Freethought & Rationalism Archive

HelenM · 06-30-2002, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DRFseven:
<strong>I never understand arguments by both believers and non-believers that an alleged "God" wouldn't do something that is argued as being unjust or illogical. I mean, he's God, right? If he says it's just, it's just; that's one of the biggest perks of being God! If he wants to send people to hell for thinking there are six circles there instead of seven, then fine. Killing babies to punish their parents? Fine, also, because we're not the one who decides what is good and what is bad. That is in the job description of the absolute good and bad inventor and if we accept the idea as valid (even if we don't think it exists), we gotta accept the consequences.</strong>

I don't know whether this was a response to me...anyway, what struck me as odd was the idea that this God who sets the standards for just and unjust would let a mere fallible human's thoughts on whether they ought to go to hell or not, dictate whether God ordains that person to go to hell or not.

This is quite different from saying that God gives people free choice whether to accept him or not. The sense of the post - as I understood it - was different from that, as I said, in my last paragraph.

But yes, there's no point in arguing 'this is just' or 'this isn't just' with people who believe that whatever God does, defines it as just or not. Because they won't accept your thoughts on what is just and what isn't, unless they are the same as yours, that it's defined by God's actions and decisions, in which case there is nothing to discuss...

love
Helen

Douglas J. Bender · 06-30-2002, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Me: The David Mathews of this world, by their false teachings, hinder people from receiving this free gift.

"Kind" Bud: Actually, Bender, your pugnaciousness is far more off-putting than Mathews' liberal views.

I'm not "pugnacious", but thank you for confirming God's Word where it says that "the world will love its own", but hate those who speak the truth. I don't doubt one bit that "Mathews' liberal views" are "less off-putting" than the truth to the atheists here - what else should one expect? Oh, and I stand by my statement regarding David Mathews - he is a false teacher, who, if he does not repent, is heaping up wrath for himself. Given his slipperiness here, his obvious unwillingness to defend ANY of his beliefs, or to be intellectually honest, I don't know why anyone would listen to him at all - honestly.

Quote:

"Kind" Bud: If there was such a thing as an afterlife, I know who I'd rather meet there. Think about how successful you have been at turning people away from The Word simply because you're such a dickhead.

Simply because I pointed out the behavior and attitudes of most here, by "mirroring" their behavior and posts, I am therefore a "dickhead"? Sheeesh, you can't even see that you are not condemning me, but most of the posters here.

Quote:

"Kind" Bud: But I know that little jab will make no difference in how you perceive yourself. I've read the "mirroring" thread.

Well, if you actually have read the "mirroring" thread, why is it you persist in accusing me of the attitudes and behaviors which I merely "mirrored"? Suppose in this post, I called you a "pugnacious dickhead" - I can just see all the atheists here swarming about, saying, "See? See?! We were right about Bender - he's just a jerk. Look at the names he calls people - only *ssholes do that kind of thing."

In Christ,

Douglas

David Mathews · 06-30-2002, 05:31 PM

Hello Helen,

Quote:

There's not one Bible verse that says God is 'too busy' to notice things or people.

David: I think one problem that atheists have is that they exaggerate their own importance relative to God. They think that their rejection of God as an individual makes God angry, sad, offended and dejected. They think that their hate directed at God provokes God to hate them in return.

I don't agree. When I say that God is too busy to notice the atheists, I am saying that God does not respond to atheism in the ways that atheists would prefer for God to respond. God is not insecure, God is not defensive, God is not easily offended, God does not hate. God is too busy to become upset, angry, offended or dejected.

God is not too busy to notice the atheists. God still loves and cares for the atheists just like He cares for everyone else.

Sincerely,

David Mathews

David Mathews · 06-30-2002, 05:40 PM

Hello John,

Quote:

If I may take the liberty of paraphrasing what you have stated: "God exists because everything else exists".

David: The existence of everything else leads me to conclude that God exist, as God does appear an adequate explanation for the origin of everything that exist.

Quote:

David, while my summary may be a little acid, I think its accurate in showing the god you refer to as completely imaginary at this time. I am not of the opinion that the above are the real reasons you believe in god, they are merely tautological statements.

David: You think that God is imaginary, but that seems like an opinion to me.

Quote:

Again, the question was "Why do you think you believe in god?" If your answer of, basically "Because I long to" stands as the only reason for your theism then my reason for atheism "There are very convincing explanations for existence that do not require god and even explain the purpose and function of fictious gods" seems a better bet.

David: What are these "convincing explanations" for existence without a god? Why do you believe them?

Quote:

Are there other reasons you believe in god that I should know of?

David: I have looked at the non-theistic explanations for the Universe but must say that they appear like informed guesses and sometimes desperate guesses.

Sincerely,

David Mathews

David Mathews · 06-30-2002, 05:42 PM

Hello Sandlewood,

Quote:

Well, I guess you have no idea what is it you believe in then.

You�re just not making any sense. I�m not talking about agreeing or disagreeing with you. I�m talking about making enough sense out of what you say to just have a conversation. I don�t think that�s happening. You�re not following along. So that�s it for me.

David: I am not going to pretend to be able to explain everything. Hell is not a subject of primary concern for myself. I have no desire whatsoever than anybody go to hell. I certainly don't want atheists to go to hell.

Sincerely,

David Mathews

David Mathews · 06-30-2002, 05:47 PM

Hello MadMax,

Quote:

The question is whether I should spend my time arguing why it would be more logical for you not to believe in your deity. But this is very difficult since I don't know why you believe in your deity or why you believe in your claims concerning it. Its at least possible you do have some factual reasons through which you could support your position, your just unwilling to tell us what they are.

David: I examined atheism. I read several books, engaged in long conversations with atheists and provoked arguments with atheists.

After examing atheism in such detail as this, I found the concept empty, devoid of positive content, and utterly unappealing to me. That is why I am not an atheist.

The reason why I am theist, then, is because: Theism is meaningful, theism possesses positive content and theism is appealing to me.

If you would like for me to become an atheist, you should present some good reasons for me to want to become an atheist. I am the guest here, not the host.

Sincerely,

David Mathews

David Mathews · 06-30-2002, 05:53 PM

Hello Philosoft,

Quote:

That depends. Is my motivation the creation of an allegedly freely worshipful life-form?

David: Supposing that it is, how would you design the universe?

Quote:

Your appeal to mortality is rather underhanded. But it's also entirely silly. Dismissed.

David: So you are satisfied with your body, satisfied enough to want to keep it?

Quote:

For starters I would have made the axons of the rods and cones exit from the back of the retina, thereby eliminating the need for the brain to subconsciously fill in my blind spot. Any particular reason why God gave the better sensory neuron design to the squid?

David: It still seems that the eyes are functional, even if you would prefer the eyes of the squid. If you were a squid, I suppose that you wouldn't have any complaint at all against God's design of your body?

Quote:

Nonsense. Roddenberry's beings were merely very powerful. None of them created beings, planets, stars, universes, etc. I even recall an episode of the original series (somebody help me out here with the name of it) in which the Enterprise destroyed the alleged god (which was a big anthropomorphic rock) of a rather primitive race.

David: We don't need to get into a trivial contest over a television show. The most recent Star Trek series (such as The Next Generation and Deep Space Nine) became explicitly theistic, including at times even miraculous at times.

Sincerely,

David Mathews

B. H. Manners · 06-30-2002, 05:54 PM

Just out of curiosity Mr. Bender could you tell us what denomination you are a member of?

David Mathews · 06-30-2002, 05:59 PM

Hello Theli,

Quote:

I've been reading alot of posts on this thread, but I can't figure out your motives for being on this board.
Your philosophy seems to be:
"I don't know anything, and I don't want to know anything. Choosing a belief is a roll of a dice. All beliefs are equal, because noone knows anything."

David: My philosophy is: I am curious about everything, I am willing to learn about anything, choosing a belief is a roll of the dice, all beliefs are equal relative to the individual holding the beliefs, and without a doubt no one knows enough.

Quote:

You tend to honk your horn alot from what I read on your webpage, but you also seem reluctant to defend your position/claims. I wonder if you are being honest.

David: I am willing to defend my beliefs, that is why I am here.

Quote:

What are your motives for being on this board?

David: I am on this board because I listen to atheists.

Quote:

Are you willing to discuss the grounds for your beliefs at all?

David: Of course I am willing to discuss my beliefs.

Sincerely,

David Mathews

Douglas J. Bender · 06-30-2002, 06:21 PM

BH,

Quote:

Just out of curiosity Mr. Bender could you tell us what denomination you are a member of?

Sure - "Independent Evangelical Christian". While that's not a "denomination" per se, it's essentially the "type" of church with which I am in agreement. Actual "denominations" which I am closest to "doctrinally" and by practice would be:

- Calvary Chapel churches (affiliated with Chuck Smith of Costa Mesa, California)
- Open Plymouth Brethren churches.

In Christ,

Douglas

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-30-2002, 05:54 PM	#168
B. H. Manners Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 1,213	Just out of curiosity Mr. Bender could you tell us what denomination you are a member of?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.