Wow

Well this is my first trip into this forum, but I'm surprised by the amount of intelligence going around.

So anyway I wrote down some thoughts on God in Notepad, and here they are:



If God exists then he wouldn't allow people to suffer. If you think that He does this to test us, it still doesn't give him just cause to make us suffer without there being some evil intent behind it. Yes maybe a little under a century of suffering is worth an eternity of pleasure in heaven, but that's like saying it's okay to steal because someone you know has killed somebody, I know you can't compare a rational number to infinity, but that said, it doesn't mean that our time here on Earth didn't happen.

Also why would he make more people suffer than others? It may seem like he rewards those who suffered more in heaven, but this is unfair on those who haven't suffered as they didn't have the chance to earn the amount of pleasure as others. If you think that it's because God created the Earth and now has no control over its happenings, such as some suffering more than others, then this would mean that God isn't omnipotent. If he isn't omnipotent, then that means he cannot have created the universe, so he cannot exist.

The crucifixtion also shows that God approves of human sacrifices, which is another example of punishment, but The Bible denies this to be the case.

If God wanted us to worship him he would make his presence known so that there was no doubting his existance. There are countless religions today and only one can be right. Those who are brought up to believe in one religion, and if it isn't the one true religion, ie Christianity in the eyes of God, then they won't be allowed entry into heaven. Yet this is unfair because they were brought up this way and had no control over what religion they would become.

And those who look further into other religions when they are old enough to make such decisions would be denied entry also. So we should be punished for being human, seeking out the truth and having our own opinion? This is what sets us apart from the rest of the animal kingdom, and it seems God doesn't

want us to exercise these powers.

With this said, it must also follow that science is a sin, and so is all medicine. Therefore people who are ill should be left to suffer.

Also, since animals can feel pain and pleasure, shouldn't they have a right to go to heaven too? They can't worship a God, but that's God's fault in the first place for not giving them this ability. But if they do go to heaven, it's unfair on humans, as the animals get into heaven without worshipping God and are ignorant

of his existance. On the other hand if they don't go to heaven it's unfair on them because they never had the chance to worship God. Either way someone suffers.

I was thinking we could really think this one through and maybe come up with a good compilation of ideas on God. I know it's based on opinion, but we can modify it to our own needs.

Well I was thinking that the Jew's God and the Arab's God and the Christian's God is all the same God.

If he were a person - he would have the same name. But that does not seem to be very relevant in the Middle East as far as peace and harmony among the God loving people or the Christians that lovre their God and the Jews that were chosen by God as they are all are in the region trying to kill each other.

How can one God allow such a vast killing field among his people occur??

Also how could one God allow his words to be interpretted so differently by different people? One would think that the words and teaching of the one God would draw the people together to kill the un-Godly homosexuals or something just as worthy of his teachings.

We are the cause of our own suffering, no need to blame god, he is not the cause.

quote:If God exists then he wouldn't allow people to suffer.

Oh dear, you fell in the first sentence.

If God exists there is no reason to suggest that he should not want humans to suffer.

It's silly to assume that if there's an all-powerful creator that he is a nice one.

quote:Originally posted by PerpetualBurn:

It's silly to assume that if there's an all-powerful creator that he is a nice one.

Omnibenevolence...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PerpetualBurn:

[B] Oh dear, you fell in the first sentence.



I agree...

Also why would he make more people suffer than others? It may seem like he rewards those who suffered more in heaven, but this is unfair on those who haven't suffered as they didn't have the chance to earn the amount of pleasure as others. http://www.totse.com/bbs/confused.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/confused.gif)

quote:Originally posted by Frontier Psychiatrist:

Omnibenevolence...



...is not an inherent property of a possible sentient creator...

quote:Originally posted by PerpetualBurn:



...is not an inherent property of a possible sentient creator...

If we're talking the Judeo-Christian God then it is. Which I do believe the original poster was alluding to. Am I correct?

Surely I agree it's not when you're simply defining a supreme being in general - but when you narrow it down to a particular God/Goddess with predefined characteristics then it is.

It is sort of false to speak in conditional tense about the existence of God whilst actually referring to an incredibly specific God.

Still, if we speak of Christianity, God still has no obligation to be nice.

quote:Originally posted by PerpetualBurn:

Still, if we speak of Christianity, God still has no obligation to be nice.

Oh God (heh), another napolean_complex.

I really don't have the inclination to start arguing about the elect and the reprobate right now.

I'm sticking to good old cerebral sceptic PerpetualBurn this evening.

People often forget about the theory of free will. If god does exist and he has given us free will then it is not up to him to intervene in our lives so that we are of the "chosen" or of those meant to go to heaven. Whether you belive in god or not you will always have a conscience and that conscience is what should govern your actions. We all know it is wrong to steal, to rape and to kill. Yet we always blame god for letting these things happen. We should blame eachother for the suffering of the world not some non-verifiable entity. For example several hundreds of millions of people starve each year, and the USA produces enough food each year to feed the world three times over yet these people still starve. Should we blame god for that, hell no, we should blame mankind for the suffering. If we as a people were better then there would be no suffering.



Those who debate the existence of god with the argument, "if god exists why do we suffer" have neither thought long enough nor hard enough as to why such a thing is permissable. If you really feel for these suffering people then you should act godly and end their suffering. You do not need a computer to live, sell it and feed the poor, you do not need a car , sell it and feed the poor. Don't blame the world's problems on "GOD" blame it on our inability to realize that guns are not as important as butter (that's for all of you who have taken Economics).

quote:Originally posted by hankletank:

We all know it is wrong to steal, to rape and to kill.

I don't know that it's wrong to steal, to rape, or to kill.

Please enlighten me as to why.

Also, I still get to blame nasty big mean God for cancer and volcanoes. The bastard.

quote:Originally posted by PerpetualBurn:

I don't know that it's wrong to steal, to rape, or to kill.

Please enlighten me as to why.

Also, I still get to blame nasty big mean God for cancer and volcanoes. The bastard.

Its just the way that culture has shaped itself, a natural evolution. Why do you think the majority of the free world condemns such acts. If I were to rape your mother, steal your life savings, and kill the only thing that you love in this world wouln't you feel like shit. Why would you do that to someone? It just doesn't make sense to do it.

edit-grammar

[This message has been edited by hankletank (edited 09-03-2006).]

Why is it wrong to make someone feel like shit if I so desire?

quote:Originally posted by PerpetualBurn:

Why is it wrong to make someone feel like shit if I so desire?

Answer this in all honesty and don't be an ass about it be resonable and be the person you are in real life and not on the internet.

Would you ever intentionally force a hardship such as rape on someone, would you ever intentionally cause someone harm so that you truly benefitted for no reason except your own desire?

Well, Captain Irrelevance, let's just assume the answer to your inane question is yes.

Why is it wrong of me to rape someone?

quote:Originally posted by hankletank:

If god does exist and he has given us free will then it is not up to him to intervene in our lives so that we are of the "chosen" or of those meant to go to heaven.

Yes, it is. If He is truly omnibenevolent and desires good for all, there's no reason he shouldn't. He often kills people in the Old Testament; why not simply kill all who would do evil? Or, he's omnipotent: he can make a perfect world and simultaneously give us free will. Hell, he doesn't even need to do that; just create only the people who will choose to do good. He created an Adam who would choose evil, and we say he had free will. He could've easily created an Adam who would've done good. Think of heaven: only good people will go there. There will be no evil in heaven. Do those people have free will? Why is impossible to create a heaven from the outset? Before you say we had to be "tested" on Earth, let me inform you that that's irrelevant. 1.) It would be simple to create only people who would eventually make it to heaven and "test" them on Earth; there is no reason that there must also be evil people. 2.) What does this suffering, this testing prove? That they had the faith to reach heaven? Why not just create people who would have the faith from the outset? They'd have just as much free will as if they were born here: either way they are created to be the people they are.

Edit:

quote:Would you ever intentionally force a hardship such as rape on someone, would you ever intentionally cause someone harm so that you truly benefitted for no reason except your own desire?

Yes. I would. I'm not kidding, or just trying to throw a wrench into the works; I really am most concerned with my own welfare. I care for others, but not as much as myself.



[This message has been edited by Twisted_Ferret (edited 09-03-2006).]

God could just give us a quick shout of "Hello" so that we knew he was up there.

He did it all the time in the Bible.

quote:Originally posted by PerpetualBurn:

God could just give us a quick shout of "Hello" so that we knew he was up there.

He did it all the time in the Bible.

Exactly.

He also did things like "harden" the Pharaoh's heart so he would refuse to let the Israelites go. Sounds like an infringement of free will to me. Hell, even killing people prevents them from having free will - can't do anything dead...

Your logic is circular and I have already answered the question. The culture of humanity has so defined the actions that we speak of as wrong. And again you can ask me "Why did human culture do that" and I would answer "because there existed a people at one point in time where they believed that god told them to do some things and not others and these beliefs passed on to our present generation."

And then you being the curious one would ask, "Why does god believe/say that raping is wrong?" And I would answer in two ways so as to settle your curiosity (?sp?)

1.(This is if you believe in god)- God is omnipotent he knows all, and sees all therefore he says not to rape/kill/steal you shouldn't.

2.(This is if you don't believe in god)-The act of raping/killing/stealing is natural to the animals i.e. Mr.Hyena steals Mr. Cheetah's food because he is too tired after hunting to defend it, Mr. Shark rapes Mrs.Shark because his hormones control his actions, Mr.Lion kills his sons because he fears they become the leader of the pack, but all these actions although perofrmed in humanity are decidedly unnatural. Hence they are actions which do no occur regularly (on a happens to every single person in the world basis) and have been defined as crimes. Because if the contrary were true then they would be decidedly natural, and my argument would from here on be crushed.

Ok now that I have proven such acts are unnatural I must prove why they are bad. And this is simple. Mankind is in perfect agreement that we are above all other creatures. (even if you're an animal rights' activist/vegetarian you still wouldn't give up your house to go sleep on the lawn with pigs and cows who shit where they eat) Now back to the argument Man is better then beast. If we subjected ourselves to such acts as rape in order to produce offspring, and stealing for a gain, then we as a humanity would no longer be the great creatures that call ourselves.

If it doesn't make sense read it a couple of times. And if you ask more Open ended questions as to why humanity believes this and that and why we have defined things with the word good and bad. Then I recommend you read the book Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintanence. That shit will blow your mind. As for this argument I'm done.

quote:Originally posted by hankletank:

Your logic is circular and I have already answered the question.

If this is referring to me, please explain how my logic is circular and where you have answered my questions. If not... carry on. http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif)

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

Originally posted by PerpetualBurn:

God could just give us a quick shout of "Hello" so that we knew he was up there.

He did it all the time in the Bible.

Exactly.

He also did things like "harden" the Pharaoh's heart so he would refuse to let the Israelites go. Sounds like an infringement of free will to me. Hell, even killing people prevents them from having free will - can't do anything dead...

If you don't believe in god then why do you use the words of the bible as arguments. Just because the bible says that God did all that stuff doesn't mean it true.

Whenever someone uses something they don't believe in to prove something they do believe in then there argument loses all validity. Unless you are trying to argue that the thing you don't believe in is false. And you guys are doing the first one not the second.



[This message has been edited by hankletank (edited 09-03-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by hankletank:

If you don't believe in god then why do you use the words of the bible as arguments. Just because the bible says that God did all that stuff doesn't mean it true.

It's not God in general I object to, it is the Christian God. The Bible purports to the the perfect and inerrant Word of God; thus, if it says He did something then believers must accept that He did it. I am using internal incosistancies to show that the Bible is not, in fact, inerrant.

Edit:

quote:Whenever someone uses something they don't believe in to prove something they do believe in then there argument loses all validity.

What I personally believe in is irrelevant. I'm not arguing for myself or for atheists, but for Christians; thus, I use the material they believe in to disprove the concept they believe in.

I'm using something I don't believe in (but that others do) to disprove something I don't believe in (but that those same others do), if that helps you get your head around it.

[This message has been edited by Twisted_Ferret (edited 09-03-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by hankletank:

[b]Your logic is circular and I have already answered the question.

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret: If this is referring to me, please explain how my logic is circular and where you have answered my questions. If not... carry on. http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/tongue.gif)

No that was for the burn guy.The one after your post is for you.

I recommend that you actually pull your head out of your arse and realise that all you've done is define how society must be run in order for it to actually work without descent into chaos.

I then recommend that you actually define "good" and "bad" in terms of morality. In absolute terms.

Finally, I recommend that you buy a copy of The Last Days Of Socrates and flick through to Euthyphro. Hopefully then you might have a clue what you're talking about when attempting to define moral absolutes.

I assume you're done with this argument because you realise that I'm not going to give an open question, but a very specific one, one that you have already failed to answer:

What defines any action as ultimately "good" or "bad"?

[This message has been edited by PerpetualBurn (edited 09-03-2006).]

quote:Originally posted by PerpetualBurn:

What defines any action as ultimately "good" or "bad"?

That question is beyond me because in order to define good and bad you must first define quality. And that my friend is beyond us all.

I want to make this known. I'm going to be real. You don't grow up until you say, "I AM WHERE I AM BECAUSE OF THE DECISION I'VE MADE". Secondly, John 10:10, tells us that the theif, come to steal, kill, and destory. Satan is the God of this world,according to 2 Corinthians 4:4. It's the truth, Adam gave it to him. Jesus gave us AUTHORITY OVER HIM, but if you don't know your authority, you can't use it. If you aren't born again, you don't have it.

You can not without God, and God will not without you. The gospel of Christ is simple. The Word of God has the power to save our souls. His word is the Truth, and it must be RIGHTLY divided, not assumed.

-God's servant.

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:



I'm using something I don't believe in (but that others do) to disprove something I don't believe in (but that those same others do), if that helps you get your head around it.

I misinterpreted your view on the argument at hand. I get it. Don't worry.

quote:Originally posted by hankletank:

I misinterpreted your view on the argument at hand. I get it. Don't worry.

Oh. Well then... no worries! http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

quote:Originally posted by hankletank:

That question is beyond me because in order to define good and bad you must first define quality. And that my friend is beyond us all.

Okay. So you have no idea what good and bad are.

So this means you have no reason to think it's wrongful of me when I rape your mother.

quote:Originally posted by PerpetualBurn:

Okay. So you have no idea what good and bad are.

So this means you have no reason to think it's wrongful of me when I rape your mother.

You asked for an absolute definition of good and bad. I can only give you examples. And then you would question the validity of those examples as applied to good and bad. And the only way to prove the validity would be to define quality. And if you can give me a serious response, one full of actual thought and of actual reflection then I will revere you a man/woman/child (whichever you are) of high magnitude. But I will tell you now that to define quality you must first start at the begining and work your way towards the summit. Because if you really reflect on quality is, and it appears that you have not, then you will realize that all decision in life is based on quality. So please if you can validate your claims and answer your own question. Beacause as I have stated before to define good and bad takes more then just five minuets of contemplation it takes a life time.

Just so you know the only way that you can save face is if you submit to the fact that you cannot define quality and that no one can.



[This message has been edited by hankletank (edited 09-03-2006).]

Sophism died 2000 and some years ago.

Either explain why it is wrong for me to rape women or admit that it isn't.

Good and Bad are human concepts, you idiot.

Intangible perceptions.

There is no objective faccets of which to diagnose a mutual understanding of moral conceptions.

Well y'all know what I'd say!

quote:Originally posted by TehOphidDildo:

Good and Bad are human concepts, you idiot.

Intangible perceptions.

There is no objective faccets of which to diagnose a mutual understanding of moral conceptions.



So it's okay if I rape your mother?

Because I don't have a problem with it.

Rape, murder, stealing, abuse, all these things and more occur in our society. But people will always do these things because the truth is, people enjoy making other people suffer. Thats why the crime rate is always high. When have you ever seen a low crime rate? People will always do whats best for them. Like said here.

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

Yes. I would. I'm not kidding, or just trying to throw a wrench into the works; I really am most concerned with my own welfare. I care for others, but not as much as myself.



So I guess this guy has a point.

quote:Originally posted by PerpetualBurn:

Why is it wrong to make someone feel like shit if I so desire?

http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m313/siash/stfupope.jpg