Questions about God... theists answer these!
Offline 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. 
]
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. ]
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. 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. 
]
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? ]
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. ]
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. ]
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...
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.
- Login to post comments
What kind of qualifications do I need?
It infuriates me when FLDS members in their 40s marry over a dozen preteen girls, fit them all in gray dresses, and rape them on a daily basis to spread their sacred doctrine.
It infuriates when fundamentalist Christian ministers preach lies, and blackmail gullible church members into donating money to "God," when, in reality, they are using the money as a down payment on their new house.
It infuriates me when radical muslims walk into crowds of innocent people and blow themselves up with 20 pounds of explosives because they think it will give them a free ride to "heaven."
It infuriates me when Scientology steals fortunes from unwary average citizens in order to rid their bodies of alien souls and achieve operating thetan.
It infuriates me when idiots like Ben Stein, Ray Comfort, VenomFangX, and YOU spit on science, the very method that allows them to live in modern society, that has given them modern transportation, medicine, cell phones, and clean water, and, instead, being emotionally insecure, they cling to the system that caused the Dark Ages, religion, a system that has given society nothing, and has tried to take away everything, a system that threatens humankind itself.
This is the 21st century. Secularism has granted you with freedom of expression, and you have every right to cover your ears, close your eyes, and wallow in any delusion that you choose. But, when your actions become detrimental to liberty and reason, to everything that I treasure, I simply cannot allow your destruction to continue unopposed. (thanks Tf00t)
Worship me or burn in hell for all eternity. This is not free will. This is an order.
The Heavenly Father, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost possess no more credibility than any of the thousands of other major imaginary friends in the world. This just happens to be the one that you chose.
Want to know the answer? We don't know, and that's why we have religion.
Humans are innately curious. We want to know things. Perhaps, at a certain point, we want to know so badly, that we simply subscribe to what gives us the most comfortable answer instead of what is most logical. This is what you have done. It is obvious from your own posts that you believe in God, not because of any intellectual search, but because it makes you comfortable, by the fact that you KNOW. Secularism doesn't know because secularism is sincere. It doesn't need to know to be content. It would rather live in reality.
You are desperate. Many of your points are addressed to yourself as much as they are to us because maybe you'll get that feeling again, and this feeling, this is what convinces you.
But, you must understand, people in every religion get this feeling. It is not the Holy Ghost, it is a self-fulfilling prophecy, a placebo. Believe me, I know. This is the hardest thing to overcome.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
I am glad to be considered a moron by people who seem automotonic. You guys are stuck. You seem angry, bitter, rageful, arrogant, and belligerent. I am glad not to be the subject of these bedevilments and that is all I have to say about that. Gotta run and see what kind of chocolate I might get next.
"There is no need to be worried by facetious people who try to make Christian hope of 'Heaven' ridiculous by saying they do not want 'to spend eternity playing harps'. The answer to such people is that if they can not understand books for grown-ups they should not talk about them. All the scriptural imagery (harps, crowns, gold, etc.) is, of course, a merely symbolical attempt to express the inexpressible." -C.S. Lewis
Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. -Marcus Aurelius
That sirs sounds like a cop out.
"There is no need to be worried by facetious people who try to make Christian hope of 'Heaven' ridiculous by saying they do not want 'to spend eternity playing harps'. The answer to such people is that if they can not understand books for grown-ups they should not talk about them. All the scriptural imagery (harps, crowns, gold, etc.) is, of course, a merely symbolical attempt to express the inexpressible." -C.S. Lewis
He's not the man he wants you to think he is. Go to The Real John McCain to learn about the double talk express. View these videos about John McCain to learn about the flip-flopping double talker. Help me get rid of a transferable credit with Southwest Airlines and you'll save $90!
"There is no need to be worried by facetious people who try to make Christian hope of 'Heaven' ridiculous by saying they do not want 'to spend eternity playing harps'. The answer to such people is that if they can not understand books for grown-ups they should not talk about them. All the scriptural imagery (harps, crowns, gold, etc.) is, of course, a merely symbolical attempt to express the inexpressible." -C.S. Lewis
Is your last name Assumesalot?
My radar is detecting insanity ....
Obviously, you're not able to respond to any of our arguments so you'll just resort to being a dogmatic hypocrite.
What do you mean?
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
You have radar is that supernatural then?
Huh?
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
You sure do use a lot of buzz words? seems sorta "dogmatic". Assume much?
Dogma it is not just for Christians anymore. Apparently.
Oh, that.
Didn't you know?
He's God!
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
Yeah, all is god, even every thought.
Thermodynamics .... an xlint part of a rational g-o-d definition. Science is my religion. Me and god are one and atheist ... No Master.
Atheism Books.
An atheist by definition does not believe that you can neither prove or disprove the existence of GOD. Some atheist you are. And I thought religion was dogma and yet conversely you subscribe to one.
Science is my religion.
Let me tell you you do not have a monopoly on rationality and indeed I doubt even a firm grasp of rationality in your own mind. Maybe rationalizing.
-Teflon
"There is no need to be worried by facetious people who try to make Christian hope of 'Heaven' ridiculous by saying they do not want 'to spend eternity playing harps'. The answer to such people is that if they can not understand books for grown-ups they should not talk about them. All the scriptural imagery (harps, crowns, gold, etc.) is, of course, a merely symbolical attempt to express the inexpressible." -C.S. Lewis
GOD CAN'T BE AN ATHEIST. That is dumb.
No an atheist by definition doesn't believe in any supernatural deity, god(s) or goddess. That's all, now agnostic is what your trying to define there.
That is true. You are correct. My mistake. Even still that does not make I am God as God a very practicing atheist then.
"There is no need to be worried by facetious people who try to make Christian hope of 'Heaven' ridiculous by saying they do not want 'to spend eternity playing harps'. The answer to such people is that if they can not understand books for grown-ups they should not talk about them. All the scriptural imagery (harps, crowns, gold, etc.) is, of course, a merely symbolical attempt to express the inexpressible." -C.S. Lewis
To direct your wrath towards.
I personally don't direct any wrath to a person, but towards their irrational ideas, either to dissect their arguments and show them the mistake they are making, if the person doesn't want to see the error in their arguments then I completely ridicule their ideology and still point out their mistakes.
Silly theist.
I luv you LovE-RicH , thanks for that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosis
Science best explains G awe D. Thermodynamics, Matter/Anti-matter, etc.
http://livefromcern.web.cern.ch/livefromcern/antimatter/site-map.html
The Timeless Universe
http://www.churingapublishing.com/timeless_4.htm
Atheism Books.
Haha, that's pretty funny.
Wait a second, that's really funny.
JesusChristisLord? Isn't that a rather obvious and generic theist username?
Don't tell me it's another person in the atheist challenge!!!!
I think I'll go shoot myself.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
It is an obvious theist name seeing as I am Unashamed of the Gospel of Christ.
I am not here to prove that I am not a hypocrite:
Yes I am a hypocrite.
Even if I do not intend to be.
I can admit that.
The mere fact that I am human
makes me fallible.
There are no if, ands, or buts about it.
As much as I desire to be cleansed of my imperfections,
nonetheless,
my shortcomings are still obvious
to all those who know me.
My goal is not to pose or
hide from the obvious;
it is progress not perfection.
"There is no need to be worried by facetious people who try to make Christian hope of 'Heaven' ridiculous by saying they do not want 'to spend eternity playing harps'. The answer to such people is that if they can not understand books for grown-ups they should not talk about them. All the scriptural imagery (harps, crowns, gold, etc.) is, of course, a merely symbolical attempt to express the inexpressible." -C.S. Lewis
JCL, regarding myself I basically agree. lol
The bible answers these questions and the Catechism of the Catholic Church also answers all of them quite well.
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but *actually* from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... time-y wimey... stuff. -The Doctor
Actually, reality explains quite well why the bible and the catechism of the catholic church are nonsense.
There are no theists on operating tables.
so have you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church Zarathustra?
Yes I have, CJ; I was raised catholic. If you want to debate catholicism, we can start a new thread, or I can point you to some existing ones (). If you don't mind however, please try to provide an actual response to the questions in this thread, rather than simply saying "The answer's in the catechism. Deal with it." Hopefully the irony of my post wasn't lost on you.
There are no theists on operating tables.
Question:
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.]
Answer:
I feel that I must preface my answer by explaning my presupposition. It is my belief that everything that God does is to glorify His name. This view does not fit with much of mainstream Christianity, but I feel that it is supported by Scripture.
A short answer to your question is that God created a place called hell to demonstrate His wrath. The wrath of God is an attribute that many christians hate to talk about, but scripture speaks of God's wrath many times more than it speaks of His love. So...yes, God did foreknow the sin of humanity. In fact, it was part of His plan. Many christians, including myself, believe the Bible teaches that before the foundations of the world, God planned everything from the beginning to the end. Including the selection of those whom He would redeem through His son and those whom He would allow to perish in their sin.
I'm not sure if this is a sufficient answer to your question. I'm sure it raises more questions, which I would be glad to discuss. My hope is to present a view that is a little different than the "normal" christian views that I have read on these forums. Thanks for taking the time to read my comments. I'm looking forward to hearing your feedback.
The christian tendency to invent things as they go along, while perfectly understandable in terms of understanding why certain people invest so much of themselves in a fiction (and a poor fiction at that) still does not forgive the creation of words such as "foreknow".
But that aside - your point.
You are essentially talking about predetermination. That is the notion whereby everything has been preordained according to the crazy (to us rational people) "logic" of a super-being whose unenviable job it is to manage the universe, and whereby therefore our job is to try to fathom what on earth (pardon the pedantry) "He" is up to and why. A sort of parlour game between us and the "supreme being", and in which the stakes (to us rational people) are on more or less a par with the most silly of the genre.
Now it would be easy to shoot such an unintellectual notion down in flames of derision and illogicality, not to mention self-contradiction and fallacy, but to do so would be simply to respond in the language you have been trained to speak. It's a language based, whether you realise it or not, on a lack of self-worth and suspicions about your own inability to think. Indeed these are the two human traits most seized upon by religious indoctrinators of all hues throughout that aberration's history. But I on the other hand have been brought up to think for myself and to inform that thinking with education based on fact. So I won't.
Instead I will ask you a simple question (or three).
Would your god be offended if you didn't capitalize his impersonal pronoun form? If not, why do you persist in doing so? If he is, why do you think our fate (by which I really mean yours) is in the hands of such a megalomaniac?
Take your time before answering. These questions go deeper than simple writing style, and well you know it.
I would rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy
Thanks for your comments Nordmann. I honestly haven't thought about the whole capitalization issue. I simply did it because I thought it was proper since my Bible did it. But after reading your question, I noticed that some of the newer versions don't capitalize the impersonal pronoun. I suppose it would be the intent of the heart that would determine the offense. If I were to write "he" instead of "He" or even "god" instead of "God" with the intent of showing disrespect, then yes, I think it would be an offense to God. And I believe that God deserves the most respect I can possibly give. Not because I will burn if I don't, but because I believe God is worthy of respect.
Nordmann, I'm not really much of a debator, I simply enjoy the exchange of ideas. It's one of the great things about free speech. I felt that christianity is not being represented as I see it, so I thought I would present my view. I don't try to prove the existence of God because I believe the Bible teaches that no one can believe in God without the help of the Holy Spirit. So, I think atheists are correct by requiring proof to believe in God.
I'm not trying to say that my view is logically sound, by your standards. But it explains the Bible a little better than most of the christians on these forums who try to present a politically correct God.
Thanks for your reply spott421, and even more thanks for the refreshing honesty in it when you admit that your view is not logically sound. Would that other religious people could preface their assertions with equal candour!
Your answer regarding the capitalization of "he" and "him" etc is also open and honest, and more or less what I anticipated as a response. Indeed that was the point of my question - to illustrate to you, hopefully in your own words, how much of your reasoning is based on what is, in my opinion, a misguided application of the desire to conform. Your intention to be respectful is a laudible attitude to possess. However the target of that respect does not merit it by any rational assessment of its properties.
Yet your action does neatly typify an aspect to religious belief which is glaringly obvious to the atheist but seemingly invisible to the religious adherent. In fact it is a ploy, one designed to keep the adherent adhering, and one of which the capitalization issue is simply a benign, almost trivial example. More malignant versions of the same ploy abound in religious belief propagation techniques.
A perfectly understandable human trait, in this case the desire not to be disrespectful, has been "hijacked" by religion and channelled into a use which achieves two principal aims at once - the affirmation of the assertion of god's existence in the mind of the individual, and the tacit definition of the lop-sided relationship between that individual and the supreme deity they have been inveigled to show respect to. When this tactic is deployed in the various manners that it is, and when instances of its use are multiplied out to reflect the many times they are displayed on a day-to-day basis, it is easy to see how religion's control mechanism is being applied to keep you in check. It is pervasive. It is relentless and, as your example illustrates, it is effective. So effective in fact that it has led to someone like yourself, a seemingly inoffensive, polite and otherwise reasonable person, subjecting yourself to that control's strictures even as you attempt to explain why, to you, the absurdity of the source of that control is not absurd.
I genuinely hope that you overcome this handicap, or at least that it does not impinge too much on the other aspects of your life which require a reasonable, logical and level-headed approach from you. But I cannot resist telling you that you have been duped, whether you know it or not, and that a fair amount of your time and intellect has been stolen from you. I wish you luck.
I would rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy
Would that I could use the english language with the depth that you do, Nordmann. Best of luck to you as well.
Thank you. From an honest person that means a lot (and at this moment in my life I need it too!).
In addition to this I would add that since God judges the heart, it is likely that many professed atheists would prefer heaven and many professing christians would prefer hell. To me, hell is mostly not about punishment which would be finite, but more about preference. Why do some not like the idea of serving God for eternity? Just like the parable, some may like the idea but not want to in the end.
Although I consider the whole teaching on hell to be a parable and that we dont really know what it will be like. We think pain=bad and thats about the extent of it. Im sure God knows what hes doing. I also dont agree with the notion that God plans our destiny even if he knows it. Then again, the whole notion of God is a parable. We dont know what he is but we do know he is not a he or an it or a thing. If he is unchanging he cannot interact with us. He cant think, change his mind, decide who goes to hell, etc....He just is....Every concept of God we have is just an anthropomorphism so we can try to discuss it. Everything in the bible is a parable first and foremost. Although, I wont be upset if some things end up being literal.
Although it is not logical to assume an afterlife to begin with. If we run with the idea anyway its not illogical to assume that we will be judged for what weve done and that there could be a jail for those who are unwilling to give up their desires to sin (which is a large chunk of the self).
I'm new here but i love debate so thought I'd jump in and give it a go...and, FYI...I am a proud bible thumper
I am generally surprised that most of the debate put forward by the "other side" tends to be in the form of derision. I must ask why it would matter if i chose to capitilize "Him" when speaking of God (did it again 
) or why I should not if He doesn't care? I would not care if someone chose not to capitilize my name when writing it...but most would do it. Similarly, I am of the generation who would not wear a hat inside (church or house), so I don't because I consider it a sign of respect, I also realize that those who chose to wear their hats inside are generally not being disrespectfull. Capitalization of His name is o.k....or not, it was started in a time when it was appropriate as a way of showing respect.
I have read a few of the questions. The first five to be precise. I have also scanned through the tread. I am vastly disappointed in some of the theist augments. I have found some to intelligent arguments, but sadly they seem to be the minority. I must give credit to spott421 I would not agree with the point made but atheist should know that spott's view is far from being rare or new. It is called predestination in some denominations. Now spott421 please tell me if that was not the view point you where trying to describe. I just wanted to point out that you were the last person to give some sort of reasonable response that did not completely diverge from traditionally Christianity.
Now I personally do not resign my self to the idea that you could describe God as a megalomaniaical jerk who deserves our respect simply because he created us, and he has already decided who will go to heaven and hell so my Christianity is just because I was lucky enough to be chosen. I will say that I am willing to change my belief if I am ever presented with good enough evidence God does not exist. I of course don't believe that is possible or I wouldn't truly be a christian. I also wouldn't except any argument blindly. I would first have to do some digging and research and if I found it still held up under intensive study I would except the fact and move on. This post is by way of introduction which I probably should have stated earlier. Here is what I plan to do. I will, starting tomorrow because it's getting late, tackle one or two questions at a time. You must admit the list is long and will take time to answer properly. I don't know everything and as I stated earlier I have not even read all the questions yet. I may very well get stumped and be lead to some self examination. On the other hand I may go on to answer even later questions that have and will arise as this tread progresses, though I seriously doubt that.
Now I ask that you don't except my arguments blindly. I ask that you research my response for yourself. I am not perfect and I do make mistakes, which is why I also ask that if I am wrong you take the trouble to point out specifically where I was wrong and point me the right direction. There is a reason the last part of my name is seeker. Oh, one more thing. The other reason that I ask you not to take my arguments blindly is that I take my religion seriously. I do not think it should be lightly entered into. In fact I think it can never truly be picked up lightly because that is how hypocrites are made. I also believe that professing Christianity is not enough. That is why I don't respect those who change there opinion at the drop of a hat, and though I am open to being wrong I will not change my opinion for a reason as simple as you think it an unhealthy belief. As the bible says on that day many will cry out Lord, Lord, and I will say I never knew you.( No that is not a direct quote but it's getting late and I have a 8 o'clock class tomorrow
, I'll get the direct quote up if requested.) So I will start tomorrow with number one. I am looking forward to this, but then again new challenges always invigorate me.
If God doesn't do things the way you think they should be done maybe you should entertain the idea that it's you who doesn't understand.
Let me start by saying that upon closer observation of this tread I have found that the logical responses have not been such an over whelming minority as I first thought from the first two and last pages of this thread. But that irrationality has not been in the minority is still highly distressing.
So you know with what back ground I am answering these questions I am a christian. A protestant, to be more precise a Nazarene. Many of you probably have never heard of my denomination. We are evangelical and international, and we celebrated or centennial just last year. On a more personal note I grew up in a home where we where taught to have personal devotions (reading the bible and prayer) every day. In addition to this we also had daily family devotions. So I can honestly say that I have read through every passage of the bible several times in my young life, and God still manages to surprise me through it. My parents openly debated the meaning of biblical matters in front of us because they never wanted us to assume something to be true even if they said it. That is why I am attempting to answer these questions and why I think I just might do a half way decent job of it. Also I have not found any answers that I would completely agree with though I do not claim to have read every response so don't get mad at me if I repeat what you or someone else has said.
So now to answer the first question.
I know some think that so many of the first Christians being Jewish discounts this question, but it doesn't because way more did reject him. What should be stated here is the fact that part of the prophecies about the Messiah where that the Jews would reject him. Isaiah 52:13 - 53:5 If you do actually go to read this passage you should know that talking in the past tense for a prophecy was quite common, which I think you can understand if you assume that it is true for a moment just for the purpose of wrapping your head around why a prophet might use past tense for what has yet to happen. The idea of what is to come is so clear so fixed in there head that it is almost as if it has already accrued. With that in mind rather a prophet refers to the future in the past tense falls to personality and how clear the vision or message is. Also there are other verses that deal with Jesus' rejection by his own people.
Also I feel it should be noted that the Jews at the point of Jesus' life had mostly come to expect a political savior, which by the way was never promised by any of the prophecies. In fact they make it quite clear that he would be killed for our sins( Isaiah again), but as we humans often do the Jews had forgotten the truth and twisted things to fit what they wanted. Quit simply they where looking for the wrong type of savior so most of them missed him. As for the religious leaders who rejected him, they either just did not want to give up their power or they had deceived themselves.
I hope this clear and acceptable. please respond
If God doesn't do things the way you think they should be done maybe you should entertain the idea that it's you who doesn't understand.
But obviously not Isaiah's head, it seems. Not a hint of resurrection there at all - just a lot of emphasis on the "dying for our sins" aspect to the messiah who was yet to come (in the past tense).
But then when a later fiction is fashioned to suit these so-called "prophesies" and in doing so has to accommodate quite a few of them, it is inevitable that the so-called "prophets" as individuals all end up retrosepctively with clairvoyant egg on their faces (now why didn't they see THAT coming!). The normal theological trick is to keep cutting between one and the other when forming a prophetic justification for the claim that the Jesus character fulfills ancient predictions, a tactic which neatly deflects from the fact that all of them are guilty - should Jesus indeed have been a real person whose life had been predicted - of glaring omissions which as individuals rather deflates their power to predict with accuracy at all.
It's an old con-trick - older than christianity in fact - and one which didn't fool the Aristotleans who rather rationally argued, having isolated four causalities in order to arrive at an outcome which can be deduced as fact, that only those who wish to establish fact without evidence (ie. liars and/or fools) place importance on prediction, a device which circumvents cause. Three of the four causalities employed in an assertion makes it plausible, two make it improbable, only one makes it almost certainly false. Prophecy, and more to the point the attempt to use it retrosepctively as evidence, ignores causality so declares the assertion evidently false. It's no wonder Aristotleans were first in the snipers' sights once christians got the power to eliminate intellectual opposition to their heresy against reason!
I would rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy
About Isaiah missing the resurrection. First no one every said God had to tell one prophet everything; other prophets talked about the resurrection, but by the way Isaiah did not miss the resurrection. "After the suffering of his soul he will see the light of life and be satisfied..." (Isaiah 53:11)
As for Aristotle's four causes they have nothing to do with cause and effect as we think of them today. They are material cause: what something is made of or made up of, formal cause: what form something takes, efficient cause: what produces something, and final cause: what something is for. For example in reference to a tiger cub: the material cause would be the parts of a tiger; the formal cause would be a tiger: the efficient cause would be a tiger in the form of it's mother, though Aristotle would of said father; and the final cause would be to be a tiger.As you can see three of the four causes of a tiger are a tiger. This is how you get such philosophical statements as a tiger is for the sake of a tiger. I think you can see how Aristotle's four causes can not possibly discount Jesus Christ in any way.
Now the idea that Aristotelian ideology was persecuted by the church is not true. In fact many of Aristotle's followers where Christians. Such as, Arius who was at the First Council of Nicaea, and one of Aristotle's most notable followers. At that time there was a lot of arguing over theology so Emperor Constantine I called the council, and a lot of church leaders came and Constantine told them they could not leave till they came to a consensus on some things. Now it is true that Arius had some controversial ideas but he was still a respected church leader.
Okay, now that I have that out of the way I would like to deal with the assertion that only fools and liars put importance on predictions. First off predictions are not why something happens. They just say that it is going to happen even if it seems unlikely at the time. Secondly not predicting every detail individually does not make a person's predictions less accurate it is the percentage of their predictions that come true that determine that. Thirdly I am not saying you have to believe in them but the very nature of the question necessitated that I refer to the predictions to answer it. Asking me not to refer to the predictions to answer a question dealing with the predictions would be like asking me to explain why there are no external signs of an illness without referring to the prognosis the doctor had given or without referring to the nature of the illness.
If God doesn't do things the way you think they should be done maybe you should entertain the idea that it's you who doesn't understand.
Now for question number two.
This if a very good question, and there are multiple answers different people would give. I am myself believe two possible answers are most likely. First and most commonly believed when the flood destroyed life on earth a guard contingent would no longer be needed and so they were called back to heaven. I know some think that if the bible doesn't say it then it is not a good answer to a religious question. The thing is when has anyone ever claimed that the bible was a complete history. I mean why would what happened to the Cherubim be important for us to know. My second theory is that perhaps the Cherubim and the sword where put there as a visual reminder to Adam and Eve. After there lives ended perhaps God took care of the tree and Called the Cherubim back. The truth is the bible doesn't say or even hint at what happened to them but then again why should it. It has nothing to do with what God wants form us, how to improve ourselves, what we need from god, our destiny as humans, how to treat each other, our relationship with God, how we should live, how to defeat the forces of evil, what we are responsible for, what heaven is, what hell is, or what to expect at the end of time. If you pay attention everything in the Bible has to do with these things.
So I guess my point is we can theorize, but in the end we don't know probably because we don't need to know.
If God doesn't do things the way you think they should be done maybe you should entertain the idea that it's you who doesn't understand.
You're a funny one, Blackroseseeker. But getting predictable already, I fear.
Huh? Why leave out bits?
That doesn't mean resurrection, unless you're pretty desparate to make it do so.
I never said Aristotlean definition for "cause" and "causality" was related to "cause and effect" as understood today. I meant it exactly as you very kindly illustrated for me above. An illustration, by the way, which neatly shows how your final assertion above is completely wrong. Aristotlean cause depends on evidence deduced from observation. It can be applied to the myth of Jesus, not the character in the myth. It only works with real, observable phenomena.
Heidegger compared christians claiming to have aristotlean beliefs to those cultures in which eating the brains of another person is assumed to confer that person's intelligence on the diner. He has a point. Aristotlean philosophy was probably one of the most important back doors through which a rather worldly ignorant and superstitious Jewish separatist cult managed to inflitrate the hellenic mindset when it did, a crucial part in its growth in numbers of adherents and one of the first fundamental steps it took away from its roots. It did so by simply adding bits to it from existing philosophy, blithely discarding or ignoring logical elements of these philosophies which did not suit its own prejudices. Many christian theological precepts can therefore be said to have originated in Aristotleanism. But you cannot square a philosophy based on observation (in the analytical sense) with a superstition cult, and the strain showed very quickly. Arius got a broken nose at that august meeting of esteemed christian minds. His followers fared rather worse. Those who followed the teachings of Aristotle but abhorred the christian slant had already been stitched up by the christians' new boss, the emperor. So now we're left with a bunch of christians claiming to be aristotlean without a single aristotlean left to question why they're doing so - except the odd philosopher such as Heidegger who debated just this point with his theologian friend Bultmann all his adult life, and to which Bultmann's best attempt at a response was that "god is allowed cherrypick philosophies for the good bits".
Firstly, you may believe that you have the first question "out of the way" but only by virtue of circumnavigating the issue, not addressing it. Your previous assertions are simply that - assertions. They contain several flaws both logically and in terms of fact, and they in no way address any issue, let alone the ones they pretend to, to a point of conclusion. But then people who do not think for themselves rarely behave otherwise.
Secondly no assertion was made that "only fools and liars put importance on predictions". Fools may indeed do just that, but liars go further and claim predictions as retrospective evidence for alleged fact. And nor am I criticising you for referring to predictions in your answer, but I do criticise you for dodging the issue and thinking you can just blithely move on to another subject as if you have answered the question (or indeed any question for that matter).
A word of friendly advice - if this is as good as you can muster by way of "answering" the first of the many questions raised above you can save yourself (and others) a whole heap of time by simply giving the formidable task you've set yourself a miss. You're not really up to it, are you?
I would rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy
#15 Response:
(vi) “Creation” is equivocal. It can either refer to a creative cause or a creative effect. The effect is temporal.
(vii) God did not exist prior to the world. Rather, there was never a time when God did not exist.
(viii) Causation doesn’t assume temporal priority. That depends on your theory of causation. For example, counterfactual theories of causality do not assume temporal priority.
(ix) A timeless being can entertain propositions about time.
(x) The objection implicitly assumes the A-theory of time, according to which past, present, and future are objective states or relations. According to the B-theory of time, the only objective temporal relations are priority, simultaneity, and posterity.
(xi) Premise 3 denies what premise one granted. Built in contradiction.
It can also refer both to the act of creation and the thing created so it is even more equivocal than you suggest. However, regardless of whether you use it to denote cause or effect, object or force, there is no escaping the fact that the thing created adheres to temporality. This is important since you go on to assert;
Given that "the world" is the thing created then its creator, by definition, cannot escape having existed prior to it, even if it was the creator who - by the same logic - rather stupidly imposed temporality on himself in doing so.
This statement reveals a lack of understanding regarding counterfactual theories of causality. If you take the subject in question, the creation of the world by a deity (ie. an occurrence), then temporal priority plays not only a significant role but the only vital one. If "C" is god and "E" the world then the counterfactual theory which applies is: "Where C and E are two distinct actual occurences, E causally depends on C if and only if; 'If C were not to occur then E would not occur.'" In the creation myth under discussion therefore time is not only implied but necessary for the regressive logic to apply.
This is unknowable and as a hypothetical assertion it presumes way too much to be useful in any argument. A "timeless being" could also, by logical assertion, be ignorant of time completely.
You make this statement as if, in your previous statements, you have removed priority as a necessary component of the creation myth. Whether you approach the statement "god made the world" from a factual or counterfactual perspective in terms of causality you set priority. The objection you object to is therefore completely unobjectionable in terms of logic and your criticism of it is unfounded.
The built-in contradiction is precisely what "premise 3" was intended to highlight. This is the very contradiction (god is atemporal but behaves temporally) which theology has never explained without reverting to "it's not for us to know" as a last ditch defence.
All of these points are concerned with the great dilemma of logic which exists at the heart of theistic creation myth. "God" is either as depicted - a temporal and very human entity which therefore must itself have been created or an atemporal non-entity to which therefore none of the achievements and characteristics associated with it by religionists can actually apply.
God, to put it bluntly, is sloppy thinking.
I would rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy
Modern Jews are the descendants of those who didn't. that's why there's so few Jews in the World. They expected a military and political leader rather than a spiritual one.
The Bible was written by humans who were inspired by God. I suspect most passages are mostly simbolic. Take the apple for example. It's probably a symbol for awareness. Adam was thrown out of the Eden because he lost his innocence.
The climate in Africa has changed enormously in the past millenia.
God, heaven and hell are represented to man in a way that makes possible for man to comprehend them. Hell, heaven are not so clearly depicted in the Bible, and this gives place to many interpretations. Some Christian confessions don't accept some of these concepts. WE are not told clearly what hell is. According to some intepretation the bliss comes from the unification with God or from enjoying of HIs presence. Hell is being deprived of it.
Why? He would point towards Earth. But that's not my "firm", so I wouldn't know for sure.
I am convinced that faith is a question of emotions. Faith is a feeling, like love. Trying to rationalize Faith is like trying to rationalize love. If you love someone or something you always find a rational explanation for your feeling.
Faith is also a lot of other things. You can have religion and faith without a God, like in Buddism. Buddism is a godless religion. So even if you don't accept the idea of a lord in heaven, you can find your type of religion.
Having faith is always better than not having it. unless you have a kind of faith that make your life miserable.
In most cases life is miserable as it is and faith is the only help we can have to make it a little bearable.
But why didn't they? After all - it's their religion's prophecies we're talking about. Are you saying it took a bunch of non-jews a few generations later to figure something out that wasn't supposedly really intended or apparently understood by its own authors? Or is it that christians were too lazy to invent their own prophecies so resorted to lifting them wholesale from someone else's faith and then forcing them inexpertly into their own?
The climate in Africa is as relevant to the question you were asked as an intelligent thought is to a fundamental christian. Your assertation of symbolism is less irrelevant, even if still completely vague. It is also one which many other christians would dispute, preferring as they do to believe the story to be the literal truth. Somebody has to be wrong here amongst you christians, wouldn't you think? Of course the siting of the event by the Euphrates wouldn't have anything to do with the legend's pre-jewish origin, would it? That might be too logical an answer.
Gandalf, Hobbiton and Mordor have also been represented in a way that makes it possible for man to comprehend them. So too have Fritz the Cat and Willy Wonka, not to mention President George W Bush. But what all these fictions had in common, from the sublime Gandalf right down to the badly drawn buffoon, is that they were presented with infinitely more clarity than the christian theological stance on heaven and hell. It's fine to hear that christians can pick and choose what they want to believe or disbelieve about the topic (though are you really sure then that all can be right?), but wouldn't it be better and more reasonable anyway simply to assign the confusion to yet another christian grafting of like to unlike, while it jimmied together a mishmash of a faith and then hoped in the process that no one noticed its dishonesty while doing so? In this case the graft was hellenistic and nordic notions onto a jewish theological concept in which the hadean or heavenly played almost no role. But that's just one of several - each as ludicrous as the other.
Oscillating martian muslims merely illustrates in a small way the stupidity of religious ritual. However should you be looking for a "firm" I suggest you get in on the ground floor now that space exploration is about to open up again and get cracking with those jet-powered revolving prayer mats before the muslims think of it themselves first. But essentially you're right - even by religious standards you would need an exceptionally pea-sized intellect to allow it to be taxed by that question.
Then you go on to answer questions that weren't asked. And I'm glad you did, because this was when you got really funny.
That came out all arseways, didn't it? You have just said that love, even though it's a feeling, can be rationalised (which is quite correct by the way). So too can "faith" then, since you say it belongs in the same category. I agree with you, though I'm not sure you really want to know how it comes out in the rational wash, or do you?
Or then again you can stop settling for inferior explanations and apply yourself intelligently to more rational ones. Whether you stick a god (as most do) into your delusion or not does not make it any less a delusion, the delusion being that you have found an explanation when all you have found is a mockery of one.
This one was your best! Blind belief in the absurd, you say, is always better than the alternative (unless it makes you miserable). Fantastic! If you really think about it you have just put your finger on the intellectual dichotomy that exists at the heart of the question of religious delusion. Brilliant!
For the record - blind belief in the absurd, when pursued as a lifestyle, should indeed make one miserable. What is alarming is that it fails to in so many cases.
But your parting shot was almost as good.
Sadly true apparently for an alarming number of people, and it's a real shame. In fact those of us in the apparent minority who use applied intelligence, logic and education to improve our lot and the lot of others around us when confronted with such misery, have been wondering about your crowd in this respect for a long time!
I would rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy
I am going to attempt to answer all 89 of your questions, Sapient.
I apologize if some of this is "old" because I began trying to read every post up until this point. Then I realized there were 8+ PAGES FULL.
Now I must content myself with reading the longest ones to see what has been said.
Suffice it to say that this forum has been going on for QUITE a while. In fact, I doubt it will ever be fully brought to a conclusion. I hope we can still have a rational debate in spite of our differences. I am a theist. I am not only a theist, but a Protestant Christian and proud of it.
I am ThePaladin...I AM NOT A D&D SPINOFF! I HAVE NEVER EVEN PLAYED THE GAME! IN FACT, I HAVE NEVER EVEN SEEN HOW IT IS PLAYED! A Paladin is a Light Bearer. I hope to be a Light Bearer in the world as well, bringing all men the Good News of Jesus Christ. I want to help those who are blind, see again. I pray that all men may come to repentance.
On the contrary. I am also god. So are you. We are all gods. You just have to let go of the supernatural crap. It doesn't exist, so god must be redefined without it to fit the natural world. The closest that can be accomplished in such a feat is recognition of the responsibility and power that each person and creature has over their own destiny. If you want a creator, the closest thing that can approximate this would be Sol. If you want the master of your life, the only answer is yourself. Nothing else that exists can fit the definition in any way.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.