.

No man didnt HAVE TO BE free..God decided to make us free agents..and inorder to be able to genuinely reciprocate love back, follow God, relate to him, and to be able to have genuine responcibillity man must have free will inorder to do these things. The problem is that youre using the term free will without giving any sort of understanding or definition to that term.. Free will MEANS one has the abillity to choose good or evil..it means they can do or do otherwise. Therefore a potential to do evil is part of having a good thing called free will, therefore you yet again are misunderstanding some basics with regards to Theism, of which I am a Theist. If one could ONLY do good, or follow God, and cant do otherwise, then THEYRE not able to do anything of their own accord..theyre just doing what they were wired to do, and thus dont really have free will, but a more so circumstantial freedom which isnt what is talked about by the Bible nor something that makes any sense in describing reality. Your argument fails in three ways..

1) It doesnt acknowledge what Theists really believe
2) It doesnt acknowledge how IM arguing for Theism or Christian Theism 3) You wanna keep using a strawman version of what you THINK christian theism is vs what it actually is..

therefore you can keep youre distance..yet you show youre not effective in representing your view because it fails to represent whats in reality. Therefore you show you must turn your back on reality inorder to believe what you do, which I dont think is effective or helpful. So please reply to how IM arguing for Christian Theism not how someone somewhere may have misrepresented it.

Quote:
This argument actually fails several times. It also fails in that this god must make himself completely and totally known to all, without any doubt, for it to work. Yet 'god' is not even a coherent term, let alone something axiomatic.

No, what God does is make Himself KNOWABLE to all, to the extent of sufficient certainty, and this makes sense if HE gives them an inner inclination towards knowing God, AND the evidence of reality to which their inclination points to which is all around them. God is axiomatic by definition. You could not make any necessary denials or affirmations UNLESS reason was grounded in that which is necessary and unchanging, and that is excatly how Theists describe God. SO inorder to do what youre doing in this forum you must assume a necessary unchanging ground to your argument, which you may call something else, to make your point that He doesnt exist...which I find is circular and self negating. There must be a necessary and unchanging ground to your statments lest they not need to be heard, accepted, or recieved as true or necessary. His existence is both coherent, axiomatic, and corrsponds to reality. Its JUST that your understanding of who God is isnt correct, and youre arguing against a strawman of who God is inorer to make your case against Him..when it isnt Him youre really reacting against..but rather is a false representation of who He is your reacting to.

Quote:
Oh, by the way, if you read Acts 13:48, you'll learn that the bible states that only pre-ordained people would be allowed in heaven. So much for freewill...

By the way you may want to find more than one antiquiated version of the Bible to reffer to, and or get a lexicon..the word there reffers to predisposition, so theres no need to read into that any sort of determinism. The way it should read or be understood is "as many were predisposed to to eternal life believed. The problem is that inorder for atheists and a-theists to try to make a feeble attempt to refute christian theism is they need to get ther info from a bad source, a bible that is over 50 years old, which doesnt rely on the earliest extant or best mansucripts, ignore principles of grammer or reading, and basically argue a strawman argument.

BTW EVEN IF it said what you said it does, it doesnt follow that free will doesnt exist. The passage is quoting the old testament regarding the fact that the gentiles would be saved in and of themselves without needing to become jews or identify with the types and shadows of judaism like in terms of circumsition...and in light of that, according to Gods foreknowledge which is unchanging, it would be reffering to the unchanging KNOWLEDGE of God, knowing for certain who would believe, rather than reffering to the actual choices of men in time..Inother words, the appointing reffers to the unchanging knowledge of God, which doesnt cause any man to do anything, but is aware or conscious of what they will choose, and done so not against their free will, but in ACCORD with their free will. Thats what Peter says as it does all throughout scripture. SO even if God knew for certain which Gentiles would believe, it SAYS THEY believed, it doesnt say God believed for them or that Gods knowledge MADE them choose. Rather it says they believed, AND it was done so according to Gods certain unchanging knowledge. ALl things are detremined from Gods perspective but free from the aspect of time and mens choice. There are other possible ways to understand this passage as well which are well within the pale of christian theism.

Quote:
Basically, I find your responses here ironic. You complain about the length of the list, yet your own responses are unneccesarily verbose. Second, your responses often don't even deal with the question. Third, your responses are basically ad hoc - if something refutes your belief, you just don't believe it. Finally, many of your claims are not only ad hoc, but based on a presumption that is itself unjustified, irrational, or even anti biblical.

My answers arent on the comparison of 89 questions and sub questions one need to deal with. My answers are in responc eto thes e89 questions and I only got around half or less of them replied to. My answers sufficiently cover the question without using insufficient one sentance answers. Im not complai ing about its length I was just saying that it seems to rely on length inorder to scare people from answering them..thus making you feel confident in some way that you not seeing answers therefore means there must not be any. I dont see how theyre ad hoc, though you can CLAIM or ASSERT they are all day, but interestingly enough, you havent shown ANY PROOF of what you claim in this thread thus far...as far as my arguments being ad hoc, arguing against themselves or the like. Please just reply to my answers in context instead of just throwing out what is a logical fallacy somehow showing people you may know what youre talking about because you know the names of some logical fallacies..WITHOUT showing HOW theyre logical fallacies or giving proof for your claims. Theyre just blind assertions with NO defensible argument.

"It has been stated that an unexamined life is not worth living, but it can also be stated that an unexamined faith is not worth believing". Norman Geisler


Gravity
Posts: 112
Joined: 2006-02-13
User is offlineOffline
Re: Questions about God... theists answer these!

GuentherBacon wrote:

"So is it a necessity to forgo all logic and reasoning for the sake of time, or are detailed, rational responses to questions more reliable for the reader who has the desire to attain information?"

- Would you be surprised if I said yes, and then no? Sometimes we would like to hop in cold baths, just to feel the instant chill and then we jump back out... shivering.

"Jesus was biblically God in the flesh, thus he was in human form. And he did fulfill all of the OT prophecies, according to scripture. Therefore, all criteria was met. Why was he not the messiah?"

- Jesus was humanly human in the flesh. I do not trust humans very much, and I distrust the works of humans even more.

"I do believe, in fact, that this was the original question. See what your lack of reason and poor attention to detail has led you? Right back to where you started."

- Keep talking about my lack of reason. I enjoy it.

"Then stop wasting our time refuting our purpose with a ridiculous faith-based philosophy that 1) we know nothing about, and 2) you're not willing to share with us."

- I have never introduced my... 'faith-based philosophy' to you, how am I to refute your purpose with a ghost on the forum?

"But that does not make all science falsifiable. We're not talking about science here either. We're talking about the lack of evidence."

All scientific theory must be falsifiable - lack of evidence requires a theory to state the evidence to lack. This is a simple point, I do not feel compelled to argue with you much on it. Might I just point you towards the millions of times science has been wrong? Unless you can talk about something like the BCS theory of superconductivity or dark matter or something with me, I think this would be the waste of time you are looking for.

"You took my statement out of context. I believe what I said was something to the effect of "You can't say 'well, the Earth is pretty damn big' and submit it as an argument"."

- Again. I didn't.

"And fine; I'll correct myself. You can't say that the continents of Africa, Europe and Asia are pretty damn big and then submit it as an argument against this question."

Ah, but you're taking my statement out of context. Surely my point was that man didn't evolve in a matter of a week in some town in Africa, just as sharks probably didn't evolve on one part of the ocean.

"Like I have said before, we are discussing the God of the Bible; not some pseudo-theistic diety you made up to gnab attention from people. The God of the Bible does not have humanistic values, or else he would have been more open to our needs."

-Really now, what about the god in the bible isn't humane, human... inhumane? - You might be able to provide an answer, but more than likely I will be able to explain in terms of psychology and human nature.

"I saw the "or". Either way, the sentence is contradictory because you insinuate both the existence of evil and the irrelevance of evil, making no point overall."

- Learn the logical operator "or," dear criticizer of my reasoning. And I restate, you merely eqauting my term bad with evil and insisted that they meant the same, when in truth, they are hardly the same- but this is my perk, had you actually asked, I might have been able to respond... rationally.

"These questions serve a purpose. Your answers were meaningless because they were in no way relevant to the questions."

- These questions serve a purpose? What purpose is this... god's purpose? Please don't ramble on about how god works in mysterious ways now... heh. These questions serve your purpose. And your purpose, sadly, is, well... sad.

"Lots of people can be theist without being fundamentalists. However, a good portion those theists also recognize the Bible as infallable, so these points must be called to question."

- Congratulations, you've just asked a hindu why he believes the bible, a muslim why he worships Christ as lord, and a Greek something he never even knew about.

"But since you do not agree with the Bible, they obviously would not apply to you. Why waste your time?"

- Ditto.

"I KNEW you were hyped up on Nietzsche. How can you be a theist and still adopt Nietzschian philosophy? The will to power is your will to power, not the will of a higher benevolent being."

- I am not Nietzsche. And Nietzsche's will to power is actually his point I most disagree with, I believe it exists, duh, I just don't see it as a basis for the world. And don't try to ask how I can believe in a god and adopt other ideas, you have completely no idea what my conception of a god is.

"Let me show you what you just wrote so you can see for yourself how stupid you actually look when you post.

"It is necessary for a Christian to be a theist."

A few lines later...

"Christian does not equal theist, meaning the necessary and sufficient conditions apply, they don't. That would be, If and only if Christian, then theist... which is obviously false."

A theist is a person who recognizes a minimum of one diety. Christianity recognizes God (the triune) as a diety. Christianity is theism, thus, a Christian is a theist."

Again, I point you to predicate logic. Review the necessary and sufficient conditions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessary_and_sufficient_conditions

My point is that equal implies the if and only if operator. Some theists can be theists and not be Christians. Point made simple. No need to draw it out anymore.

"Then quit wasting our time, and yours, by basing your answers to these questions on a pseudo-theistic philosophy for which it was not intended."

You like the word pseudo-theism don't you? Would you get mad if I called you a real atheist or something...?

"I think we're all a little curious as to what the Hell you believe in."

- Figure it out yourself. That is what I believe in.

"Your fears have come to life in ways you are too stupid to realize."

Woe is me.

"Then you cannot use that as an argument, because you have not allowed us to find out more about you, and you are too stubborn to tell us anything about you. This is your own fault, not ours, and thus your failure to criticize my question directly denotes your failure to know how to properly criticize it, because you willingly do not tell us anything about you so that we understand perfectly what your definition of "criticism" is, and all that it entails."

Again, my failure to criticize your question is more than likely because I don't feel the need to. Must we repeat ourselves? Or... are we to play these childish games to appease our curiosities and drives... you can't do this... do it to prove me wrong!

"Unfortunately for you, you wouldn't know a rational thought if it crawled up your ass in the form of a fire-forged phallus."

- Hey, quite possibly the most intelligent thing you've ever said to me, or the stupidest. I'm hoping for the former.[/i][/url]

I'm a dipshit.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

I am unable to read any of your posts gravity. This board has a much higher functionality then myspace. You should use the quote function.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Gravity
Posts: 112
Joined: 2006-02-13
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

Sapient wrote:
I am unable to read any of your posts gravity. This board has a much higher functionality then myspace. You should use the quote function.

I apologize.

I'm a dipshit.


dominick_777
Theist
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

todangst wrote:
Nice little forum you have here, by the way. I hope you liked my response. My favorite part of it would have to concern refuting the anti-biblical 'free will defense".

Id like to see how you respond to my post on it within what Ive given here if youre willing.

"It has been stated that an unexamined life is not worth living, but it can also be stated that an unexamined faith is not worth believing". Norman Geisler


dominick_777
Theist
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

Sapient wrote:
dominick_777 wrote:

Im thinking about it. I think I will. But what I may do instead is offer a proof or two for the existence of a theistic God if I lack time to answer every question here, and instead deal with it in the sense that if it can be shown that Theism is true, then it follows that all non theism is false..as a first step. Id like to know your thoughts on that?

I'm thinking you just dodged a bunch of questions, including these as well.

Addditionally I'm thinking that you need to start a new thread on it, and yes if you could give valid proof of a theistic god than obviously all non-theism is false. Do I think you can provide valid proof? NO.

Are you asking me the question or yourself as to whether I can or cannot provide a valid and sufficient proof? If youre asking yourself, why are you reffering the question to me? If the question is meant for me to answer, why are you answering it? Youre answer is self negating and implies omniscience exists..though exluding you from being it (omniscient)...for omniscience wouldnt make such a self nagting argument..that indirectly implies a theistic Gods existence. If you dont even allow the possibility of Gods existence you must 1) Provide proof of the impossibility of a theistic God. 2) Show how you know everything since youd have to know everything inorder to absolutely know there is no omniscient God in existence..You show youre not open or willing to see evidence for a theistic Gods existence, because you dont even think its possible..but to do so proves He exists..even though you may not be aware of it.

"It has been stated that an unexamined life is not worth living, but it can also be stated that an unexamined faith is not worth believing". Norman Geisler


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Re: Around half way done..I cannot promise to reply 2 all re

dominick_777 wrote:

todangst wrote:
dominick_777 wrote:
As it seems was perhaps intended by the person(s) who compiled this daunting list, to stiffle many if anyone from taking the time to reply because of its length, please do not expect me to reply to most if not many replies to this because of the same reason..length and that I don't have time to.

Hi Dominick. The list was not created by one person. It was created by many posters on Infidelguy.com, over a period of time. This is specifically stated in the list, so I'm not sure how you missed it.

I understand that many people emailed or posted questions,


Then your complaint makes no sense to me. But I digress...

Quote:

Lord willing when I get a chance to post a proof or two for the existence of a Theistic God,

How can you talk about the existence of something that violates ontology? This isn't a rhetorical question.

Quote:

Ontology is the study or being or existence.

Right.
Quote:

All you just did there was STATE or ASSERT that God violates ontology. Id say He doesnt and can back that up.

I don't think you can without contradicting yourself somewhere along the way. To exist is to exist as something, to have a specific identity. To have a nature. How does something beyond nature, have a nature? How can you apply positive traits to something that is 'above' nature? Can you explain?

Quote:
Quote:
List of questions about God, religion and the supernatural have been compiled by IG over the years as well as some interesting ones by readers.

1. If Jesus fulfilled all the OT prophecies so well, why didn't the Jews recognize him as the messiah? - Francois Tremblay

This wrongly assumes that the problem men have with the existence of God and His love for us, is intellectual assent.

It does? Then why do christians claim that there were prophecies in the first place? How else do people assess the outcome of a prophecy, if not by 'intellectual assent".

It seems that you are just trying to find an ad hoc way out of a mess.

Quote:

I never said that intellectual assent and evidence isnt important, I said that the MAIN assumption behind that question seems to imply that if only they had the right evidence they would have believed, and I showed that that is not correct.

You haven't shown any such thing. In fact, your assertion undermines the entire point of a prophecy - i.e. the point of a prophecy is that its ability to predict events would provide evidence - i.e. it is an appeal to the intellect, evidence, etc.

Quote:
Quote:

2. If Gen 3:24 is true, why hasn't anyone found the Cherubims and the " flaming sword which turned every way"?

Is this a serious question..?? Who says that since Adam and Eves demise that there needed to be a continuing Cherubum or sword there?

Is this a serious response? You ask "who says there needs to be a continuing flaming sword"

Well, the simple thing to do is check your source for your claim, the bible.

The bible states this:

3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.

3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

Nothing here implies that the tree of life was taken away, nor does anything here imply that the cherubim or sword would be taken away.

Quote:

Thats an argument from silence.

No, it is not. An argument from silence does not occur if we point to a lack of evidence as meaning that our opponent has no grounds for asserting a counter claim. I did not assert that X did not happen, what I said was that nothing in the bible implies that the tree of life was taken away, nor does anything here imply that the cherubim or sword would be taken away.

You, on the other hand, are commiting an insertionism fallacy. This fallacy, or more correctly, deceitful debate tactic, occurs when there is an unwarranted and unsubstantiated insertion of words or new meanings into a statement or argument.

There is nothing in the original passages that supports your claim. This is the point made here.

Quote:
Quote:
3. It's been proven that modern humans originated from Africa. Yet, the Adam and Eve story claims the first Humans lived in a garden in Eden, near 4 rivers. ( Most of which no one can find). One of these rivers mentioned is the Euphrates, which runs through Iraq, Syria and a portion of Turkey. What's the truth? Did man come out of Africa or near the Euphrates River? - The Infidel Guy

I would disagree that man has been shown to decend from Africa conclusively. Theres no single ONE view of Darwinian evolution.


So what? The fact that an inductive claim can be doubted, in of itself, is not a reason to reject an inductive claim. Do you have a reason as to why you think man did not descend from Africa? If not, how do you know that you're not just denying this, to suit your biases?

Quote:

Well my "bias" is first principles of reason, and since Darwinian Evolution is based in and pretty much IS or is BASED IN naturalism or materialism, and these philosophies are contradictory and thus contrary to first principles of reason, it shouldnt be considered seriously..

I don't think you have good grounds for your bias. I shall simply move on here, as I don't see much point of continuing this line of thought.

Quote:
Quote:
4. When the believer gets to Heaven, how can Heaven be utter bliss when people they love and care about are burning in Hell ? - The Infidel Guy - [Note: Some say God erases your memories of them, but if God erases your memory, you as Mr. Joe /Jane Smoe ceases to exist.

After hearing most of your broadcast, I can see how you don't seem to understand that you in fact have some great misunderstandings of the Bible you passionately reject. Firstly people arent tortured in hell, theyre tormented, which is a difference, knowing their choice was wrong for all eternity, they have eternal regret, unsatisfaction or pain, and emptiness..


How is purposely tormenting someone better than torturing them?

Quote:

I dont understand how youre measuring better or worse?

You're the one who made the distinction, not me. You hold there is a difference. What is it?

Quote:
How can a person be blamed for making the choice that their intellect and conscious dictates?

Quote:

Just because one sincerely believes something doesnt mean they cant be sincerely wrong. [snipped]

Sorry, but none of what you wrote here responds to the question. How can a person be blamed for making the choice that their intellect dictates?

Quote:

Why would any loving being offer a 'choice' between torment and worship?

Would you torment your own children for not obeying you?

Quote:
[unread, snipped]

One more time. Would you torment your own children for not obeying you?

Can you shorten your answers too?

Quote:

Quote:
5. How can a God have emotions, i.e. jealousy, anger, sadness, love, etc., if he is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent? Emotional states are reactionary for the most part. How can God react to us if he is all-knowing and has a divine plan? - IG [Note: Indeed, many religious texts display their gods this way . Listen to the An Emotional Godshow.

Emotions for HUMANS and all contingent changing beings is sequentially and temporally reactive, but not for God.

Sorry, but this is more ad hocism. Emotions are sequentially and temporally reactive... so if you remove this element, you no longer have an 'emotion'

Quote:

That just begs the question

No, this is how we define emotions. You are confusing 'begging the question' for a definition. If you want to disagree with how we define emotions, then please provide a better definition.

Quote:

and is an indirect argument for the existence of God. If all is contingent and changing, thus COULD change from being into non being..

Non sequitur. You're missing a connective premise. And please, if we can, let's avoid presuppositionalism. If you seriously hold to this view, I see basically zero reason to continue.

Quote:
6. Why would God create a place such as hell to torture sinners forever when he foreknew who would disappoint him? - IG [Note: Some say you have a choice, but this misses the point. If God hates sin so much, why create Adam and Eve when he knew they'd sin? The only conclusion I can come up with, if Yaweh exists, is that he wanted sin to enter the world

God doesnt hate the potential to do evil, because that is a good thing called freedom/free will.

Incorrect. Theists claim that man must have 'free will' to follow god. Therefore, evil acts have no role at all in this situation. The only 'free will' that is required is free choice to 'follow god'

Therefore, no other evil act is required.

Therefore, this argument fails.

Quote:

No man didnt HAVE TO BE free..God decided to make us free agents..

Cite your chapter and verse, please. Show me where 'god' says this.

Can you also explain the following:

If this 'god' creates free will, doesn't he also create the parameters within which free choices are made? If so, then doesn't this make free will moot?

If god creates free will, and is perfectly responsible for his creation, then doesn't he still bear ultimate responsibility?

How do you jibe your claims of free will with an omnipotent creator?

How do you deal with these biblical passages, which clearly endorse strict determinism for the universe:

**************
Isaiah 46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,

46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

if god says something will happen, it will happen:

Isaiah 46:11 Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.

and he knows all that happens because he causes everything that happens!

matthew 10:29 Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father.

again, god is omniscient because he planned everything perfectly, before any of us even existed:

Peter 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;

1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

all that happens is already known to god, and written in his book:

revelations 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

god knows all because all is already written: the book of revelations also tells us that the damned were damned before they were even born:

17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

jesus also verifies that all was already known to god before any of us were born:

matthew 25:34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

Paul also chimes in and agrees:

Ephesians 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

1:6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

an old testament version of this same claim:

Jeremiah 1:4 Now the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying, 5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee, and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee; I have appointed thee a prophet unto the nations.

From a newer translation:

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations." (NRSV)

*************

Quote:

The problem is that youre using the term free will without giving any sort of understanding or definition to that term.. Free will MEANS one has the ability to choose good or evil..

Then according to your own definition, how can one have a free choice, if the options are heavenly bliss and eternal torment? This is not a freedom to choose, it is the exact opposite, this is a perfect example of coercision!

A true freedom to choose god must include the following:

1) knowledge that this god exists in the first place ( you can't choose an option that you don't believe exists!)

2) freedom from coercision to choose whatever option you prefer, free from reprisals or any negative ramifications as far as making the choice itself goes.

Your claims violate both necessary components

Quote:

You wanna keep using a strawman version of what you THINK christian theism is vs what it actually is..

My quotes of the bible show that you are the one with the strawman. I have shown that your own bible affirms strict determinism. For every passage that you might find that seems to affirm free will, I can probably find two that affirm strict determinism bordering on fatalism.

I agree, however, that theists often make claims that are both non biblical and contradictory. But I don't think that this is what you are intentionally arguing here.

Quote:
This argument actually fails several times. It also fails in that this god must make himself completely and totally known to all, without any doubt, for it to work. Yet 'god' is not even a coherent term, let alone something axiomatic.

Quote:

No, what God does is make Himself KNOWABLE to all,

Then why do theists need faith?

One can assert 'god does not exist" free from self contradiction. So we already know that 'god' is not axiomatic.

Next, as this 'god' is beyond our ken, I fail to see how you can assert what you have asserted here.

Finally, seeing as theists themselves argue that one must have faith, and that faith is belief without justification, I must disagree with your assertion:

Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
- Paul, Bible: New Testament. Hebrews 11:1.

I.e., it's belief based on hope, not evidence.

For those who cry 'out of context', Paul continues here:

Romans 8:24-25: ?For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees? But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with perseverance.? (NKJV)

It should be now obvious that 'faith' is belief without evidence and that theists hold that one must believe without evidence. . If one has evidence - reasons - for their belief, then why do they need faith? Clearly and obviously "faith" is required when one wishes to hold to a supernatural claim.

Again, to make this point even clearer, let look at what Martin Luther has to say:

"All the article of our christian faith, which God has revealed to us in His Word, are in the presence of reason shearly impossible, absurd and false. ...Reason is the greatest enemy that faith has. ...She is the devils greatest whore... a whore eaten by scabs and leprosy, who ought to be trodden underfoot and destroyed, she and her wisdom...Throw dung in her face...drown her in baptism"
-- Martin Luther

So, obviously, a theist feels a need for a means to hold belief without any justification - faith - i.e. unjustified belief - i.e. belief without evidence.

let's continue:

"If by any effort of reason I could conceive how God, Who shows so much anger and iniquity, could be merciful and just, there would be no need of faith."
-- Martin Luther Werke (Erlangen),XXIX , 217-33, on Maritian, 15.

Faith is not an epistemological position. It's a rejection of the need to justify a belief.

Quote:

. There must be a necessary and unchanging ground to your statments lest they not need to be heard, accepted, or recieved as true or necessary.

Do you realize that there is no formal proof that the supposed 'infinite regress' problem is actually a problem?

There are alternatives to foundationalism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundationalism

Quote:
Oh, by the way, if you read Acts 13:48, you'll learn that the bible states that only pre-ordained people would be allowed in heaven. So much for freewill...

Quote:

By the way you may want to find more than one antiquiated version of the Bible to reffer to, and or get a lexicon

By the way, when a theist is confronted with a biblical problem, they cry out the same two ad hoc complaints:

translation error

or

out of context.

Neither response works, because the method is applied in an ad hoc fashion.

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

Books on atheism.


Chandler
Posts: 1
Joined: 2006-03-25
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

dominick_777 wrote:
4 questions for the questioners..

1) What happens if a personal can answer these in a reasonable way, that should be acceptable to anyone who follows the principles of reason?


Quote:

If they could answer all of them, they'd have done an awfully good job proving Yahweh, exists.

I'm wondering, if you can't do a good job of proving that Yahweh exists, why do you believe he exists?

Vote for my left nut and see if it "makes a difference."


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

Myself, I'm wondering how anyone could refer to a textbook example of coercision as a 'free will choice', vis the 'free will choice to 'accept jesus':

Coercision:
Function: noun
: to compel by threat of force or adverse consequences.

What else could you call the threat of hellfire than the ultimate act of coercion?

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

Books on atheism.


LCQuerido
Posts: 9
Joined: 2006-07-28
User is offlineOffline
Questions about God... theists answer these!

Quote:
40. Why can't we wait until we get to Heaven to worship God ? Why would it be too late? - IG

The question is good, maybe only badly posed. It could go like this: why can't people repent and find value in Christ teachings after they die? Aren't your feelings and opinions about Christ's teachings what saves?

So what my gullibility has to do with it all?

In the end, what saves is your ability to fool yourself into believing in fairy tales, and since you can't use this ability ater you die, there's no way you can be saved by then.

Belief is the idiot's Wisdom.


elnathan
Posts: 81
Joined: 2006-09-13
User is offlineOffline
Myself, I'm wondering how

Myself, I'm wondering how anyone could refer to a textbook example of coercision as a 'free will choice', vis the 'free will choice to 'accept jesus':


It is interesting that you see this as coercision. While you seem quite knowledgeable of the Bible--or are at least able to find multiple references to support your thinking--there are a few things you seem to overlook.

The main reason to 'accept Jesus' is NOT to avoid hell--which ever verse you choose to quote. True, there are many Christians that choose Jesus as a form of fire insurance, to escape the fiery furnace. As I see it, most prevalent among these are the Baptists. It seems Baptist preachers are more inclined to the preaching of fire and brimstone that others--such as Methodists preachers.

If one reads the Bible more carefully, it becomes evident that the worst descriptions of Hell, Hades, Gahanna, are generally reserved and intended for satan and his minion, and true "evil doers". In many places, the consequences of not following Jesus results in being cast into an "outer darkness" or a second death, completely separated from God. These verses don't carry the coercive properties you seem to support. Most references in the NT, actually claim that the consequences of non-belief are simply a separation from God. To an atheist, this may not be seen as a bad thing, but for someone that is trying to get into Heaven by following Jesus, it would be horrible. And don't forget...God is a jealous God, of course He is going to think everyone wants to be around him.

I can understand how many can see the threat of this separation as coercision, or may consider themselves as possible minions of satan. personally, I don't think that is the case.

I fear the modern perception of "Hell" is formed from accounts from sources such as "Dante's Inferno." I am not really sure, but I doubt that story is actually a revelation from God.

I think those firey depths of hell, are reserved from the worst of the worst. But then again, I think it's mainly a big threat, and that while we may be punished for a while, most of us will get to that big party in the sky eventually.

Quote:

What else could you call the threat of hellfire than the ultimate act of coercion?

A consequence?

Another of your points I would like to address is the one about the cherubim with the flaming sword.

The first thing that came to mind when I read that is....since it was placed on the east side, why didn't Adam and Eve run around and come in from behind, and snatch a couple of fruits and runaway?

But the main thing is this > If the garden was destroyed in the flood, there was no longer a need for a guard. I realize you assert that this is not mentioned in the Bible, and therefore (apparently) it didn't happen. I would like to point out that not everything that happened is mentioned in the Bible, or given much detail. For instance, it doesn't tell us when/how man discovered fire, figured out how to make bronze, where they found all that gold, when/why the climate changed and turned the wilderness into desert. It appears to me, the Bible is missing way more details than we are actually given within the text. But then I also, think God is pretty arrogant and doesn't feel a great need to explain himself to us. Sad

In intellectual matters you can think things out, but in spiritual matters you will only think yourself into further wandering thoughts and more confusion. --Oswald Chambers


Reddragon
Posts: 54
Joined: 2006-06-27
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote:List of

Sapient wrote:
List of questions about God, religion and the supernatural have been compiled by IG over the years as well as some interesting ones by readers.

1. If Jesus fulfilled all the OT prophecies so well, why didn't the Jews recognize him as the messiah? - Francois Tremblay

2. If Gen 3:24 is true, why hasn't anyone found the Cherubims and the " flaming sword which turned every way"?

3. It's been proven that modern humans originated from Africa. Yet, the Adam and Eve story claims the first Humans lived in a garden in Eden, near 4 rivers. ( Most of which no one can find). One of these rivers mentioned is the Euphrates, which runs through Iraq, Syria and a portion of Turkey. What's the truth? Did man come out of Africa or near the Euphrates River? - The Infidel Guy

4. When the believer gets to Heaven, how can Heaven be utter bliss when people they love and care about are burning in Hell ? - The Infidel Guy - [Note: Some say God erases your memories of them, but if God erases your memory, you as Mr. Joe /Jane Smoe ceases to exist.]
.
.
.
.
PICK THE QUESTION YOU WANT TO ANSWER, AND POST IT HERE...

Hey, whats up? I haven't been here in a while and I'm just jumping in. I picked the first few questions. They may have been answered but here goes:

For number 1. Jesus did not fulfill all of the OT prophecies but will fulfill them when He comes back. The Jews were looking for a king(if I remember right), and when Jesus comes back He will come as a king. Ok, I'm rusty when it comes to biblical prophesy but from what I can remember from the book of Revelations, Jesus will have a kingdom on the earth for 1000 years.

For number 2. I always thought that the garden of eden didn't exist anymore and maybe it was destroyed by the flood. So there would be no more need for cherubims with a flaming sword to gaurd it.

For number 3. I think that we can't assume that the Euphrates River is the same as the pre-flood Euphrates River. I would think that the topography of the earth change massively as a result of the flood. This would make me think that the original Euphrates river would not have been recognizeable to Noah and his family while at the same time maybe the new Euphrates river resembled the old or maybe they just named it after the old river for some reason.

For number 4. I don't believe heaven is utter bliss. Unless somebody finds this in the Bible somewhere. I don't think heaven is a place of perfect happyness. I think we will know more than we do now. I think as a result of this some people will be sad and wish they had lived better lives or wish they had been more dedicated to God. Also I think that if you don't like church or don't enjoy praising God, you may not like it in heaven.

BTW All of this is IMHO

If I tell people the Gospel, it's not because I care about whether or not they go to heaven or hell. I do it because I honestly believe that this is God's will and purpose for my life... weeeeeeeee!!!


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Reddragon wrote: For number

Reddragon wrote:

For number 1. Jesus did not fulfill all of the OT prophecies but will fulfill them when He comes back. The Jews were looking for a king(if I remember right), and when Jesus comes back He will come as a king. Ok, I'm rusty when it comes to biblical prophesy but from what I can remember from the book of Revelations, Jesus will have a kingdom on the earth for 1000 years.

For number 2. I always thought that the garden of eden didn't exist anymore and maybe it was destroyed by the flood. So there would be no more need for cherubims with a flaming sword to gaurd it.

Interesting opinions.

Quote:
For number 3. I think that we can't assume that the Euphrates River is the same as the pre-flood Euphrates River. I would think that the topography of the earth change massively as a result of the flood. This would make me think that the original Euphrates river would not have been recognizeable to Noah and his family while at the same time maybe the new Euphrates river resembled the old or maybe they just named it after the old river for some reason.

I think you may have missed the purpose of the question. It had nothing to do with Noah.

Quote:
For number 4. I don't believe heaven is utter bliss. Unless somebody finds this in the Bible somewhere. I don't think heaven is a place of perfect happyness. I think we will know more than we do now. I think as a result of this some people will be sad and wish they had lived better lives or wish they had been more dedicated to God. Also I think that if you don't like church or don't enjoy praising God, you may not like it in heaven.

Interesting opinion.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Reddragon
Posts: 54
Joined: 2006-06-27
User is offlineOffline
For number 3: I guess what I

For number 3: I guess what I was trying to say is that we can't realy know where the Bible's account of the beginning of man took place. This is because we don't know if the current Euphrates river is the same as the old pre-flood one.

If I tell people the Gospel, it's not because I care about whether or not they go to heaven or hell. I do it because I honestly believe that this is God's will and purpose for my life... weeeeeeeee!!!